The Eastern Catholic Churches and the Restoration of Unity Theology

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The abstract is too long. Moreover, it includes a rather simplified and partly one-sided description of the historical process. You should shorten it and pick only those parts which clearly are a part of the main argument of the article and relevant for understanding. 

It is not quite accurate to state that the restoration of the unity of the Church would have begun with the union of Brest-Litovsk, especially because it has also been a source of many tensions, and currently the Catholic church generally distances herself from this kind of model for ecumenism. Yet the union has elements which are worth reflecting also in the modern context and in the Catholic-Orthodox ecumenism.

Page 2: The self-understanding of the Romanian Greek Catholic Church may be that they "have paved the way for the restoration of unity". However, the union model is also generally seen as a disputed one. Therefore it would be wise to formulate a bit more cautious this paragraph.

Please explain in the introduction more carefully your method and sources and the aim/hypothesis of the article. 

Especially on the first pages the language and argumentation is not quite clear and can surely be improved. The rest of the article is much better from this point of view. The abbreviation CCEO should be explained.

Page 3: Is it really so that "the basis of the construction of the theology of the Romanian Church, is the use of vernacular language in religious worship"? This may well have an effect on the inculturation of the doctrinal and theological tradition but the basis is probably the Scripture and Christian tradition, not culture per se? Perhaps this part can also be formulated in the light of this anew.

Page 6: There are differing views whether the council of Ferrara-Florence managed in clarifying "points of dogmatic divergence". Anyhow, in the Orthodox tradition it is not an ecumenical council. This doesn't naturally mean that it wouldn't still have relevance for the ecumenical discussion.

Page 7: It is true that Martin Luther's catechisms were a leading example of catechetical literature in his contemporary context, and they inspired other catechisms. However, Christian catechetical literature as such is much older. Already the Didache from the 1st century can be seen as a catechism.

Page 7: You might want to remind in this context which are the four points of divergence exposed at the Schism of 1054.

 

Author Response

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The abstract is too long. Moreover, it includes a rather simplified and partly one-sided description of the historical process. You should shorten it and pick only those parts which clearly are a part of the main argument of the article and relevant for understanding. It is not quite accurate to state that the restoration of the unity of the Church would have begun with the union of Brest-Litovsk, especially because it has also been a source of many tensions, and currently the Catholic church generally distances herself from this kind of model for ecumenism. Yet the union has elements which are worth reflecting also in the modern context and in the Catholic-Orthodox ecumenism.

I shortened the abstract. I clarified in the abstract that it is about the restoration of the unity of the Constantinopolitan Churches of Central and Eastern Europe which began with the Union of Brest-Litovsk (1595-1596)…

P. 2: The self-understanding of the Romanian Greek Catholic Church may be that they "have paved the way for the restoration of unity". However, the union model is also generally seen as a disputed one. Therefore it would be wise to formulate a bit more cautious this paragraph. Please explain in the introduction more carefully your method and sources and the aim/hypothesis of the article. Especially on the first pages the language and argumentation is not quite clear and can surely be improved. The rest of the article is much better from this point of view. The abbreviation CCEO should be explained.

The expression The United Churches have paved the way for the restoration of unity is made in the light of recent studies and the clarification of the ecclesiological model through the reception of Lumen Gentium and the CCEO, as well as in the light of the Particular Law promulgated by the United Churches sui iuris. What is rejected by the “Catholics” and “Orthodox” has been programmatically rejected by the Greek Catholics over time. This is the position supported by Cardinal, Major Archbishop Myroslav Ivan Lubachivsky or the statement of the current Major Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk, ecclesiological clarifications that are almost ignored or unknown at the theological level in the contemporary debate. His Beatitude Sviatoslav, the Major Archbishop of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, defines the united Churches as follows: The Ukrainian Greco-Catholic Church, the largest of the Eastern Catholic Churches is not in any way opposed to the Orthodox Churches. We are an Orthodox Church, with Orthodox theology, liturgy, spirituality and canonical tradition that chooses to manifest this Orthodoxy in the spirit of the first Christian millennium, in communion with Rome. We are witnesses to the fact that Christian East and West not only have an obligation to seek some vague rapprochement, but are called by our Savior Himself to actually live the unity of one Body of Christ, not in the subjugation of one to another, but in the loving union of the Three Divine Persons who live not three lives parallel to each other, but one life: a life of self-emptying love, that gives life rather than take it. It is our mission, as a Church that experienced great persecution and martyrdom in the twentieth century, to stand up for those who experience such persecution today: our brothers and sisters the Copts of Egypt, the Melkites, Chaldeans, Syrian Orthodox, Assyrians, and others in the Middle East. It is our duty to help them tell their stories (report of His Beatitude Sviatoslav during the banquet on the occasion of carrying Institute Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky from Ottawa to Toronto University” (September 28, 2016), http://news.ugcc.ua/en/articles/words_of_his_beatitude_sviatoslav_during_the_banquet_on_the_occasion_of_carrying_institute_meripolitan_andreysheptytsky_from_ottawa_to_toronto_university_september_28_2016_77610.html). I am trying to popularize and pave the way for the critical reception of new orientations in Catholic/Greek Catholic ecclesiology, which have been disputed as not being within the scope of current positions.

Page 3: Is it really so that "the basis of the construction of the theology of the Romanian Church, is the use of vernacular language in religious worship"? This may well have an effect on the inculturation of the doctrinal and theological tradition but the basis is probably the Scripture and Christian tradition, not culture per se? Perhaps this part can also be formulated in the light of this anew.

