- Feb 5, 2002
- 186,236
- 68,588
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Fr. Jason Charron
In the wake of the 1,700-year commemoration of the Council of Nicaea, where Pope Leo XIV and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I stood together on the soil of ancient İznik, the question of Church unity has taken on renewed urgency. Their meeting, at once liturgical and symbolic, recalled not only a shared origin but the enduring divergence of temperament that has shaped East and West. If unity is to be more than diplomatic choreography, it must engage the deeper currents of the distinct theological “styles” that define Catholicism and Orthodoxy.
The modern pursuit of communion between Rome and Constantinople often imagines unity as the work of theologians, hierarchs, or ecumenical commissions. Yet beneath formal theology lies temperament, and beneath temperament lies worldview; and renewing that is the obligation of all the baptized (Romans 12:2). Permit me to borrow a helpful analogy from a world I love, that of chess. Some openings are universal: resilient systems built on enduring principles that can withstand any opponent. Others are particular: brilliant and precise but dependent on specific conditions and upon the subjectivity of your opponent. This tension between the universal and the particular, between adaptability and rootedness, sheds light on the contrasting ecclesial genius of Catholicism and Orthodoxy.
In chess, the universal player builds upon the enduring principles of control over the center, development, and security. These principles are fixed, and the player who follows that develops a confidence which lies not in predicting the opponent but in trusting the integrity of the system. So too, Catholicism, both by etymology and by theological instinct, embodies this universal mode.
Continued below.
crisismagazine.com
In the wake of the 1,700-year commemoration of the Council of Nicaea, where Pope Leo XIV and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I stood together on the soil of ancient İznik, the question of Church unity has taken on renewed urgency. Their meeting, at once liturgical and symbolic, recalled not only a shared origin but the enduring divergence of temperament that has shaped East and West. If unity is to be more than diplomatic choreography, it must engage the deeper currents of the distinct theological “styles” that define Catholicism and Orthodoxy.
The modern pursuit of communion between Rome and Constantinople often imagines unity as the work of theologians, hierarchs, or ecumenical commissions. Yet beneath formal theology lies temperament, and beneath temperament lies worldview; and renewing that is the obligation of all the baptized (Romans 12:2). Permit me to borrow a helpful analogy from a world I love, that of chess. Some openings are universal: resilient systems built on enduring principles that can withstand any opponent. Others are particular: brilliant and precise but dependent on specific conditions and upon the subjectivity of your opponent. This tension between the universal and the particular, between adaptability and rootedness, sheds light on the contrasting ecclesial genius of Catholicism and Orthodoxy.
In chess, the universal player builds upon the enduring principles of control over the center, development, and security. These principles are fixed, and the player who follows that develops a confidence which lies not in predicting the opponent but in trusting the integrity of the system. So too, Catholicism, both by etymology and by theological instinct, embodies this universal mode.
Continued below.
Leo and Bartholomew in Nicaea
A reunification of Orthodoxy with Catholicism could remind each of what was lost in the schism.
crisismagazine.com
