More from World Orthodoxy

[Seraphim Reeves]

Greek "Orthodox" and Melkites build a common church...

http://www.cnewa.org/cw29-3-pp13-15.htm

(excerpt from article)

“The two communities share the same faith, the same history and the same traditions – all rooted in Antioch. But there are two different jurisdictions – a parting of the ways came about in 1724, when one part of the church decided to enter into full communion with Rome,” he added.

"Same faith", "full communion"? I know it was the papist party in this agreement who said this, but still...

It's obvious how many of the "Greek Orthodox" layman are understanding this project, and it's religious significance.

One layman is quoted as saying...

“It is not important whether the priest is Orthodox or Catholic,” Mr. Fouad continued.

Sigh. I hate being a "fanatic" (or at least having circumstances shove me into that part.)

Seraphim

[TomS]

I really think that you are reading way too much into this. It has been done for econoomic reasons. A quote:

“In Doumar, the two sister churches, Melkite and Greek Orthodox, to which the majority of Syrian Christians belong, thought it would be better to share a single church rather than to have none at all,” said the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch, Ignatius IV, who resides in Damascus.

“We will celebrate the Divine Liturgy at different times, for example, one in the morning and the other in the afternoon.”

[Arsenios]

That is terrible Seraphim

[Seraphim Reeves]

I really think that you are reading way too much into this. It has been done for econoomic reasons.

Even if it were simply a matter of pragmatism, it is of the worst sort. However, it's quite clear from the article itself (your excerpt shows to me that you read it through) that this is not only a matter of pragmatism, but also signifies some hope for union (and it goes without saying, not genuine union - papist repentence and return to Orthodox Christianity).

I find it odd that you missed the ecumenistic import of this little experiment - it's explicitly stated in the article (it's not some inference I'm making.)

Seraphim

[TomS]

More from the article:

"According to Syrian law, when a new community is being developed, the government allocates a plot of land for Christians, free of charge, so a church can be built. The thinking behind this ensures a just and equitable balance between newly constructed mosques and churches.

In the past, however, when land was to be allotted to Christians, different denominations would try to monopolize the land and build its own church. The government always rejected this, stating that the land was for the use of the entire Christian community, not a single denomination. Such a deadlock usually led to the withdrawal of the land offer."

Did they REALLY have a choice? What are you saying - no church is better than a church that SHARES its space. They are not talking about combining the Liturgy. So where is the problem?

And the ecumenical talk is coming from the Melkite Greek Catholic Archbishop.

This is economy.

[Anastasios]

We Americans/Canadians cannot fathom what it is like to live under a Muslim regime, even a "secular" one like in Syria. I think we should pray for our bretheren instead of condemning them. Maybe instead of being upset that they are building a church together, we would like to start a collection to give to the Orthodox so they can afford land of their own? And start a letter-writing campaign to the dictator of Syria to give them the land after they have the money? All this criticism and negativity gets us nowhere. Let's do something POSITIVE if this affects us so much!

anastasios

[Justin Kissel]

All this criticism and negativity gets us nowhere.

And where has all the positivity of the ecumenically toned dialogues and meetings gotten us? To communion with anti-Chalcedonians and building Churches with Catholics? I remember you sharing a story, Anastasios, in which you related how someone invited a heterodox man in, sat down to dinner with him, and then said "now let me tell you why you are a heretic" (or something to that effect). I have no problem helping people in that part of the world--whatever their religious belief. I won't stop pointing out when errors happen though, not because I love judging them, but because I fear for both them and us. To be tacit is to partake in their destruction (on judgment day).