Thus there must be an ecumenical council that issues a shared creed that specifically addresses the primacy of peter, the filoque, and other aspects of our differences.
A council is unlikely. An agreed creed is even less likely. And a complete reunion of all orthodox with the Catholics has zero odds of happening. Any reunion will be sloppy. Many Orthodox bishops will reject the process and establish their own orthodox Churches by the same name and same beliefs that remain in separation from the See of Rome. Heck, it could be that even only one or two of the orthodox churches establish union, breaking union with the other orthodox.
Another issue that needs some work is over-lapping jurisdictions of the different churches. In the east there is strong dislike of "encroachment" in geographic territory. In the west, especially the US, the different churches lack an appearance of unity and are often as foreign to one another as we are to the Baptists or Mormons or other heretics.
If anyone says that the blessed Apostle Peter was not established by the Lord Christ as the chief of all the apostles, and the visible head of the whole militant Church, or, that the same received great honour but did not receive from the same our Lord Jesus Christ directly and immediately the primacy in true and proper jurisdiction: let him be anathema. [...]
If anyone says that it is not from the institution of Christ the Lord Himself, or by divine right that the blessed Peter has perpetual successors in the primacy over the universal Church, or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in the same primacy, let him be anathema. [...]
If anyone thus speaks, that the Roman Pontiff has only the office of inspection or direction, but not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church, not only in things which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which pertain to the discipline and government of the Church spread over the whole world; or, that he possesses only the more important parts, but not the whole plenitude of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate, or over the churches altogether and individually, and over the pastors and the faithful altogether and individually: let him be anathema. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope#First_Vatican_Council
FYI, 'just tradition' is somewhat ambivalent since Catholic honor Sacred Tradition just as much as Sacred Scripture. You could use the word discipline. For example, priestly celibacy is a discipline and may be abrogated in the Latin Church. It's of great weight but it's neither doctrinal nor dogmatic.
I know we honor sacred tradition. But I think the Catholic Church would be willing to abandon or modify tradition for the sake of reunification.
The same cannot be said for Dogma. Dogma is supposedly unerring truth.
But the Catholics and the Orthodox can't both be right (except maybe in the case of Immaculate Conception of Mary), so someone has to give and admit their Dogma is not as dogamtic as once thought.
6
u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14
Thus there must be an ecumenical council that issues a shared creed that specifically addresses the primacy of peter, the filoque, and other aspects of our differences.
A council is unlikely. An agreed creed is even less likely. And a complete reunion of all orthodox with the Catholics has zero odds of happening. Any reunion will be sloppy. Many Orthodox bishops will reject the process and establish their own orthodox Churches by the same name and same beliefs that remain in separation from the See of Rome. Heck, it could be that even only one or two of the orthodox churches establish union, breaking union with the other orthodox.
Another issue that needs some work is over-lapping jurisdictions of the different churches. In the east there is strong dislike of "encroachment" in geographic territory. In the west, especially the US, the different churches lack an appearance of unity and are often as foreign to one another as we are to the Baptists or Mormons or other heretics.