“I am pinging Kolo on this as I think this is indeed an interesting hypothetical question.”
Thank-you. I too think its an interesting scenario. But my initial reaction was just the same as Mark’s. I know my reaction would be deep suspicion. And I would be concerned not about the Wiccan nuns, but rather the uncatechized Latin laity who might well flood into our parishes fleeing the NO liturgies and the VII mentality prevalent in so many Latin dioceses. They will come in “as of right”, not like the usual inquirer who might someday after a long period become baptised and/or chrismated. What will the modern Latin mindset do to Orthodoxy at the parish level in the West? How do we deal with the availability of Saturday liturgies in English when we are trying to explain to our children that they can’t be on that sports team that plays on Sunday morning because we go to the DL? I went through that and the oldest wasn’t on those teams, but we didn’t have any alternative to a Sunday DL. How do we deal with a hierarchy, at least in this country, which is so very, very political?
As for the theological problems, of course it would be helpful and a source of reunion if the churches believed dogmatically the exact same things, which, as you point out Kosta, brings us back to the 8th century. And of course that cuts both ways and a council can deal with the dogma/theologoumenna matter.
I can’t imagine why we would want, or agree, to change the Creed. That looks to me to be change for the sake of change. Orthodoxy doesn’t do that.
What do we do with the Orthodox parishes scattered, and they are scattered, across the central and mountain states? Can they remain under their bishops and metropolitans? Will the overwhelming dominance of the Latins and their Patriarch quickly or slowly turn us into Maronites with an unmarried clergy and a Latinized liturgy? Will a new Archbishop Ireland arise and we be left looking for a new +Alexis Toth but with no where to run? Assurances that the Latin bishops will leave us alone frankly ring hollow to me in light of the freedom those hierarchs seem to feel about intruding themselves into the affairs of other bishops’ dioceses, especially when politics is involved. The Vatican knows of these concerns; they’ve been warned about them rather continually of late I’m told and there have been some encouraging signs, but its far too soon to tell if the days of boundary crossing are over. In fact, the latest actions of Archbishop Burke and his attacks on the Cardinal Archbishop of Boston over the Kennedy funeral indicate quite the opposite.
I readily admit that my concerns are in many senses parochially American, or North American, but that’s where I live. The same concerns would apply in Western Europe.
You say that you "would be concerned not about the Wiccan nuns, but rather the uncatechized Latin laity who might well flood into our parishes fleeing the NO liturgies and the VII mentality prevalent in so many Latin dioceses."
I really don't think so. Those who wanted to flee the NO liturgies have already done so by attending inordinary Traditional Latin Mass where it is available. Let me just say that I actually researched the number of such diocese and found they are dismally few in number compared to those offering ordinary Pauline Mass.
We may have a (false) impression that every other Catholic is a TLM Catholic because they seem to congregate here on FR, but when you compare the number of NO churches and those that offer TLM , either alone, or TLM and NO at different times, and actually count the number of people who attend each version of the Mass, there is no doubt that the TLM crowd makes up barely 1% of the Catholics, if that much.
Most Catholics are neither interested nor desirous to flee the comfort offered by the NO liturgy. Why in the world would they flee to the rigors of the Divine Liturgy, where (at least in theory) they have to stand for two hours, confess before communion, fast at least since midnight before communion instead of one hour prior, not have the Saturday option, not have it in English? Except for standing, they have all that in TLM which they can relate to, and sit through most of it.
I am sure there are those who are curious and they are free to come into any Orthodox church and observe the Divine Liturgy. There is no reunification needed for to do that. A few decide to convert for various reasons. I don't see that changing. Besides, who runs the church, the people or the bishop? I don't think busloads of Latins would begin arriving at parishes to take over. There is simply no evidential support for such phobia.
And coming in "as of right" would mean what? That the church would distribute communion to those improperly prepared? My God! Isn't that what most Greek, OCA and Antiochan churches are already doing? Everyone in the church receives communion!
How could all these people have gone to confession the night before? When I asked an OCA priest how many communions does one get for one confession, 20,30, 500...he looked at me indignantly but never answered. Yet in his church, it's a mass communion every Sunday, and people are happily chatting while waiting in line.
And fasting...cream cheese bagels during Great Lent in the coffee shop (even the priest was munching on one). When I asked one of the volunteers "Is this fasting food?" she laughed me off saying "We are not monks." And I said "Well, we are not fasting either." It's this kind of hypocrisy that drove me away from the Church, Kolo, and once my eyes were opened I only saw more and more of it.
Last time I was in the Serbian church on the Feast of St. Nicholas (Nativity Fast period), the priest was blessing Slava bread that was obviously glazed with eggs. The Orthodox talk the talk but they don't always walk the walk, Kolo.
And what to say of people showing greater veneration to Theotokos during the liturgy then for God, as I wrote about some time ago? Idolatry, nothing short of that. Or who gets to carry the icons when we walk around the church? The one who donated the most money to the church! What about those poor ones who may give two pennies but that's all they have?! Pharisees, Kolo, shame on them!
And speaking of dispensation for St. Patrick's day for Catholics, the OCA regularly gives dispensation for Thanksgiving, so what's the difference? I could go on, and on, but I think I made my point.
I can’t imagine why we would want, or agree, to change the Creed. That looks to me to be change for the sake of change. Orthodoxy doesn’t do that.
Perhaps we need to ask ourselves why did the Seventh Ecumenical Council change the Creed? As I said, no one ever mentions that it was, let alone the reason.
What do we do with the Orthodox parishes scattered, and they are scattered, across the central and mountain states?
Obviously, jurisdictionally, things would not and could not change. I would imagine the hierarchs would have the wisdom to put that in the reunion agreement. Jurisdictional issues are alive and well among Orthodox parishes as well. The Monastery in Ft. Myers, FL, comes to mind where the Greek bishop took the monastery to court and, according to the abbess of the monastery, lied under oath.
There are even fist fights at Mt. Athos over attempt by the Ecumenical Patriarch to assert his authority there, not to talk about Greek and Armenian monastics swinging at each other in Jerusalem. There are territorial issues I read about every day in Serbian churches in Serbia, where one bishop wants something done one way and the Patriarchy interferes, with the help of the government, just as in Greece, or where bishop(s) routinely ignore the decisions of the Synod.
I think Alex's hypothetical question cuts into the core of this reunification game. If it's not jurisdictional, then it is theological, but if you eliminate both, then it is the laity, the liturgy, dispensations, anything is cited as the reason(s) why reunification is not a good option...he is right, we will always look for a reason to railroad any attempt because, despite all the talk to the contrary, the Orthodox would accept Catholics only if they became Orthodox, and the Vatican would like the Orthodox to turn into "Uniates" at the very least, probably preferably more into Maronites.
Perhaps the Latins have not properly thought this over. Currently, Eastern Churches make up only 1% (1 in 100) of the Catholic Community of approximately 1.2 billion people (on paper). If reunion were to occur today, the Eastern element would jump to 25% (1 in 4). This would significantly change the makeup of the Church as the Vatican knew it for the last 1,000 years.
I am not sure the Vatican would be comfortable with that either. Perhaps desires for marriage obscure problems that come with it.