Tag: Unity

Family Reunions Are Challenging

“My son is dead,” the father said, though the son was actually very much alive. The young man was raised in an Orthodox Jewish household. From the moment he decided to embrace Christianity, his father never looked on his face or spoke to him again.
What pain for both. What a price to be paid by each for fidelity to his religious convictions. The father saw his son as not only abandoning the traditions that were the father’s very lifeblood but also as rejecting the commandments and very truth of God. The son saw his father as so locked into his customs and practices that they overrode his understanding and love.
Throughout the centuries, Christians too have often read whole Christian communities out of the Church and acted as though they no longer existed. In effect, this is what the first ecumenical councils of the Church — its “family reunions” — did to confront controversies.
Arians were condemned at Nicaea in324; the followers of Macedonius, at Constantinople in 381; and Nestorians, at Ephesus in 431. This led to the estrangement of the Assyrian Church of the East from the rest of the Church.
The decrees of the Council of Chalcedon in 451 were rejected by many of the subject Christian peoples of the Byzantine Empire. As a result the Universal Church no longer counted the churches of Armenia, Egypt and Syria as part of the world-wide Christian communion.
In 553 and 680 at Constantinople and in 787 at Nicaea, councils still wrestled with problems of orthodoxy.

A sad result of the council held in Constantinople in 869 was the condemnation of the Patriarch of Constantinople, Photius. This aggravated the growing estrangement between the East and West. By 1054, the Pope and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople solemnly read each other out of full communion with the Church.
Councils were convoked by the Catholic Church in 1123, 1139, 1179, and 1215 (Rome); in 1245 and 1274 ( Lyons); in 1311-12 (Vienne); in 1414-18 (Constance); in 1431-42 (Basel-Ferrara-Florence); in 1512-17 (Rome): in 1545-63 (Trent): and in 1869-70 and 1962-65 (Vatican).
At the councils of Lyons and Basel-Ferrara-Florence there were short-lived attempts at dialogue and reconciliation with the Orthodox Church, but even so the schism between the East and West continued unabated.
A great change of heart came about with the Second Vatican Council in 1962. The Catholic Church invited all the Christian churches of the world to send observers to the council. It recognized them as still-living parts of the one Church of Christ, even though not in full communion with Rome.
For the first time in centuries, in spite of existing important differences, all Christians were considered as one great family, and bold steps were taken towards achieving a complete family reunion.


(Published as “Family Reunions”
in Catholic Near East, 25:6, November 1999)

Beyond the Pale

A friend of mine once told me about how he and his wife resolved differences with their teenage children — for example, whether they had to go church on Sunday.
The parents would discuss it with the children and try to persuade them to do the right thing. But if the family couldn’t find some common ground, my friend felt it was up to him to decide the issue:
“For me, it’s simple — the rule in this house is that everybody who lives here goes to Mass. When my kids are living independently, they can make their own decisions about what they choose to do.”
Generally, the father’s norm for his children’s behavior was that, while they lived under his roof, they had to live within the boundaries their parents set for them.
Was this a diminishment of the children’s freedom? Of course. It was part of the price they had to pay for being members of a family and living at home as minors.
Similar things happen in the Church. As in all big families, there is always a fair share of internal disagreement and feuding — and name calling — among the Church’s members.
Also, as children often vie for their father’s attention and approval, so do individuals and groups in the Church, for the attention and approval of the Holy Father. They want him to be on their side.
For example, Pope John Paul II recently extended a few disciplinary canons of the Church’s law to clarify for its members their obligations to adhere to certain categories of church teachings.
There were exaggerated reactions both applauding and bewailing the Holy Father’s action.

There were expressions of delight by some that the “liberals” were being made to tow the mark. Others reacted as though the decree represented a victory of the “conservatives” in the Church.
The loving task of the father or mother of any family is not to pick or place one child over the other, but to maintain peace and order so that all their children live harmoniously together.
As in the family, the Holy Father tries to resolve difficulties and persuade the Church’s members to do the right thing. But, if this fails, it’s his responsibility to make clear norms of belief and behavior that must be observed by those who want to remain part of the Church family.
Is this a diminishment of their personal freedom? Of course. It’s part of the price they are willing to pay for being members of the family of the Church and living in it.
The Holy Father’s special responsibility is to keep the Church together in unity. As he presides over that diverse, international, and dynamic assemblage in the Spirit which is the Church, from time to time he has to set boundaries.
When the Anglo-Normans conquered sections of Ireland in the 12th century, those who chose to live outside Anglo-Norman governance were considered to be “beyond the pale.”
With the Church, too, alas, some are unwilling to pay the price of unity and choose to live “beyond the pale.”


