For discussion, on membership in the Church during schisms: St. Irenaeus of Lyons wrote, [A spiritual disciple] shall... judge those who give rise to schisms, who are destitute of the love of God, and who look to their own special advantage rather than to the unity of the Church; and who for trifling reasons, or any kind of reason which occurs to them, cut in pieces and divide the great and glorious body of Christ, and so far as in them lies, [positively] destroy it—men who prate of peace while they give rise to war, and do in truth strain out a gnat, but swallow a camel. For no reformation of so great importance can be effected by them, as will compensate for the mischief arising from their schism. He shall also judge all those who are beyond the pale of the truth, that is, who are outside the Church... (newadvent.org/fathers/0103433.htm) There were historical schisms involving St. Meletius of Antioch and St. Photios of Constantinople in which the schism was subsequently healed, but in which Saints were recognized as existing on both sides of the dispute (in the case of St. Meletius, Sts. Athanasius, Damasus, Epiphanius, and Jerome on one side, and St. John Chrysostom and the Cappadocian Fathers on the other). Moreover, St. Isaac the Syrian was a member of the Assyrian Church of the East, which was not in visible communion with the Orthodox Church following the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus. So while of course I affirm the teaching of the Creed that the Church is one and undivided, I wonder whether organizational divisions between Christians, and a lack of concelebration of the Eucharist, necessarily mean that one party is in the Church, and the other is not. As far as I know, in the case of these historical schisms that were healed, the Fathers who worked for restoration of visible unity did not all agree that one party to the schism had been outside the Church during the time when the sharing of the Eucharist together was disrupted. I wonder whether a more apophatic ecclesiology would be appropriate, in which some faithful Christians, through no fault of their own, find themselves shut off from visible communion with other faithful Christians on the account of the sin of schism. I think a more apophatic attitude toward where the Church is not would be helpful in restoring the Coptic, Armenian, Syrian, and Roman churches to visible communion with the Orthodox Church in the holy catholic and apostolic Faith. In other words, I am arguing for an ecumenism of rediscovery, of each side seeking in their own heritage the one true Faith that unites them to Christ and His Body, as opposed to an ecumenism of return (Youre wrong and outside the true Church, and were right and the only true Church, and you must abandon your own identity and become like us in all respects).
Posted on: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 22:17:35 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015