Full Text of the Balamand Statement
The following is the complete text of the
Balamand Statement as published in an Eastern Rite Catholic
periodical (Eastern Churches Journal, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.
17-27).
Joint International Commission for the
Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and the
Orthodox Church VIIth Plenary Session, Balamand School of
Theology (Lebanon), 17-24 June, 1993: "Uniatism, method of
union of the past, and the present search for full
communion."
INTRODUCTION
1) At the request of the Orthodox Churches, the
normal progression of the theological dialogue with the Catholic
Church has been set aside so that immediate attention might be
given to the question which is called "uniatism".
2) With regard to the method which has been
called "uniatism", it was said at Freising (June 1990)
that "we reject it as a method for the search for unity
because it is opposed to the common tradition of our
Churches".
3) Concerning the Eastern Catholic Churches, it
is clear that they, as part of the Catholic Communion, have the
right to exist and to act in response to the spritual needs of
their faithful.
4) The document prepared at Ariccia by the
joint coordinating committee (June 1991) and finished at Balamand
(June 1993) states what is our method in the present search for
full communion, thus giving the reason for excluding
"uniatism" as a method.
5) This present document is composed of two
parts:
1) Ecclesiological principles, and
2) Practical rules.
ECCLESIOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES
6) The division between the Churches of the
East and of the West has never quelled the desire for unity
willed by Christ. Rather this situation, which is contrary to the
nature of the Church, has often been for many the occasion to
become more deeply conscious of the need to acheive this unity,
so as to be faithful to the Lord’s commandment.
7) In the course of the centuries various
attempt were made to re-establish unity. They sought to achieve
this end through different ways, at times conciliar, according to
the political, historical, theological and spiritual situation of
each period. Unfortunately, none of these efforts succeeded in
re-establishing full communion between the Church of the West and
the Church of the East, and at times [these efforts] even made
oppositions more acute.
8) In the course of the last four centuries, in
various parts of the East, initiatives were taken within certain
Churches and impelled by outside elements, to restore communion
between the Church of the East and the Church of the West. These
initiatives led to the union of certain communities with the See
of Rome and brought with them, as a consequence, the breaking of
communion with their Mother Churches of the East. This took place
not without the interference of extra-ecclesial interests. In
this way Eastern Catholic Churches came into existence. And so a
situation was created which has become a source of conflicts and
of suffering in the first instance for the Orthodox but also for
Catholics.
9) Whatever may have been the intention and the
authenticity of the desire to be faithful to the commandment of
Christ: "that all may be one" expressed in these
partial unions with the See of Rome, it must be recognized that
the re-establishment of unity between the Church of the East and
the Church of the West was not achieved and that the division
remains, embittered by these attempts.
10) The situation thus created resulted in fact
in tensions and oppositions.
Progressively, in the decades which followed
these unions, missionary activity tended to include among its
priorities the effort to convert other Christians, individually
or in groups, so as "to bring them back" to one’s
own Church. In order to legitimize this tendency, a source of
proselytism, the Catholic Church developed the theological vision
according to which she presented herself as the only one to whom
salvation was entrusted. As a reaction, the Orthodox Church, in
turn, came to accept the same vision according to which only in
her could salvation be found. To assure the salvation of
"the separated brethren" it even happened that
Christians were rebaptized and that certain requirements of the
religious freedom of persons and of their act of faith were
forgotten. This perspective was one to which that period showed
little sensitivity.
11) On the other hand certain civil authorities
made attempts to bring Eastern Catholics back to the Church of
their fathers. To achieve this end, they did not hesitate, when
the occasion was given, to use unacceptable means.
12) Because of the way in which Catholics and
Orthodox once again consider each other in relationship to the
mystery of the Church and discover each other once again as
Sister Churches, this form of "missionary apostolate"
described above, and which has been called "uniatism",
can no longer be accepted either as a method to be followed nor
as a model of the unity our Churches are seeking.
