Bartholomew desires to make a new beginning that it why he proposed that “it is already empirically evident that the conviction has matured in the hearts of both sides, namely that, from this point on the course of our efforts must be reversed. That is to say, we must expend our spiritual energy not in the effort of finding justifications for the strengthening of positions, which we overly defended in the past towards the justification of the schism, but in sincerely endeavoring to find arguments that verify the error of divisive inclinations and that, even more, seek out ways of approaching full restoration of the unity of the Churches.”

The patriarch believes that “the best method for investigating this matter is the continuation and cultivation of inter-ecclesiastical dialogues and relations, as well as especial cultivation of the outcome of the dialogue of love into a substantial and theological dialogue between both of our Churches, Orthodox and Roman Catholic. The personal acquaintance of the members and especially of the representatives of the Churches often leads to the discovery that the people involved are of good will, and that a deeper understanding of the events that provoked the schism based upon objectivity will suffice to dissipate fears, suspicions, distrust, and conflicts of the past.”

And nothing will come of it.

Hmmm…Why do you think so? Don’t you have trust in the HS to move things?

Should we keep saying things such as what you stated…to continue to be pessimistic?

Or should we all instead pray that something will indeed come out of it?

At this time I am convinced that reunion between us in this life is impossible. The Patriarchs will not recognise the Pope’s claim to universal authority and power and the Pope will not concede his claim to universal power and authoirty. And I doubt the creed in the west will ever have teh fillioque taken from it.

That is basically it. There are things in the way that Papal Infallibility is formulated (even if one takes the most charitable and understanding reading possible) which are unacceptable to the Orthodox. The same is true of the Filioque, which is a symptom of a deeper theological disagreement over the nature of the ontological difference between creator and creation, and also the nature of the man’s participation (synergy) in his own salvation.

No offence Ignatian but I’m glad you are not the patriarch and I’m not the pope as this kind of attitude would make for a short dialogue.

I will continue to hope & pray the HS will in fact make the “impossible” possible however He sees fit. :highprayer: This is an awesome opportunity for us to be more open to the HS and allow His will be done. :thumbsup:


Exactly. Sometimes I thought what the heck, go to hell with them if they are so unfriendly. Who need them anyway. But then I realized that there are misfits in that church as there are in the Catholic Church. Thanks God the Pope and their leaders are holy Spirit filled people with much sense of sanity. It’s in them that our hope lies and that the Holy Spirit will bring us together to be one as indeed is the prayer of our Lord Jesus.

Is that your desire?

Well we can say the ecumenical dialogue has taken a turn, no?


Nothing means void of anything. Something “will” come of this, what, remains to be seen. :wink:

As a person stuck in the middle between Catholicism and Orthodoxy, I may have a unique perspective. In my opinion what separates both is their individual arrogances.
Universal Papal Supremacy is the catholic arrogance, and the easiest to see.
The orthodox have a more subtle arrogance. That of the feeling that theey have been completely true to the faith created by Jesus and the Apostles while the RC has fallen into error.

In order for the sides to meet, the catholic Church needs to give a little on this idea of absolute supremacy, and the Orthodox need to chill out abou the “we are the faith of the Apostles and you catholics are in serious error, if not outright heresy.”

The political pressure on the heirarchy of both sides NOT to give in may be too great for this to happen anytime soon.

EDIT- Now that I re-read my post, it’s clear to me that my position is not so unique. It’s been said thousands of times before.

“Standing against the modern ecumenist movement is the traditional Orthodox Church which staunchly maintains there is but one Church, and Orthodoxy is the Church. Thus, theories like “sister church” or “two lungs” are generally rejected, because in its view the Church is theologically indivisible. Leading the anti ecumenical movement in the 1980s was Fr. John Boylan of the OCA.” [Wiki-pedia on Ecumenism]

This does seem to create a problem with limiting the Most Holy Spirit and I do realize where the issue stems as stated above. Nevertheless, this doesn’t “appear” to be what Bartholomew is stating.

"The patriarch said on November 30 that “the uniqueness of the founders of our Churches, of Elder Rome and of New Rome, the Holy Apostles Peter and Andrew, as brothers according to the flesh, constitutes a motivation for both of our Churches to move toward the genuine experience of spiritual brotherhood and the restoration of communion in this same spirit, in truth and in love.”

The patriarch went on saying that “unfortunately, throughout the course of the centuries, this brotherhood has been deeply wounded and as a result, the spiritual unity of our Churches has been disrupted."

Brothers of the Flesh does seem similar to “theories like “sister church” or “two lungs” are generally rejected.” [from above]

Frankly I do see a change and “something” happening, and the will of Our Lord. :thumbsup:

Everyone needs to give a little. Frankly I’m anxious to see what Pope Benedict has to say about the Primacy which both He and Bl JP-II have stated they are willing to consider and re-evaluate.[to badly paraphrase]. Subtle hasn’t been the path of either Church till V-II with Rome. Which in attempt to walk away from the we own the Holy Spirit theory, has created a chaotic atmosphere in Christianity. But we do need to re-think the theory and ecumenism on a whole, I am “positive” the Holy Spirit is very much active in Trinitarian Christianity.


I hope you’re right.

I suspect that a lot of Anglicans never expected to see any kind of reunion with Rome, either.

Some individuals will never accept communion with the Church, but that says more about them than it does about the efforts to re-unite, doesn’t it?

It sure does, there are many here who have gone over and over the East/West situation and its a credit to all these souls who are willing to drop the East/West image and seek Communion. Sure its frustrating and often falls off track, yet at the same time I’ve seen a genuine effort to communicate and understand, and often in a positive direction.

For the East to open their doors in Communion to the West would no doubt help the situation.

Ecumenical dialogue in England is pretty much dead. Why? )ecause vested politicians decided in 1992 that women priests were more important than the unity of the Catholic Church.

Those here who know me, know this issue is of great importance to me. I pray that the Holy Spirit moves among these great leaders of the Church, and guides them to reconciliation.


No I’m not a patriach but I’m a layman who believes in the teachings of his church and believes there was a reason why we schismed in the first place. If any of the patriarchs decided to accept Rome’s claim and enter in to communion with rome you can rest assured we would probably excommunicate him. But I don’t exclude a divine miracle happening, if it be the will of God, but I still think it will not happen and is near impossible.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit