3,000 Assyrians Received into the Catholic Church

Rorate Caeli ^ | MONDAY, MAY 12, 2008

[Petrosius]

The Chaldean Catholic Diocese of St. Peter and Paul has formally received into its fold, those members of the Assyrian Catholic Apostolic Diocese who, under the leadership of Mar Bawai Soro (pictured above), had asked to be reconciled with the Catholic Church last January 17, 2008.

One bishop (Mar Bawai himself), six priests, 30+ deacons and subdeacons and an estimated 3,000 faithful were received into full communion during liturgical celebrations for the Feast of Pentecost. The announcement by the Chaldean Catholic Church can be found here.

The Black Cordelias blog has an earlier article here.

Mar Bawai Soro has long advocated the Primacy of the See of Rome. On November 2, 2005, he presented to the Synod of Bishops of the Assyrian Church of the East (of which he was a bishop at that time) a paper entitled "The Position of the Church of the East Theological Tradition on the Questions of Church Unity and Full Communion " in which, among other things, he stated that

The Church of the East attributes a prominent role to Saint Peter and a
significant place for the Church of Rome in her liturgical, canonical and
Patristic thoughts. There are more than 50 liturgical, canonical and Patristic
citations that explicitly express such a conviction. The question before us
therefore is, why there must be a primacy attributed to Saint Peter in the
Church? If there is no primacy in the universal church, we shall not be able to
legitimize a primacy of all the Catholicos-Patriarchs in the other apostolic
churches. If the patriarchs of the apostolic churches have legitimate authority
over their own respective bishops it is so because there is a principle of
primacy in the universal Church. If the principle of primacy is valid for a
local Church (for example, the Assyrian Church of the East), it is so because it
is already valid for the universal church. If there is no Peter for the
universal church there could not be Peter for the local Church. If all the
apostles are equal in authority by virtue of the gift of the Spirit, and if the
bishops are the successors of the Apostles, based on what then one of these
bishops (i.e., the Catholicos-Patriarchs) has authority over the other
bishops?

The Church of the East possesses a theological, liturgical and
canonical tradition in which she clearly values the primacy of Peter among the
rest of the Apostles and their churches and the relationship Peter has with his
successors in the Church of Rome. The official organ of our Church of the East,
Mar Abdisho of Soba, the last theologian in our Church before its fall, based
himself on such an understanding when he collected his famous Nomocanon in which
he clearly states the following: “To the Great Rome [authority] was given
because the two pillars are laid [in the grave] there, Peter, I say, the head of
the Apostles, and Paul, the teacher of the nations. [Rome] is the first see and
the head of the patriarchs.” (Memra 9; Risha 1) Furthermore, Abdisho asserts “.
. . . And as the patriarch has authority to do all he wishes in a fitting manner
in such things as are beneath his authority, so the patriarch of Rome has
authority over all patriarchs, like the blessed Peter over all the community,
for he who is in Rome also keeps the office of Peter in all the church. He who
transgresses against these things the ecumenical synod places under anathema.”
(Memra 9; Risha 8). I would like to ask here the following: who among us would
dare to think that he or she is more learned than Abdisho of Soba, or that they
are more sincere to the church of our forefather than Mar Abdisho himself? This
is true especially since we the members of the Holy Synod have in 2004 affirmed
Mar Abdisho’s List of Seven Sacraments as the official list of the Assyrian
Church of the East. How much more then we ought to consider examining and
receiving Abdisho’s Synodical legislation in his Nomocanon?

Five days later, Mar Bawai was suspended by the Holy Synod of the Assyrian Church. The story behind this, as well as the full text of the paper on papal primacy that Mar Bawai had presented to the Synod, can be found here.


Following upon his suspension, Mar Bawai and the clergy and faithful who had remained loyal to him formed the Assyrian Catholic Apostolic Diocese, then proceeded to draw ever closer to the Catholic Church through the Chaldean Catholic Patriarchate. How fitting that they finally came home on Pentecost Sunday. Deo Gratias!

[trisham]

Now I am going to write something that will cause all sorts of consternation to the Orthodox here and everywhere: It seems to me that Catholics can’t do ANYTHING without the Orthodox finding something to complain about.

**********************

I can't say that I have noticed that to be a problem. To whom are we closer than the Orthodox? Yes, we may disagree at times, but we Roman Catholics also disagree at times.