(Published in
Catholic Near East, 24:6, November 1998)

Bab Sittna Mariam

When Suleiman the Magnificent rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem in 1539-1542, his builders embedded lion reliefs in both sides of the last gate of the city to be completed. They probably were taken from the coat of arms of the Sultan Baybars.
It’s no surprise then that today, in Hebrew, the gate is commonly called, “the Lions’ Gate.”
Actually, Suleiman intended the gate to be called Bab el-Ghor, “the Jordan Gate,” since it faced East toward the Jordan Valley; however that name never took.
Christians persist in calling it “St. Stephen’s Gate” after an old gate that stood in the same area before the walls were rebuilt. Since Crusader times it was associated with the nearby church of St. Stephen outside the city walls.
For   For Muslim—and Christian—Arabs, the gate’s name is Bab Sittna Mariam, “Our Lady Mary’s Gate,” for down the hill from it, in the Kidron Valley near the Grotto of Gethsemane, is the Tomb of the Virgin.
Our Lady’s tomb is a place of great devotion for Muslims as well as Christians, especially for women.
Originally a great Byzantine church stood over this spot, probably with its altar built over the tomb itself. It was destroyed by the Persians in 614, rebuilt, and then destroyed again. The Crusaders built another great church there, but Saladin destroyed it, leaving only the crypt.
If you walk down into the crypt to visit the tomb of Our Lady, next to it you will find a mihrab, a curved niche in the wall that marks the direction of Mecca, so that. devout Muslims can orient themselves correctly when they pray at this holy place.

Muslim devotion to the mother of Jesus is rooted in the teachings of the holy Qu’ran.
Although there are several references to her in other places, one of the 114 surats, or chapters, of the Qu’ran is dedicated to Mary. Part of it recounts the story of the Annunciation:

. . . Then We sent to her Our angel, and he appeared before her as a man in all respects.
She said: “I seek refuge from thee to God Most Gracious: come not near if thou dost fear God.”
He said: “Nay, I am only a messenger from thy Lord to announce to thee the gift of a pure son.”
She said: “How shall I have a son, seeing that no man has touched me, and I am not unchaste?”
He said: “So it will be: Thy Lord saith, ‘That is easy for Me: and We wish to appoint him as a Sign unto men and a Mercy from Us’: It is a matter so decreed.”
So she conceived him . . .

Mary is a point of convergence for the three great monotheistic religions. She is a Jewish maiden, the mother of the Christ, beloved of his followers and Muslims too.
Maybe the real translation of Bab Sittna Mariam ought to be “Our Lady Mary is the Gate.”


(Published in
Catholic Near East, 24:2, March 1998)

Two’s Company, Three’s a Crowd

On 6 January 1996, the Holy See’s Congregation for the Eastern Churches issued an Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.
The attractively printed, 96 page document seems, at first blush, to be a somewhat technical publication of interest only to liturgical and canonical specialists.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. The prescriptions of this beautifully crafted document are revolutionary in their implications, They are another bold step forward by the Holy See in its quest for Church unity.
The first millennium of the Church’s life is a history of its spread throughout the ancient world and beyond, in Europe and in Asia. It also is a history of divisions, rooted in politics, rivalries, cultural differences, and misunderstandings.
During the second millennium, the Church spread throughout most of the world. The dark side of this period was the splintering of the Western Church and the attacks on Christianity in modern times. The bright side was the quest for the unity of the Church and new vitality in Church life everywhere.
During recent centuries many groups of Eastern Christians, separated from the Church of Rome, sought to establish full communion with the Holy See, even at the price of breaking away from their mother churches. Most of today’s Eastern Catholic Churches were born this way.
Over the years, these Eastern Catholic Churches began to adopt many of the rites, customs, traditions, and vesture of the Latin or Roman Church. In other words they, became “Latinized.”

