{"id":24979,"date":"2009-10-05T07:44:15","date_gmt":"2009-10-05T11:44:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/2009\/10\/speculation-of-east-west-reuni\/"},"modified":"2009-10-05T07:44:15","modified_gmt":"2009-10-05T11:44:15","slug":"speculation-of-east-west-reuni","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/2009\/10\/speculation-of-east-west-reuni\/","title":{"rendered":"Speculation of East-West Reunion is too premature"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n\"Met.<\/a><\/p>\n

Metropolitan
\nJohn Zizioulas of Pergamon sent a letter<\/a> to the Archbishop of Greece and to all
\nMetropolitans of the Church of Greece reflecting on their acerbic and
\nuninformed opinion regarding theological dialogue with the See of Rome. Rigid adherence to one’s opinion is sinful. Metropolitan John is a consequential theologian and therefore I think his
\ninsight matters. Clearly one gets the impression he distrusts imprudent public
\nspeculation as to when and how a “reunion of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches”
\nis to take place. A too hopeful stance is unrealistic and does not account for
\nthe continued dogmatic, ecclesiological differences yet to be resolved. One
\nwonders if the Catholic theologians and media people actually do their homework
\nor whether clichés is all they know. There is reason to believe we want to see partial reality.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

Your Eminence,<\/span><\/p>\n

Given that much turmoil has
\nbeen unduly created by certain circles, on the subject of the official
\ntheological Dialogue between Orthodox and Roman Catholics, and that views have
\nalso been expressed, which often range between inaccuracy and open falsehood
\nand slander, I am hereby addressing Your affection in order to clarify the
\nfollowing:<\/span><\/p>\n

1. The aforementioned theological Dialogue does not constitute a
\nconcern of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, and much less, that of a specific
\nperson, but is something that is taking place upon the decision of all the
\nautocephalous and autonomous Orthodox Churches without exception. Specifically
\nwith regard to the present period of the Dialogue, during which the undersigned
\nhas the co-chairmanship from the Orthodox side, the agreement of all the
\nOrthodox Churches for the continuation of the Dialogue has been recorded in
\nMemoranda signed by the venerable Primates of the Orthodox Churches, which are
\nhereto attached in photocopy.  As Your Eminence will see when reading
\nthese Memoranda, even the most holy Church of Greece – and in fact with a
\nSynodical decision – has admitted that “despite the existing difficulties,
\nwhich spring from the provocative activities of Unia to the detriment of the
\nflock of the Orthodox Church, the said Theological Dialogue must
\ncontinue.”  Consequently, those opposed to the said theological
\nDialogue are doubting and judging pan-Orthodox decisions, which have been
\nreached synodically. By claiming solely as their own the genuine conscience of
\nOrthodoxy, these people are in essence doubting the Orthodoxy not only of
\ncertain persons – as they misguidedly insist – but of the very Primates and
\nsacred Synods of all the most holy Orthodox Churches.<\/span><\/p>\n

2. The same things apply
\nin the case of the said Dialogue.  We are informed that a certain
\nprofessor in his letter to the Reverend Hierarchs is censuring the topic of
\nprimacy as a chosen topic for the theological Dialogue, and believes that the
\nDialogue should be concerning itself with other matters.  But the said
\nprofessor is either ignorant of, or indifferent to, the fact that – again – the
\ntopic of the Dialogue was decided on at a pan-orthodox level. The attached
\nMemoranda, signed by all the Primates of the Orthodox Churches, testify to and
\nverify this.  The most holy Church of Greece thus accepts that “this
\ndiscussion (regarding Unia) can, for the sake of facilitating the course of the
\nDialogue, be conducted within the framework of ecclesiology through the prism
\nof the primacy”.  This is precisely what we normally intend to do,
\nduring the forthcoming discussion of the subject “The Primacy during the
\n2nd Millennium”, which is also when Unia first appeared. The remaining
\ntopics that the said professor referred to will by no means be overlooked by
\nthe Dialogue. However, during the present phase, as decided at an
\ninter-orthodox level from the beginning of the Dialogue, the focal point of the
\ndiscussion is Ecclesiology. It is duly respected and legitimate, for the said
\nprofessor – or anyone else – to have a different point of view, but it is
\ninadmissible to be crying out that Orthodoxy is in danger because the Primates
\nwho are shepherding Her do not share his opinion.  Where are we heading as
\na Church, my Reverend holy brother?<\/span><\/p>\n

3. It is being propagated very falsely and
\nconspiringly<\/span> that the signing of the union of the Churches is imminent! <\/b>A
\nprofessor emeritus of Theology, who is well known for his ill-will towards my
\nperson, had visited a Hierarch of the Church of Greece and had told him that he
\nknew with certainty (!) that the union had already been signed (in Ravenna!)
\nand that the relative announcement was a matter of time!!!  Clergy and
\nlaity have approached me and asked me if it is true that the union is to be
\nsigned in Cyprus, in October!  Obviously, a feeling of unrest is being
\nattempted among the people of God through this behaviour, with unpredictable
\nconsequences for the unity of the Church.  However, those who are
\ndisseminating these things are fully aware (as long as they have not been
\nblinded by empathy, fanaticism or a mania for self-projection), firstly, that
\nthe ongoing theological Dialogue has yet to span an extremely long course,
\nbecause the theological differences that have accumulated during the one
\nthousand years of division are many; and secondly, that the Committee for the
\nDialogue is entirely unqualified for the “signing” of a union, given
\nthat this right belongs to the Synods of the Churches.<\/b>  Therefore, why all
\nthe misinformation? Can’t the disseminators of these false “updates”
\nthink of what the consequences will be for the unity of the Church?  «He
\nwho agitates (God’s people) shall bear the blame, whoever he may be» (Galatians
\n5:10).<\/span><\/p>\n

Your Eminence,<\/span><\/p>\n

The responsibility of all of us, and mostly of the
\nbishops who have been appointed by God to cater to the safeguarding of the
\ncanonical unity of their flock, is an immense one.<\/span><\/p>\n

What is being jeopardized is
\necclesiological: What is the authority and the prestige of Conciliar decisions?
\nDo we conform to the Conciliar decisions as we are already doing – and being
\nattacked for doing so – or<\/i> do we conform to the “zealots” of
\nOrthodoxy?<\/span>  Can there be an Orthodoxy and Dogmas without any Conciliar
\nrulings?<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

We ask you to please place yourself on the matter, before we are led
\nto a complete demerit of Conciliar decisions, and before Your flock
\ndisintegrates because of negligence on our part.<\/span><\/p>\n

In humility and in awareness
\nof episcopal responsibility, we submit the above to Your affection and judgment
\nand remain, <\/span><\/p>\n

in Athens the 26th of September 2009<\/span><\/p>\n

With Respect, honour and love
\nin the Lord<\/span><\/p>\n

+ John of Pergamon<\/span><\/p>\n

Orthodox Co-Chairman of the Committee for the
\nTheological Dialogue between Orthodox and Roman Catholics<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Metropolitan John Zizioulas of Pergamon sent a letter to the Archbishop of Greece and to all Metropolitans of the Church of Greece reflecting on their acerbic and uninformed opinion regarding theological dialogue with the See of Rome. Rigid adherence to one’s opinion is sinful. Metropolitan John is a consequential theologian and therefore I think his … Continue reading Speculation of East-West Reunion is too premature<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[57],"tags":[1908,2203,2176,1980],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24979"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24979"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24979\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24979"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24979"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24979"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}