[Biggirl]

In other words do not egg it on.

[Petrosius]

I am convinced to the depths of my soul that as I said, the Orthodox laity don’t want it and in any event will never allow it to be imposed on us by our hierarchs. We simply have neither the need nor the desire for it.

The Orthodox should stop the search for unity of the apostolic church because the laity are opposed? This hostility, or ambivalence if you will, on the part of the Orthodox laity is not praiseworthy. Nothing should be imposed but it is the role of the bishops, after the theological disputes have been resolved, to act as pastors and lead their flocks. Even now the bishops should be preparing the ground work of eventual union should the theological disputes be settled. Jesus Christ founded one Church and we should all be seeking to do his will to be united in faith.

[Kolokotronis]

“The Orthodox should stop the search for unity of the apostolic church because the laity are opposed?”

Not at all. But its not going to work now or in the foreseeable future. It is the laity’s role to ultimately approve or disapprove what the hierarchs do. In this sense we are very, very different from the Latins. Bishops indeed do lead. That is their proper role. It is also their skulls which pave the floor of hell. In any event, P, this is the way it has always been in Eastern Christianity. In the end, the laity has the say. We believe that it is our obligation to defend Orthodoxy from some of the more “out there” antics of the hierarchs. Many believe that the dialogs have pushed matters into the “out there” stage and its time to rein the hierarchs back in. We think that is very praiseworthy. The quiet adverse reaction to the Vatican’s actions in this Assyrian case indicates to me that perhaps things haven’t gone too far, that our hierarchs still recognize and it would seem reject, what we see as an over extension of Papal power and authority.

[CTrent1564]

True on the point of Sacraments. The Anglicans were ordained as Catholic priests, thus the Anglican orders were not recognized. So, on that point you are correct.

[NYer]

I was thinking the same thing when watching Fr. Geldard and Marcus on the Journey Home last night. When the Anglican Church was debating whether to ordain women, Marcus asked why didn’t the Catholic Church make contact with the Oxford Movement/Anglo-Catholics in the Anglican Communion. Fr. Geldard’s response was enlighting, Rome’s policy was not to get involved at this point as Rome did want to be seen as causing division within the Anglican Communion. Rome, for its part, as Fr. Geldard put it, would rather deal with the entire Anglican Communion as long as there was an intact “Anglican Communion”. However, at the point when the “situation on the ground” changed as in the case where the Anglican-Communion agreed to ordain women, a large number of Anglicans approached Rome about reconciliation. Only at this point did Rome enter into negotiations and how the various options were discussed was really interesting such as 1) Should there be an Anglican-Usage in the UK, 2) Should it be sui juris Church, etc, etc.

Thank you for verbalizing his statements so well. I too was most impressed with the process, especially why the Anglican-Use Rite would not work in the UK. Wish I could find a transcript of the interview. It covered to much territory.

[Petrosius]

I was not addressing any particular theological issues. Rather I am filled with sadness at what seems to be a lack of desire for unity. Without compromising on any of the issues in dispute, the Orthodox should still be trying to instill in the laity this desire to reunite the apostolic church. We need this so that we can benefit from their prayers for this goal. Also, without this desire I can see the tragic possibility that were the bishops of our two churches, lead by the Holy Spirit, to reach a true understanding of the faith that could lead to unity that it could be rejected by a hostile or ambivalent laity; that any agreement with Rome must be, per se, a surrender and a compromise of the faith.

The saying is where there is a will there is a way. Unfortunately I sense from many Orthodox that there is no will; and tragically no prayers.

[Kolokotronis]

“Without compromising on any of the issues in dispute, the Orthodox should still be trying to instill in the laity this desire to reunite the apostolic church.”

P, the hierarchy is trying to do just that, at least most of it is. The problem is that the laity and monastics see compromise on issues of ecclesiology. Theology has little to do with it.

[annalex]

Here it is: EWTN - Journey Home - 5/12 at 8pm - Fr. Peter Geldard - Former Anglican (Conversion Story); however, the transcript doesn't go in every detail that I, too, remember from the radio interview.

[CTrent1564]

Thanks for the transcript. I see where in two weeks, I think, Fr. Geldard and another former Anglican who is now a Catholic Priest will be on a Roundtable with Marcus in England discussing Anglicans with Catholic leanings and how more of them can be reconciled with Rome and the Universal Church.

Thanks again