Can a joint Melkite/Orthodox parish exist?

[Basil Shannon]

Perhaps I am misunderstanding what happened, but according to the artcile linked below, the Patriach of Antioch blessed the establishment of a joint Melkite Catholic and Orthodox parish. Is this possible? Does anyone know more about this event?

Melkite Orthodox parish established (http://www.orthodoxnews.netfirms.com/159/inaugurated.htm)

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

The article is vague about how much this a 'joint parish'. Having both Orthodox & Melkite-Catholics sharing the same altar would go against all canonical practice. You'd think the Melkites would react against this as strongly as the Orthodox. Apart from the question of the correctness of doing such a thing it is difficult to imagine how services & sacraments would be performed in a 'joint parish' without this leading to endless confusion.

On the other hand Orthodox missions are sometimes found worshipping in Roman Catholic or Anglican church buildings. They have their own space with their own altar. Maybe the Orthodox-Melkite parish has two seperate altars with two seperate spaces.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Clement Alexander]

I did read the article and it is on the Antiochian Patriarchate web site. It is extremely disturbing least to say. And the repercussions of such a move are beyond any imagination.

Does this mean that the Patriarch of Antioch and all of the east recognize the Melkite Patriarchate as valid counterpart?

Does it mean that they will be concelebrating soon?

As a member of the Antiochian Church I can only be very very concerned over such a move. Are we going to prostrate under the feet of Heretic Rome and turn into another Uniate entity?

Lord Have Mercy!!!!!

[Moses Anthony]

I checked a couple of places, and found the article on an Orthodox news site. An informative (historical) article is at www.cnewa.org (http://www.cnewa.org) under melkite Catholics.

[Norman]

Re: Maybe the Orthodox-Melkite parish has two seperate altars with two seperate spaces.

The story refers to a single altar:

"The Alter [sic] was equipped according to the Tradition ..."

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

The story refers to a single altar:


"The Alter [sic] was equipped according to the Tradition ..."

If this is so then I would say that "sic" with a "k" added seems to be the right word to describe such an action. But still in my 25 years in the Church I have never heard of such a thing. I guess that's why I'd like to be more certain of what really occured.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Edward Henderson]

This is clearly why the Church desperately needs to call a Pan-Orthodox Synod will ALL the Canonical Bishops of the Orthodox Church, because as a whole, this would not be acceptable if they are indeed concelebrating or even sharing a common altar. The only case of this I know of is the Holy Sepulchre which is jointly owned and maintained by the Orthodox, Latins, and Armenians but that is more the result of history and politics than ecumenism.

I know the Old Calendar zealots are going to have a field day with this story and it does bring scandal to believers. The only thing we can do is repent of our sins and struggle to be faithful Orthodox Christians, especially those who are raising Orthodox children. One thing my spiritual father reminds me of when these sort of things occur is that the people behind this are part of a generation that is dying off. Certainly Patriarch Ignatius is part of that generation of "reformers" (like Patriarch Athenagoras or Archbishop Iakovos)who steered the Church in the wrong direction towards apostacy, but as close as it has come and as close as it comes, full "union" with the Latins has not happened and I think when the "next generation" takes the helm of the Antiochian Patriarchate, things will change and God-willing for the better.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

I keep wondering if there is more to this than the article, which gives the impression of a new "ecumenical church", tells us.

After all I thought that it was just as canonically forbidden for Catholics to concelebrate Liturgy with the Orthodox as the other way around. Maybe Theophilus would know more about this.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Demetrios Galanidis]

When this story broke a while back I do recall this shared temple was built because separate churches were just too difficult to get approval from the Syrian government which, although secular, still makes life difficult for all non-Moslems. In this case, funds were allowed to be expended for ONE temple only - whose church was it to be? I am certain there is more here than just ecumenmical shennanigans. Survival seems to be a factor.