From the Roman Catholic point of view, these churches seem thoroughly eastern. But from the Orthodox point of view, they are too absorbed and influenced by the West. In a way, they have become a third kind of church, a hybrid of East and West.
The major focus of this new Vatican document is to encourage the Eastern Catholic Churches to divest themselves of all western adaptations and to restore the ancient traditions of the Eastern Churches:

. . . the Eastern uniqueness . . . risks being compromised or even eliminated in the contact with the Latin Church, her institutions, her doctrinal elaboration, her liturgical practices, and her internal organization . . . In every effort of liturgical renewal . . . the practice of the Orthodox brethren should be taken into account, knowing it, respecting it and distancing from it as little as possible . . .

The Instruction lays the groundwork for a striking plan for the unity of the Church. The churches that broke with Orthodoxy for the sake of union with Rome must become instruments of union.
Firm in their communion with Rome, they must return to the fullness of their ancient traditions so that Eastern Churches not yet in full communion with Rome will see in them a genuine, uncompromised model of unity in diversity.
May the third be the millennium of unity!


(Published in
Catholic Near East, 22:4, July 1996)

Full Circle

In his book, The Phenomenon of Man, Father Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., observed that “Nothing is so delicate and fugitive by its very nature as a beginning . . . Beginnings have an irritating but essential fragility, and one that should be taken to heart by all who occupy themselves with history.”
As much as we would like to know more about the beginnings of the ancient Church of India, we have only the immemorial tradition that it was founded by St. Thomas the Apostle
Although early historical references are few, it seems clear that the descendants of the converts of St. Thomas were joined over the centuries by various groups of Christian immigrants from the lands of the old Persian Empire.
When the Portuguese arrived in India at the end of the 15th century, they found this ancient Church of India undivided, though not without its internal differences. By then it was thoroughly integrated into the fabric of South Indian society and Chaldean in its religious life and traditions.
Whether due to misunderstanding or indifference, the regulations and demands of the Portuguese authorities, both civil and religious, provoked a deep polarization and, ultimately, a division of this Indian Christian community.
The fragmentation of the Indian Church continued through the beginning of the 20th century until, providentially, a new movement seeking reunion arose.
Its founder was a priest of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church, Father P.T. Geevargheese. In 1919, he had started a religious community, the Bethany congregation, seeking to combine Oriental monastic traditions with Indian spirituality.

The new community flourished and was a great spiritual leaven within the Orthodox Christian community.
In 1925, Father Geevargheese was consecrated a bishop with the new name of Mar Ivanios. He still dreamed and worked for the unity of the Thomas Christians of India.
In 1926, he and four other bishops of the Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church began to explore the possibility of reconciliation with the Church of Rome.
On 20 September 1930, Mar Ivanios and his suffragan bishop, Mar Theophilos, entered into full communion with the Holy See. Two years later Pope Pius XI appointed him as Archbishop of Trivandrum and a new Eastern Catholic Church was born, the Syro-Malankara.
By the time of the death of Mar Ivanios in 1953, the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church had grown rapidly and consisted of two dioceses, Trivandrum and Tiruvalla
His successor, Mar Gregorios, provided dynamic and creative guidance to the Malankara Church for the next 40 years.
In 1978, a third Malankara diocese was created, Battery. Its founding bishop, Cyril Mar Baselios, just promoted to Archbishop of Trivandrum, assumes the mantle of leadership of this youngest, yet ancient, Eastern Catholic Church.
May God grant him much success in continuing the great work of reuniting all of Thomas’s children!


