Fr. Stephen Freeman has reposted regarding a year old article by Fr. Thomas Hopko at Pontifications. The subject is the Orthodox approach toward Ecumenism, reunion between the Orthodox Church and Rome and the ever prevailing issue of the Papacy.

I’m thinking that part of the renewed interest in this article is the politics leading up to the reopening of discussions between Rome and Orthodoxy. Political wrangling often starts with hard and fast positions on every issue. People are throwing down the gauntlet because the possibility of even the smallest change is unsettling.

The Young Fogey provides some background including a link to Ad Orientem which reposts a comment from the Pontifications site by Owen of The Ochlophobist.

I highly suggest people read this commentary.

I have a few comments of my own.

Owen’s commentary certainly hit home for me as a member of the PNCC. Specifically:

Perhaps I am less irenic in tone because after some years of being Orthodox and then visiting a Novus Ordo Mass (in a —conservative— RC mega-parish) I was struck by the fact that it may as well have been a mainline Presbyterian service or a happy clappy Pentecostal service, it was so far from what I recognize Christianity to be. We think it kind in these circles to talk about what we have in common, but what is not said (enough anyway) is that what we have in common is all abstract. In the real flesh and blood terms of authentic communion we have very little in common.

Now I would only modify it by changing ‘abstract’ to ‘core’ but otherwise, how can an effective reunion be accomplished with a Church that (at least in the U.S.) is so different liturgically, sacramentally, and in terms of its discipline.

A Church Council would be the only logical way to hash out these issues. We would have to arrive at the sense of Catholic Christendom. The Council would have to include any truly Catholic body (Rome, Oriental, Eastern, PNCC). I have faith enough to know that a St. Athanasius would step forward in the process, leading us to the light given by the Holy Spirit.

Some have said that the PNCC is just like Rome or just like the Orthodox. In the sense of its Catholicity it is. In my estimation the PNCC is closer to the Orthodox in theology and understanding while being Western in practice (however far more solemn and centered, not Eastern Orthodox in externals but orthodox in practice).

In this I fully agree with Owen. People can say we are the same, but having come from the R.C. Church in the United States (having been brought up in a very traditional parish and having attended very liberal parishes) I can say that this supposition is not true. The PNCC is unique in its own existence as a body, and is far more Catholic in the essentials. We sit in a place that bridges the gap, and we face the same struggles as much of Orthodoxy in America. While we pray for unity, what we seek is the understanding and respect upon which any future unity needs to be based.

I believe that there needs to be a balance between headlong unity in everything and anything (ala Hopko) and unity in the essentials, i.e., more than just the core but less than the totality (i.e., economic unity —“ and I think the Russians hit this spot on).

Unity is not hopeless or impossible, but there are major roadblocks —“ the first and foremost, and the one every dialog dies on, is the role of the Pope. Until this issue is resolved by the totality of the Church Catholic we will have to struggle on.