[Alex Haig]

We must try to remember that Christians in many parts of the World are not allowed the freedoms that we expect as of right in the West. Throughout the World Christians from different positions have to work together in order to be able to survive.

Having said this, this seams a very strange situation to have occured, but it seams from the posts above that no-one on this forum is in full possession of the facts, leading to propositions being put forward, the validity of which are unknown.

Let us all pray for the suffering Christians of the World, who often live in a situation far more difficult than it is possible for us to imagine and who witness Christ through suffering persecution in their own lands: "Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven" (Matt 5:10).

With love in Christ

Alex

[Moses Anthony]

I understand that Melkites are Orthodox who (for one reason or another), accepted the yoke of Rome. I found this thread Joint Melkite - Orthodox Parish in Syria at www.christianforums.com/f145 (http://www.christianforums.com/f145). This is TAW (The Ancient Way-Eastern Orthodox. Post #21 in the thread is the one in particular that caught my eye.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

About Melikites the Catholic Encyclopedia writes:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
From that time there have been two kinds of Melchites in these countries, the Catholic Melchites who kept the communion of Rome, and schismatical (Orthodox) Melchites who followed Constantinople and the great mass of eastern Christians into schism. Although the name has been and still is occasionally used for both these groups, it is now commonly applied only to the Eastern-Rite Catholics. For the sake of clearness it is better to keep to this use; the name Orthodox is sufficient for the others, whereas among the many groups of Catholics, Latin and Eastern, of various rites, we need a special name for this group. It would be, indeed, still more convenient if we could call all Byzantine-Rite Catholics "Melchite." But such a use of the word has never obtained. One could not with any propriety call Ruthenians, the Eastern Catholics of southern Italy or Rumania, Melchites. One must therefore keep the name for those of Syria, Palestine, and Egypt, all of whom speak Arabic.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



As this quote shows the Melkites are Catholic not Orthodox.

I also went to the TAW site where there is a thread devoted to this topic. I have absolutely no interest in making a criticism of any individual priest's or parishes' actions. But even in cases of giving refuge or providing basic hospitality to other Christian groups (the example of Copts in an Orthodox church was given) the Orthodox altar should never be used especially once it has been consecrated. Rather one would think a seperate space could be provided in all kindness just as the non-Orthodox of various types have often provided this for us.
For example when our parish began a little over 50 years ago we worshipped in an Anglican church. A separate space in the parish hall was provided and there was a temporary altar & iconstasis. This hall-church was blessed by Archbishop Ioasaph.
So similar hospitality could be offered to certain non-Orthodox Christian groups while maintaining the good order of the Church & not causing confusion or temptation for the faithful.
In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Ken McRae]

"I thought that it was just as canonically forbidden for Catholics to concelebrate Liturgy with the Orthodox as the other way around. Maybe Theophilus would know more about this." - Fr Raphael

I wish I could be of some service here, but I'm not up to speed on this one, unfortunately; I am digging into it, though. You're correct, however, Father: the CC does not permit concelebration either, 'officially' speaking. But, having said that, I should also say that I've seen some very unusual, even highly scandalous things done, under the guise of ecumenism, as you can only well 'imagine', I'm sure.

On one notorius and now very famous occasion, for example, there was a large ecumenical gathering held in one of the "holiest" Catholic shrines of all, located in a place called 'Assisi'. At this meeting were the leaders of all the major world religions, and I do believe Orthodoxy was represented there as well. And on the high altar, front and centre for all to see, there was placed a statue of the Buddha. I forget, though, at the moment, if a Mass was celebrated at that time, but that would be easy enough to find out. I believe the event was 'billed' as an ecumenical "prayer" meeting; whatever that means!!

If anyone's interested, check out this link for some revealing photos of John Paul II's scandalous pontificate (http://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/ChurchRevIndex.htm).

In the Lord,
Theophilus

(Message edited by theophilus on 17 February, 2005)

[Clement Alexander]

Concerning what Demetrios wrote I assure everybody that the issue of permit from the Syrian authority is not the cause. I think and know as someone who grew up in the Antiochian church that there has been a great deal of rapprochement between the Patriarchate of Antioch and the Melkites and there is a certain segment in that Patriarchate that would rush into a false union at heart beat.

The conservative elements in our church are a minority and their voice is not heard our hierarchies are more concerned about being friendly with the Moslem majority than preserving the true faith and that is really a shame.

The Antiochian church needs a lot of prayers and even though at the surface it looks as the only growing Patriarchate, I do believe and know first hand that this growth is far from being healthy or lasting unless a massive repentance takes place both among the hierarchies and the laity.

IN Christ Clement.A

[Demetrios Galanidis]

Thank you, Clement Alexander. Certainly these "pastoral agreements" with both the Melkites and the Syriacs are causing great unease in Orthodoxy. Alas, I feel secure in one of Orthodoxy's great strengths - that no one bishop or local church may truly corrupt the entire Church and that in time corrections will come about.

However, are you saying that the initial news reports that did reference this permit process are inaccurate? Or is this process a mere excuse to further dubious rapproachment?

[Norman]

This joint Melkite-Antiochian Orthodox parish seems to represent the progress of some initiatives taken by these communions in 1996, initiatives that were then (as now) problematic to both Roman Catholics and Orthodox.


Some background:

From: http://www.cin.org/east/melkite.html

From a Melkite Greek Catholic press release (September 1996):

"The holy Synod of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church met in Rabweh, Lebanon July 22-27, 1996 and, after studying the question of unity within the Patriarchate of Antioch, declared that communicatio in sacris = worship in common is possible today and that the ways and means of its application would be left to the joint decisions of the two Antiochian Church Synods - Melkite Greek Catholic and Greek Orthodox. The Synod of thirty-four bishops and four general superiors under the presidency of Patriarch Maximos V (Hakim) deliberated extensively on the topic of church unity particularly within the Antiochian Patriarchate which has been divided since 1724, and issued a document titled, Reunification of the Antiochian Patriarchate. This document is part of the official minutes of the Synod and was made public on August 15, 1996 in the Middle East....

"The Melkite Synod sees that the church of the first millennium could be the model for unity today. The Synod strongly affirms its full communion with the Apostolic See of Rome and that this communion would not be ruptured. The Fathers offered their thanks to the International Theological Commission as well as the Joint Synodal Commissions recently reestablished by Patriarch Maximos V and Orthodox Patriarch Ignatius IV."

Key to this initiative was the profession of faith made by the Melkite Greek Catholic Archbishop Elias Zogby:

"They offer special thanks to Archbishop Elias Zoghby whose 1995 Profession of Faith was the major force for reopening dialogue with the Orthodox brothers. Zoghby, the former archbishop of Baalbek and a long-time leader among the Melkite bishops, offered this brief statement in 1995 and it was subscribed to by 24 of the 26 bishops present at the 1995 Holy Synod: 1. I believe everything which Eastern Orthodoxy teaches. 2. I am in communion with the Bishop of Rome as the first among the bishops, according to the limits recognized by the Holy Fathers of the East during the first millennium, before the separation."

In October, 1996 the Holy Synod of the Antiochian Orthodox Patriarchate issued a statement which included these concerns on the Melkite proposal:

"In this regard, our Church questions the unity of faith which the Melkite Catholics think has become possible. Our Church believes that the discussion of this unity with Rome is still in its primitive stage. The first step toward unity on the doctrinal level, is not to consider as ecumenical, the Western local councils which the Church of Rome, convened, separately, including the First Vatican Council.

"And second the Melkite Catholics should not be obligated to accept such councils. Regarding inter- communion now, our Synod believes that inter-communion cannot be separated from the unity of faith. Moreover, inter-communion is the last step in the quest for unity and not the first."

In a letter to the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America, Metropolitan Philip also said:

"Please be advised that, while we pray for unity among all Christians, we cannot and will not enter into communion with non-Orthodox until we first achieve the unity of faith. As long as this unity of faith is not realized, there cannot be intercommunion. We ask you to adhere to the instructions which you receive from our office and hierarchs."

Next is the text of the letter with Rome's commentary on the Melkite Initiative. It has been translated from the French by Ken Guindon. It was reviewed by His Grace Bishop Nicholas Samra (who made a few corrections) and permission was given to publish this in English.

---------------

Congregation for the Eastern Churches Prot. No. 251/75

June 11, 1997

His Beatitude Maximos V HAKIM
Greek-Melkite Catholic Patriarch of Antioch and of all the East, of Alexandria and of Jerusalem.

Your Beatitude,

The news of the project for "rapprochement" between the Greek-Melkite Catholic Patriarchate and the Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch has given rise to various echoes and comments in the public opinion.

The Congregation for Doctrine of the Faith, the Congregation for the Eastern Churches, and the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity have made an effort to study and closely examine the areas which fall within their competence in this domain; and the heads of these Dicasteries have been charged by the Holy Father to express some considerations to Your Beatitude.

The Holy See is greatly interested in and encourages initiatives which favor the road to a complete reconciliation of the Christian Churches. She appreciates the motivation behind the efforts undertaken for several decades by the Greek-Melkite Catholic Patriarchate, which is trying to hasten the coming of this full communion so greatly desired. The Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches recognizes the duty for every Christian (Can. 902), which becomes for the Eastern Catholic Churches a special duty (munus) (Can. 903), whose exercise will be governed "through special norms of particular law while the Roman Apostolic Church functions as the moderator for the universal church" (Can. 904).

This is all the more true for two communities which see themselves as being closely united because of the ties of common origin and common ecclesiastical tradition, as well as by a long experience of common initiatives which no doubt place them into a privileged situation of proximity.

The Church's desire is to find adequate ways and means to progress further along the road of brotherly understanding and, to encourage new structures which further such progress towards full communion.

Pursuing such goals, Your Patriarchate is motivated by a sensibility and a knowledge of the situation and an experience which are peculiarly its own. The Holy See desires to contribute to this process by expressing some considerations which she believes will eventually help the future progress of this initiative.

The Dicasteries involved appreciate very much that common pastoral initiatives are undertaken by Catholics and Orthodox, according to the instructions found in the Directory for the application of the principles and norms for Ecumenism, especially in the areas of Christian formation, of education, a common effort in charity, and for the sharing of prayer when this is possible.

As to experiences of a theological nature, it is necessary to labor patiently and prudently, without precipitation, in order to help both parties to travel along the same road.

The first level in this sharing concerns the language and the categories employed in the dialogue: one must be very careful that the use of the same word or the same concept is not used to express different points of view and interpretations of a historical and doctrinal nature, nor lends itself to some kind of oversimplification.

A second level of involvement necessitates that the sharing of the content of the dialogue not be limited only to the two direct participants: the Patriarchates of the Catholic Greek-Melkites and the Orthodox of Antioch, but that it involve the Confessions with whom the two Patriarchates are in full communion: the Catholic communion for the former and the Orthodox for the latter. Even the Orthodox ecclesiastical authorities of the Patriarchate of Antioch have brought forth a similar preoccupation. This global implication also will permit averting the risk that some initiatives, meant to promote the full communion at the local level, might give rise to a lack of understanding or suspicions beyond the generosity of the intentions.

Now we consider the elements contained in the profession of faith of his Excellency Kyr Elias Zoghby, Greek-Melkite Catholic Archbishop emeritus of Baalbek, signed in February 1995, and to which numerous hierarchs of the Greek-Melkite Catholic Synod have adhered.