(Published in
Catholic Near East, 22:1, January 1996)

Distinction Without a Difference

Last month the new director of our Jerusalem office, Fr. Denis Madden, spent a week in New York for his initial orientation. Naturally we overwhelmed him with papers and reports and his every day was crammed with meetings and conversations.
The most important aspect of his orientation hardly could be put into writing. It had to do with intangibles, the attitudes and style which characterize our work — our Catholic Near East Welfare Association “oral tradition.”
Discussing the ecumenical dimension of what we do, I conveyed to him one of our prime directives: “Always act as if the church is one, unless you are forced to encounter a difference.”
This means being as respectful, attentive, and solicitous to the needs of the Orthodox and Protestant communities and their spiritual leaders as we are to the various Catholic communities.
So often in ecumenical dialogues, as they are usually called, theologians fasten upon the points of doctrinal difference and seek to bridge the gaps and hostilities.
In our work we’re more fortunate. In our “dialogue of charity,” to use a beautiful expression of Pope John Paul II, we fasten upon the commonality of need and the universal appeal and power of love.
When it comes to helping people in need, their creed or their lack of it is not a determining factor.
Our mission is to be of service not just to Roman Catholics, but to all Catholics — not just to Catholics, but to all Christians — not just to Christians, but to all believers — not just to believers, but to all members of the one human family.

The tendency of modern societies is to accentuate differences — differences of nationality, ethnic group, race, religion, political affiliation — differences of social class, economic achievement, education, and breeding — even differences of sexual orientation, life-style, and values.
If all I do is accentuate what makes me different from others, after a while I paint myself into a lonely corner. After all, if we press it far enough, each one of us is ultimately unique and different from everyone else in the whole world. That’s the way God made us!
To know who you are — and to have confidence in yourself — you have to know and appreciate all that is distinctive about yourself.
To be in touch with anybody else, to be joined or to be in solidarity with others in any way, you have to learn to bridge the differences.
That’s what forgiveness, reconciliation, and peacemaking are all about, whether between individual persons or among groups or nations.
In fact, the special name for this power God gives us, which enables us both to appreciate all that distinguishes us and to reach out and join together with others, is love.
Maybe the prime directive for the successful orientation of every new member of the human family should be this: “Always act as if we all are one, unless you are forced to encounter a difference.”


(Published in
Catholic Near East, 20:1, January 1994)

Back to the Future

At the end of August I had the privilege of joining a small committee of United States Catholic bishops on a trip to the Soviet Union. We had an ambitious itinerary — to visit Russia, Lithuania, Latvia, Byelorussia, and the Ukraine. We also had a generous purpose — to learn from the local clergy and people what kind of assistance they hoped for from their brothers and sisters in the West.
In terms of space, of geography, it was a trip of thousands of miles. In terms of time, it was a trip back at least 50 years.
Christianity in the Soviet Union has been on the defensive since the Bolshevik revolution. As persecution increased under Communism, Christians clung ever more tenaciously to their customs and traditions, even to the point of death. Thanks be to God for their heroic faith!
But now, as pressures are beginning to be relieved, the clergy and the faithful of these churches are challenged to face freedom and the modern world. They’re like people awakening from a long and bad dream, to discover that the world-wide Church of 1990 has changed and evolved into a Church very different from the one they have known and defended all these years.
I wonder how the “underground” Ukrainian bishops felt when they came to meet the Polish pope in Rome in June. They saw the “Latin” liturgy all simplified and in Italian — almost Protestant, when seen with the eyes of 50 years ago.
They found a special agency of the Holy See to promote Christian unity — to find ways to reestablished peaceful communion with the Orthodox Church, not to treat it as a bitter rival.

The differences they faced aren’t just externals: priests in suits instead of cassocks, nuns in lay clothes instead of habits, or liturgy in the vernacular instead of Latin. Those of us who lived through the days of the Second Vatican Council and its aftermath realize the incredible change of mentality that has permeated the Church of today.
We take for granted freedom of religion and respect for conscience. Pluralism is our way of life. We no longer speak of the one, true Church, but of the servant Church that is a sacrament or sign of intimate union with God and of the unity of the whole human family.
When we ask the Catholic churches of the Soviet Union what help they need, we may be thinking of the buildings, equipment, and tools we’re used to; they may be more concerned for vestments, prayer books, and rosaries. Our pastoral goal may be how best to support all believers, Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant; theirs may be the repossession of their confiscated churches and the defense of their rights.
The challenge of their future is aggiornamento, to be caught up in the great renewal of the Church launched by the Vatican Council. Their challenge is to transform their heroic faith of resistance into the faith that plunges into the open, unknown future, with the same confidence in the Lord who promises “I am with you always, until the end of the age.”


(Published in
Catholic Near East, 16:4, October 1990)