Of course, it is true that: the basis is probably the Scripture and Christian tradition. I am referring to a specific historical aspect of the evolution of the Eastern Churches in Central and Eastern Europe: if the Churches speaking Greek or Old Slavonic as liturgical languages ​​supported the use of "sacred languages" in the liturgy, the Romanian Church - speaking a neo-Latin language totally different from the Slavonic language institutionally imposed in the medieval period - both in terms of the non-united Romanian Church and especially in the Romanian Church United with Rome, began in the 17th-18th centuries to introduce the Romanian language into the liturgy. In the Act of Union of 1700, Bishop Atanasie explicitly asks Rome to approve the use of the Romanian language in the liturgy, 300 years before this measure was implemented after Vatican II. This aspect is little explored in theological studies and reveals the problems that arose in the context of the modernization of the Church and society in this geo-cultural environment.

Page 6: There are differing views whether the council of Ferrara-Florence managed in clarifying "points of dogmatic divergence". Anyhow, in the Orthodox tradition it is not an ecumenical council. This doesn't naturally mean that it wouldn't still have relevance for the ecumenical discussion.  

There are differing views whether the council of Ferrara-Florence managed in clarifying "points of dogmatic divergence": Even though the Counter-Council convened by Mark Evgenikos rejected and de facto annulled the Union of Florence, the solution of reconciling theological positions between Western and Eastern schools of thought was the only path of reconciliation accepted by the future United Churches. It is the foundation of Greek Catholic theology throughout the centuries, obviously with the good and the bad they faced in certain periods.

Page 7: It is true that Martin Luther's catechisms were a leading example of catechetical literature in his contemporary context, and they inspired other catechisms. However, Christian catechetical literature as such is much older. Already the Didache from the 1st century can be seen as a catechism.

Unlike the catechetical literature of the patristic period, Reformed or post-Tridentine Catholic catechisms reflect confessional theological aspects.

Page 7: You might want to remind in this context which are the four points of divergence exposed at the Schism of 1054.

Yes, it wasn't clear, I explicitly included it in the Conclusions.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

• "during which they offer a reflection that fully grows through an ecumenical theology avant-la-lettre, a theology of restoring the unity of the Church": repeated expression
• "Churches and especially the use of leaven in The Roman Rite Church": correct orthography
• The subject is very interesting, but the historical development could be improved.
• The phenomena of 'uniatism' (p. 9) and 'filioque' (p. 5) would perhaps require a brief explanation to orient the reader.
• The term 'Counter-Reformation' could perhaps be replaced by 'Catholic Reformation', which, in any case, predates the Protestant Reformation.
• Page 7 needs more bibliographical support, while the section on Protestant catechisms is a bit simplistic.
• The conclusions are not very conclusive and do not relate to the developments in the previous pages.
• A reference to the Decree Orientalium Ecclesiarum of the Second Vatican Council, for example, would be necessary, as for example, https://revistas.unav.edu/index.php/scripta-theologica/article/view/558  

Author Response

• "during which they offer a reflection that fully grows through an ecumenical theology avant-la-lettre, a theology of restoring the unity of the Church": repeated expression
• "Churches and especially the use of leaven in The Roman Rite Church": correct orthography
• The subject is very interesting, but the historical development could be improved.
• The phenomena of 'uniatism' (p. 9) and 'filioque' (p. 5) would perhaps require a brief explanation to orient the reader.
• The term 'Counter-Reformation' could perhaps be replaced by 'Catholic Reformation', which, in any case, predates the Protestant Reformation.
• Page 7 needs more bibliographical support, while the section on Protestant catechisms is a bit simplistic.
• The conclusions are not very conclusive and do not relate to the developments in the previous pages.
• A reference to the Decree Orientalium Ecclesiarum of the Second Vatican Council, for example, would be necessary, as for example, https://revistas.unav.edu/index.php/scripta-theologica/article/view/558  

Indeed, I have improved the text, made the necessary changes, I hope it is more conclusive.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for the clarifications. They managed to answer to most of my questions.

Author Response

• "during which they offer a reflection that fully grows through an ecumenical theology avant-la-lettre, a theology of restoring the unity of the Church": repeated expression

  the repetition was fixed

• "Churches and especially the use of leaven in The Roman Rite Church": correct orthography

corrected on page 5

• The subject is very interesting, but the historical development could be improved.

I have made a few additions to this.

• The phenomena of 'uniatism' (p. 9) and 'filioque' (p. 5) would perhaps require a brief explanation to orient the reader.

I have made a few additions. I try not to expand too much in basic directions; I just want to send the reader towards the mentioned themes.

• The term 'Counter-Reformation' could perhaps be replaced by 'Catholic Reformation', which, in any case, predates the Protestant Reformation.

I replaced everywhere in the text

• Page 7 needs more bibliographical support, while the section on Protestant catechisms is a bit simplistic.

I have completed and augmented the quotes.

• The conclusions are not very conclusive and do not relate to the developments in the previous pages.

I synthesized the evolution of literature over time and developed the conclusions.

• A reference to the Decree Orientalium Ecclesiarum of the Second Vatican Council, for example, would be necessary, as for example, https://revistas.unav.edu/index.php/scripta-theologica/article/view/558  

I inserted a quote, but thank you very much for the reference, the article signed by Pablo is very interesting and needs to be popularized among specialists.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I believe that a final revision would be useful in order to check that the final version of the text is correct and, above all, consistent with the conclusion.

Author Response

I have made a few additions. I try not to expand too much in basic directions; I just want to send the reader towards the mentioned themes. I have completed and augmented the quotes.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf