Scripture describes ecclesialdivision as harmful to Christ’s flock,
and something that requires correction (1 Cor. 1.10-13; 12.25).
The
continued absence of full communion between the Orthodox Church and the
Roman Catholic Church–each comprised of local Churches that together in
the first millennium formed a single communion of Christ’s Holy Body–is a
sorrowful reality that inhibits a united Christian witness to the
world. The non-Christian world, however, does not have to look far to
find Christian writers “satisfied” with the status quo.
The Church itself, however, has not been satisfied with the detached
communion of hundreds of millions of Orthodox and Catholic
Christians. While some who oppose the dialogue might point to various
synodical documents of the 19th century to support their viewpoint, they
cannot ignore the parts of those documents that actually support the dialogue. For example, in the Patriarchal Encyclical of 1895,
we read that “every Christian heart ought to be filled with longing for
union of the Churches,” and that the “whole Orthodox world…ardently
longs for the unity of the Churches in the one rule of faith…”
“Agreeable, therefore, to this sacred longing, our orthodox Church of
Christ is always ready to accept any proposal of union…” that is absent
of doctrinal “novelties” (Article 3).
The Encyclical of 1895 recognizes and laments the “sad
division of the Churches of East and West” (Article 3). Within just a
short span, this document, lauded by those who oppose rapprochement,
recognizes not only that those in the West are “Churches,” but there
should be a “union” of the “Churches” with the Orthodox! “The union of
the separated Churches with herself in one rule of faith is, as has been
said before, a sacred and inward desire of the holy, catholic and
orthodox apostolic Church of Christ; but without such unity in the
faith, the desired union of the Churches becomes impossible” (Article
4).
The Encyclical of 1848,
written in response to Pope Pius IX’s letter to those of the East,
mentions “Rome herself” and “the West generally” among the “Christian
nations…that are today calling upon the name of Christ” (Article 21).
It speaks of “other Christian Communions” (Articles 13, cf. Article 21),
thereby recognizing them as truly Christian. The Orthodox hierarchs
hope for reconciliation with Rome, yet “not with haste, but with ‘mature
consideration.’” Nevertheless, the Patriarchal Synods hope that the
“middle wall of partition…be taken away in the time of his Holiness…”
that is, within their lifetime, and even while Pius IX himself is still
alive—not delaying for decades or centuries! This shall be achieved in
every necessary instance “after consultation with the more wise,
religious, truth-loving, and prudent of the Bishops, Theologians, and
Doctors, to be found at the present day, by God’s good Providence, in
every nation of the West.” They are not pseudo-bishops or
pseudo-theologians, as some today would claim it. The encyclical
furthermore prays that the Pope take up his position as upholder of the
Orthodox Faith that he may “strengthen us, his brethren, still more in
the Orthodoxy Confession…and [we] would that the pope might be this true
successor to the blessed Peter!” (Article 12).
The Encyclical of 1848 also states that the prayer of Christ
for the “common love and unity of Christians in the One Holy Catholic
and Apostolic Church…works in us no less than in His Holiness.” (Article
12). Neither the Fathers nor the present Orthodox hierarchy “deny her
[Rome] canonical privilege in the rank of the hierarchy, so long as she
was guided purely by the doctrines of the Fathers, walking by the plain
rule of Scripture and the holy Synods” (Article 13). Yet even before
any such union, the Encyclical refers to the popes of the
middle ages as “Bishop of Old Rome” (Article 8), to Pius IX as the
“present Bishop of Rome” (Article 10) and as “His Holiness the Pope”
(Article 11).
In this document, the phrases “the Catholic Church” and “the Orthodox
Church” are used interchangeably referring to the Orthodox Church as
the Church of Christ. The Fathers of 1848 expect Pope Pius IX to write
“a work” that will not only reunite Rome and the Orthodox Church, but
also win Protestants and thus be “a work that will unite” all of “the
churches of the West to the holy Catholic Church” (Article
16). “Therefore let the Pope be assured, that if, even now” he will
write to affirm such things as two hundred Bishops on investigation find
in agreement with the seven Ecumenical Councils, then “he shall hear
from us sinners today, not only ‘Peter has so spoken’…but this also,
‘Let the holy hand be kissed which has wiped away the tears of the
Catholic Church.’” (Article 15). If this be the case in response to a
Pope that at the time called us schismatics and even heretics, should it
not be all-the-more applicable now, when the Roman Catholic Church sees
the authentic Church within the gates of the Orthodox Church? Then it
did not esteem us and our Liturgies, but now it recognizes the practices
and beliefs of the Orthodox Church to be authentically that of the
Church of Christ. Can we, in good conscience, turn away the approach of
a billion Christians that draw near to us, whose leaders encourage
their people to learn the riches of Orthodoxy as being part of their own
heritage?
The Encyclical of 1895 states that “for the practical
realization of the pious longing for the union of the Churches, a common
principle and basis must be settled first of all,” and thus both “must
search what the one holy, catholic and orthodox apostolic Church of
Christ, being then ‘of the same body,’ through the East and West
believed, and to hold this fact, entire and unaltered” (Article 5). The
Orthodox-Catholic dialogue has thus far been committed to this process
as described above, and we pray that they continue on this course. May
their synergy be God-centered, their course God-driven, and the
denouement God-inspired.
Very Rev. Dr. Harry Linsinbigler is Adjunct Instructor of
Theology at St. Sophia Ukrainian Orthodox Seminary in South Bound Brook,
New Jersey and priest at Holy Protection Orthodox Church in Dover,
Florida.This essay was sponsored by the Orthodox Theological Society in America’s Special Project on the Holy and Great Council and published by the Orthodox Christian Studies Center of Fordham University.