13) In fact, especially since the Pan-Orthodox
Conferences and the Second Vatican Council, the rediscovery and
the giving again of proper value to the Church as communion, both
on the part of Orthodox and of Catholics, has radically altered
perspectives and thus attitudes. On each side it is recognized
that what Christ has entrusted to His Church—profession of
apostolic faith, participation in the same sacraments, above all
the one priesthood celebrating the one sacrifice of Christ, the
apostolic succession of bishops—cannot be considered the
exclusive property of one of our Churches. In this context it is
clear that rebaptism must be avoided.
14) It is in this perspective that the Catholic
Churches and the Orthodox Churches recognize each other as Sister
Churches, responsible together for maintaining the Church of God
in fidelity to the divine purpose, most especially in what
concerns unity. According to the words of Pope John Paul II, the
ecumenical endeavor of the Sister Churches of East and West,
grounded in dialogue and prayer, is the search for perfect and
total communion which is neither absorption nor fusion but a
meeting in truth and love (cf. Slavorum Apostoli, n.
27).
15) While the inviolable freedom of persons and
their obligation to follow the requirements of their conscience
remains secure, in the search for re-establishing unity there is
no question of conversion of people from one Church to the other
in order to ensure their salvation. There is a question of
achieving together the will of Christ for His own and the design
of God for His Church by means of a common quest by the Churches
for a full accord on the content of the faith and its
implications. This effort is being carried on in the current
theological dialogue. The present document is a necessary stage
in this dialogue.
16) The Eastern Catholic Churches, who have
desired to re-establish full communion with the See of Rome and
have remained faithful to it, have the rights and obligations
which are connected with this communion. The principles
determining their attitude towards Orthodox Churches are those
which have been stated by the Second Vatican Council and have
been put into practice by the Popes who have clarified the
practical consequences flowing from these principles in various
documents published since then. These Churches, then, should be
inserted, on both local and universal levels, into the dialogue
of love, in mutual respect and reciprocal trust found once again,
and enter into the theological dialogue, with all its practical
implications.
17) In this atmosphere, the considerations
already presented and the practical guidelines which follow,
insofar as they will be effectively received and faithfully
observed, are such as to lead to a just and definitive solution
to the difficulties which these Eastern Catholic Churches present
to the Orthodox Church.
18) Towards this end, Pope Paul VI affirmed in
his address at the Phanar in July 1967: "It is on the heads
of the Churches, of their hierarchy, that the obligation rests to
guide the Churches along the way that leads to finding full
communion again. They ought to do this by recognizing and
respecting each other as pastors of that part of the flock of
Christ entrusted to them, by taking care for the cohesion and
growth of the people of God, and avoiding everything that could
scatter it or cause confusion in its ranks" (Tomos
Agapis, n. 172). In this spirit Pope John Paul II and
Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios I together stated clearly:
"We reject every form of proselytism, every attitude which
would be or could be perceived to be a lack of respect" (7
December 1987).
PRACTICAL RULES
19) Mutual respect between the Churches which
find themselves in difficult situations will increase appreciably
in the measure that they will observe the following practical
rules.
20) These rules will not resolve the problems
which are worrying us unless each of the parties concerned has a
will to pardon, based on the Gospel and, within the context of a
constant effort for renewal, accompanied by the unceasing desire
to seek the full communion which existed for more than a thousand
years between our Churches. It is here that the dialogue of love
must be present with a continually renewed intensity and
perseverance which alone can overcome reciprocal lack of
understanding and which is the necessary climate for deepening
the theological dialogue that will permit arriving at full
communion.
21) The first step to take is to put and end to
everything that can foment division, contempt, and hatred between
the Churches. For this the authorities of the Catholic Church
will assist the Eastern Catholic Churches and their communities
so that they themselves may prepare full communion between the
Catholic and Orthodox Churches. The authorities of the Orthodox
Church will act in a similar way towards their faithful. In this
way it will be possible to take care of the extremely complex
situation that has been created in Eastern Europe, at the same
time in charity and in justice, both as regards Catholics and
Orthodox.
22) Pastoral activity in the Catholic Church,
Latin as well as Eastern, no longer aims at having the faithful
of one Church pass over to the other; that is to say, it no
longer aims at proselytizing among the Orthodox. It aims at
answering the spiritual needs of its own faithful and it has no
desire for expansion at the expense of the Orthodox Church.
Within these perspectives, so that there will no longer be room
for mistrust and suspicion, it is necessary that there be
reciprocal exchanges of information about various pastoral
projects and that thus cooperation between bishops and all those
with responsibilities in our Churches can be set in motion and
develop.
23) The history of the relations between the
Orthodox Church and the Eastern Catholic Churches has been marked
by persecutions and sufferings. Whatever may have been these
sufferings and their causes, they do not justify any
triumphalism; no one can glory in them or draw an argument from
them to accuse or disparage the other Church. God alone knows His
own witnesses. Whatever the past may have been, it must be left
to the mercy of God, and all the energies of the Churches should
be directed so that the present and the future conform better to
the will of Christ for His own.
24) It will also be necessary—on the part
of both Churches— that the bishops and all those with
pastoral reposibilities in the Churches scrupulously respect the
religious liberty of the faithful. In turn, the faithful must be
able to express themselves for this purpose. In fact,
particularly in situations of conflict, religious liberty
requires that the faithful should be able to express their
opinion and to decide without pressure from outside if they wish
to be in communion either with the Orthodox Church or with the
Catholic Church. Religious freedom would be violated when, under
the cover of financial assistance, the faithful of one Church
would be attracted to the other, by promises, for example, of
education and material benefits that may be lacking in their own
Church. In this context, it will be necessary that social
assistance, as well as every form of philanthropic activity, be
organized with common agreement so as to avoid creating new
suspicions.
25) Furthermore, the necessary respect for
Christian freedom— one of the most precious gifts received
from Christ—should not become an occasion for undertaking a
pastoral project which may also involve the faithful of other
Churches, without previous consultation with the pastors of these
Churches. Not only should every form of pressure, of any kind
whatsoever, be excluded, but respect for consciences, motivated
by an authentic exigency of faith, is one of the principles
guiding the pastoral concern of those responsible in the two
Churches and should be the object of their common reflection (cf.
Galations 5:13).
26) That is why it is necessary to seek and to
engage in an open dialogue, which in the first place should be
between those who have responsibilities for the Churches at the
local level. Those in charge of the communities concerned should
create joint local commissions or make effective those which
already exist, for finding solutions to concrete problems and
seeing that these solutions are applied in truth and love, in
justice and peace. If agreement cannot be reached on the local
level, the question should be brought to mixed commissions
established by higher authorities.
27) Suspicion would disappear more easily if
the two parties were to condemn violence wherever communities of
one Church use it against communities of a Sister Church. As
requested by His Holiness Pope John Paul II in his letter of 31
May 1991, it is necessary that all violence and every kind of
pressure be absolutely avoided in order that freedom of
conscience be respected. It is the task of those in charge of
communities to assist their faithful to deepen their loyalty
towards their own Church and towards its traditions and to teach
them to avoid not only violence, be that physical, verbal or
moral, but also all that could lead to contempt for other
Christians and to a counter-witness, completely ignoring the work
of salvation which is reconciliation in Christ.
28) Faith in sacramental reality implies a
respect for the liturgical celebrations of the other Church. The
use of violence to occupy a place of worship contradicts this
conviction. On the contrary, this conviction sometimes requires
that the celebration of other Churches should be made easier by
putting at their disposal, by common agreement, one’s own
church for alternate celebration at different times in the same
building. Still more, the evangelical ethos requires that
statements or manifestations which are likely to perpetuate a
state of conflict and hinder the dialogue be avoided. Does not
St. Paul exhort us to welcome one another as Christ welcomed us,
for the glory of God (Romans 15:7)?
29) Bishops and priests have the duty before
God to respect the authority which the Holy Spirit has given to
the bishops and priests of the other Church and for that reason
to avoid interfering in the spiritual life of the faithful of
that Church. When cooperation becomes necessary for the good of
the faithful, it is then required that those responsible come to
an agreement among themselves, establish for this mutual
assistance clear principles which are known to all, and act
subsequently with frankness, clarity, and with respect for the
sacramental discipline of the other Church.
In this context, to avoid all misunderstanding
and to develop confidence between the two Churches, it is
necessary that Catholic and Orthodox bishops of the same
territory consult with each other before establishing Catholic
pastoral projects which imply the creation of new structures in
regions which traditionally form part of the jurisdiction of the
Orthodox Church, in view to avoid parallel pastoral activities
which would risk rapidly degenerating into rivalry or even
conflicts.