It is clear that this Patriarchate is an integral part of the Christian East whose patrimony it shares. As to the Greek-Melkite Catholics declaring their complete adhesion to the teaching of Eastern Orthodoxy, it is necessary to take into account the fact that the Orthodox Churches today are not in full communion with the Church of Rome, and that this adhesion is therefore not possible as long as there is not a full correspondence in the profession and exercise of the faith by the two parties. Besides, a correct formulation of the faith necessitates a reference not only to a particular Church, but to the whole Church of Christ, which knows no frontiers, neither in space nor in time.

On the question of communion with the Bishops of Rome, we know that the doctrine concerning the primacy of the Roman Pontiff has experienced a development over time within the framework of the explanation of the Church's faith, and it has to be retained in its entirety, which means from its origins to our day. One only has to think about what the first Vatican Council affirmed and what Vatican Council II declared, particularly in the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium Num. 22 and 23, and in the Decree on ecumenism Unitatis Redintegratio Number 2.

As to the modalities for exercising the Petrine ministry in our time, a question which is distinct from the doctrinal aspect, it is true that the Holy Father has recently desired to remind us how "we may seek--together, of course--the forms in which this ministry may accomplish a service of love recognized by all concerned" (Ut unum sint, 95); however, if it is legitimate to also deal with this on a local level, it is also a duty to do this always in harmony with a vision of the universal Church. Touching this matter, it is appropriate to be reminded that in any case, "The Catholic Church, both in her praxis and in her solemn documents, holds that the communion of the particular Churches with the Church of Rome, and of their Bishops with the Bishop of Rome, is--in God's plan--an essential requisite of full and visible communion" (Ut unum sint, 97).

As to the various aspects of communicatio in sacris, it is necessary to maintain a constant dialogue in order to understand the meaning of the current regulation in force, in the light of underlying theological presuppositions; premature, unilateral initiatives are to be avoided, where the eventual results may not have been sufficiently considered, they could produce serious consequences for other Eastern Catholics, especially for those living in the same region.

In summary, the fraternal dialogue undertaken by the Greek-Melkite Catholic Partriarchate will be better able to serve the ecumenical dialogue to the degree that it strives to involve the entire Catholic Church to which it belongs in the maturing of new sensitivities. There is good reason to believe that the Orthodox in general so share the same worry, due also to the obligations of communion within their own body.

The Dicasteries involved are ready to collaborate in order to further the exchange of verifications and echoes; they express their satisfaction for these meetings which have been held on this subject with the representatives of the Greek-Melkite Catholic Church, and they hope and wish that these meetings continue and intensify in the future.

Not doubting at all that Your Beatitude would want to share these ideas, we beg you to accept the expression of our fraternal and cordial greetings.

Joseph Card. Ratzinger
Achille Card. Silvestrini
Edward Card. Cassidy

[Fr Aaron Warwick]

I received the following e-mail from the Patriarchate of Antioch. Thought it might be of interest to all of you, so I have copied it in below:

The Patriarchal Vicar, H.G. Bishop Ghattas Hazim, addressed to the beloved
faithful the following clarification, concerning the Church of St. Peter and
St. Paul, newly inaugurated at Dummar suburb, Damascus.

? To our beloved children,
In order to make appropriate clarification and to avoid any ambiguity concerning
the Church of Dummar, we would like to respond to some questions raised:
The Church of Dummar has been built and its Hall coated from generous donation
by Mr. Habib Beitinjaneh.
The expenses and costs of remaining building works and soil preparation, were
equally paid by both Greek Catholic and Greek Orthodox Churches. Consequently
each Church is proprietor in half of the new church.
As for liturgical services, they are held at different separate timings
according to the convenience of each parish, and a Divine Liturgy is celebrated
for the Orthodox, another Divine Liturgy is celebrated for the Catholics. The
priest of each parish is responsible for the pastoral affairs of his own flock
without combination or confusion.
Finally, there is for either the church or the hall administration its own
committee including members from both churches, within which each church is
nominating its own members. Those committees are supervising the management of
the church, its hall and its annexes according to a protocol agreement signed
between the two churches.



Deacon Tawfeek Al_Haddad
information office