Taking great pains to point out that the Assyrians are NOT Orthodox (by your definition) you then go on to bemoan the wildly pedantic claims that this initiative is from “Roman meddling”.

Dare I suggest your comment is symptomatic of just another example of non-Catholics sticking their nose into Catholic concerns?

Very well said. As a Latin Rite Catholic, thank you for your prayerful work in restoring the unity and communion of our Lord’s Mystical Body. I pray for the Chaldean Catholics and other Assyrian Churches during their time of persecution.

Yours in Christ,
Dan

St. Maron lived in the 5th Century. The Maronites are different from all other rites in that they were not the result of a “split” or schism or heresy. The Maronites were essentially a religious order before religious orders were common. St. Maron basically started an Order that was recognized as a new Rite insteda of an Order. The Maronites are one of only two eastern Churches (the other is one of the Indian churches) that have *never* been in schism.

Peace be with you…

Before I begin, please allow me to introduce myself. I am Anthony, one of the sub-deacons who is within the diocese of H.G. Mar Bawai Soro, and one of the people in the original signing of the declaration of intent. I don’t represent in any ways the official voice of the diocese, but wanted to clear up some questions I ran into… opinions from my personal experience and knowledge of these matters.

1 – First, in regards to the size of the group, we have about 3 dozen priests and deacons as someone pointed out. Estimates of the number of people who support this movement will only lead to banter about numbers and people are always prone to over exaggerate anyways, so I don’t want to even take a guess at it, suffice it to say, it is a sizeable number of families. The declaration of intent is supported by the whole diocese that has chosen to support Mar Bawai, seeing that he is walking according to the path of our Lord. Most of the deacons are men with family, while there is a good number of subdeacons and readers who are also involved.

2 – In regards to the Institution Narrative: Although the Anaphora of Mar Addai and Mar Mari was found to be valid without the explicit recital of the words, the insertion of the Narrative was allowed for by the ACOE {Assyrian Church of the East} and we have indeed recited it in our Liturgy services. It was especially a sign of our desire for unity with the other Apostolic traditions, and specifically with our Chaldean brothers.

3 – One person asked about the the new Chaldean liturgy, and indeed it has been brought back more in line with its traditional roots.

4 – Someone asked about English Congregations. There are two parishes within the Diocese that are comprised of mostly English speaking members. They are the parishes of St. Barnabas the Apostle and St. Thomas. The priests of those two congregations are extremely knowledgeable in the Syriac tradition and especially the Church of the East. Both have been a wealth of information and a source of spiritual enlightenment to me.

Now, I will address the situation. Others have remarked on the history of what has happened, and they have talked about the reason of dispute and why our bishop was treated thus badly. It will be a long posting if I try to talk about it, and it is not the reason of my posting.

Instead, I will address it from the standpoint of someone who is within the parish which is the cathedral of our diocese. Our parish has always been close to our brothers within the Chaldean Catholic Church in San Jose. From long before I was a regular attendee, the two parishes had always had a strong bond between them, especially as signified by the co-celebration of the “Rogation of the Ninevites” and the Feast of Thanksgiving the day after the 3 day rogation. To me personally, the priest of St. Mary’s {Catholic Church} has been a personal spiritual father to me just as the priests within my own parish and my diocese.

The CCD which was signed helped foster that situation, and it was with great sadness that many of us saw that people were trying to break the relationship between us, especially in light of the other bishops’ refusal to put into effect what would have been the natural conclusions of the talks with Rome.

If Christological differences are resolved, and Sacraments are respected, and even if somehow a step further was taken in regards to our respective patristics, and if our Church tradition, and fathers too, quite clearly state the primacy of Rome, since it is the blessed city in whom are laid two preachers, Peter and Paul {paraphrase from our liturgical books in the Feast of Sts Peter and Paul, for more information, see“In Defense of Our Faith” in http://www.zindamagazine.com/html/ar…/index_wed.php } then what is to keep us from unity with the Chaldean church? It is the branch of our Church that is in communion with Rome. Why would we not pursue unity? Is it a matter of profane vanity and pride in trying to preserve our own positions? A lack of desire for accountability to our own traditions, and to the Apostolic faith? Why?