30) To pave the way for future relations
between the two Churches, passing beyond the out-dated
ecclesiology of return to the Catholic Church connected with the
problem which is the object of this document, special attention
will be given to the preparation of future priests and of all
those who, in any way, are involved in an apostolic activity
carried on in a place where the other Church traditionally has
its roots. Their education should be objectively positive with
respect to the other Church. First of all, everyone should be
informed of the apostolic succession of the other Church and the
authenticity of its sacramental life. One should also offer all a
correct and comprehensive knowledge of history aiming at a
historiography of the two Churches which is in agreement and even
may be common. In this way, the dissipation of prejudices will be
helped, and the use of history in a polemical manner will be
avoided. This presentation will lead to an awareness that faults
leading to separation belong to both sides, leaving deep wounds
on each side.
31) The admonition of the Apostle Paul to the
Corinthians (I Corinthians 6:17) will be recalled. It recommends
that Christians resolve their differences through fraternal
dialogue, thus avoiding recourse to the intervention of the civil
authorities for a practical solution to the problems which arise
between Churches or local communities. This applies particularly
to the possession or return of ecclesiastical property. These
solutions should not be based only on past situations or rely
solely on general juridical principles, but they must also take
into account the complexity of present realities and local
circumstances.
32) It is in this spirit that it will be
possible to meet in common the task of re-evangelization of our
secularized world. Efforts will also be made to give objective
news to the mass-media, especially to the religious press, in
order to avoid tendentious and misleading information.
33) It is necessary that the Churches come
together in order to express gratitude and respect towards all,
known and unknown, bishops, priests or faithful, Orthodox,
Catholic whether Eastern or Latin—who suffered, confessed
their faith, witnessed their fidelity to the Church, and, in
general, towards all Christians, without discrimination, who
underwent persecutions. Their sufferings call us to unity and, on
our part, to give common witness in reponse to the prayer of
Christ "that all may be one, so that the world may
believe" (John 17:21).
34) The International Joint Commission for
Theological Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox
Church, at its plenary meeting in Balamand, strongly recommends
that these practical rules be put into practice by our Churches,
including the Eastern Catholic Churches who are called to take
part in this dialogue which should be carried on in the serene
atmosphere necessary for its progress, towards the
re-establishment of full communion.
35) By excluding for the future all proselytism
and all desire for expansion by Catholics at the expense of the
Orthodox Church, the commission hopes that it has overcome the
obstacles which impelled certain autocephalous Churches to
suspend their participation in the theological dialogue and that
the Orthodox Church will be able to find itself together again
for continuing the theological work already so happily begun.
Balamand (Lebanon), 23 June 1993
BALAMAND PARTICIPANTS
The following delegates participated in the
Seventh Plenary Session of the Joint International Commission for
the Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and
the Orthodox Church, held at Balamand School of Theology,
Lebanon, 17-24 June 1993.
From the Eastern Orthodox Churches:
Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople
His Eminence Archbishop Stylianos of Australia
Orthodox Co-President of the Joint International Commission
Patriarchate of Alexandria
His Eminence Metropolitan Dionysios of Nubia
Professor Constantine Patelos
Patriarchate of Antioch
His Eminence Metropolitan George of Byblos and
Botrys
Father Archimandrite Youhanna (Yazigi)
Church of Russia
Father Hegumen Nestor (Zhilyaev)
Church of Romania
His Eminence Metropolitan Antonie of
Transylvania
Father Archpriest Dumitru Radu
Church of Cyprus
His Eminence Metropolitan Chrysanthos of
Morphou
Professor Macarius Papachristophorou
Church of Poland
Father Hieromonk Barsanuphius (Doroszkiewicz)
Church of Albania
Professor Theodoros Papapavli
Church of Finland
His Grace Bishop Ambrosius of Joensocu
Executive Secretary:
His Eminence Metropolitan Spyridon of Italy
[The Patriarchate of Jerusalem, and the
Churches of Georgia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece, and Czechoslovakia
were not represented.]
|