This split had long ago stopped being an internal dispute. I agree with ASimpleSinner who stated that this thing not being solved internally might in the long run be beneficial to all Assyrian Christians. This is not a petty material dispute. We do not follow Mar Bawai just because of some personal preference. We have taken a stand based upon our faith and our desire to be Orthodox and ever faithful to the traditions of our Church!

In response to Isa Almisry’s question {“how is submitted to Rome going to solve the scandal?”}, our desire join in communion with Rome and to enter the Chaldean Church is not an attempt to resolve scandal. It is that we must be in communion with fellow Christians. We cannot just be on our own, standing “contra mundum,” nor was that ever our intention. We did not want splintering, but rather unity. We did not look to hate, but only to be established in love. And we definitely did not want to start another splinter within the Church of the East. So that is not an option… having a fourth, then maybe fifth, then sixth, etc,etc, branch. No, we remain faithful to our tradition as put forward by our Saints, Doctors, and Fathers. The Church of the East is the “Catholic Church in the East,” meaning it is NOT supposed to be standing alone outside of communion with all, just for whatever reason it feels like, but rather it is to seek to fulfill our Lord’s Prayer and words… “That they all may be one”. (John 17:21)

In conclusion, I ask, please pray that the Lord guide our humble diocese in this journey as we seek the Lord, following His light. And rejoice my brothers in Christ, remembering our Lord Jesus Christ’s declaration, “I have other sheep … they will hear my voice, and there will be one flock …” (John 10:16)

In Christ,
Anthony

Hi all,

I registered on this site in order to ease the confusion and misunderstanding of the recent steps taking by Dr. Mar Bawai Soro.

I was a member of the Assyrian Church of the East (ACOE) until corruption enveloped the hierarchy of the Holy Church of my forefathers and ancestors. This was after the current Patriarch of the ACOE allowed a Bishop (Mar Aprim Khamis) that committed adultery with a Pakistani Muslim (Yasmine Khan) to remain in his bishopric duties against the canons of the Church. Unfortunately, this news was kept in the closet until a Chicago Tribune reporter stumbled on the adultery of this bishop and the blackmail he had paid towards the Pakistani woman.

http://www.zindamagazine.com/html/archives/2001/7.23.01/index.php#ZindaSays

Sadly, this wasn’t the only time this Patriarch went against the canons in the Church. In 1994, Mar Dinkha, the ACOE Patriarch, along with his bishops met with the Holy Father, St. John Paul II, in order to pave a tangible road towards unity and communion. Finally, the Church of the East would end its ~1500 years of ecclesiastical isolation. Since Assyrians have been isolated for such a long time the reception to this news was mixed. Please read Mar Bawai’s assessment of the news by fellow Assyrians:

http://www.cired.org/cat/04_Reception_of_the_CCD.pdf

The ACOE entered within its own sunhadoos (canon laws) this common christological declaration as well as their effort to reestablish unity within the church through the Joint-Committee for Theological Dialogue.

http://www.cired.org/cat/03_Joint_Statement_1995.pdf

Without notice Mar Dinkha, ACOE Patriarch, suspended this committee and took no more interest in the unity with the Roman Catholic church. Rumors flooded all the dioceses of the ACOE that Mar Dinkha did not want to submit to the Pope. Ironically, the Joint-Committee for Theological Dialogue was no longer active around the year 2000. This was the same time that the corruption of the ACOE flooded the church halls in regards to the Bishop blackmailed by Yasmine Khan.

Mar Bawai Soro did not stop campaigning for unity within the church as well as striving for accountability. He was the only bishop in the Church who intentionally did not sign the 2001 ACOE Synod regarding the adulterous Bishop Khamis’ minor punishment following his affairs and paid blackmail. Mar Bawai was interviewed on TV and stated that to sign the Synod would place him under anathema as he would actively go against the Canons of the church by allowing Bishop Khamis to still carry out bishopric duties within the church when his Canon punishment was to be defrocked. Interestingly, the Canon of Mar Odisho states that if a bishop is caught committing adultery he must be defrocked immediately and if not the entire Synod will be placed under “khormeh” (anathema).

After his failed attempt for accountability within the church, Mar Bawai started amplifying his message of unity between the Chaldean Catholic Church of the East and the Assyrian Church of the East through the path towards Vatican. Many isolationists within the church started to actively campaign against Mar Bawai for such unifying views. They did not want to be “papayeh”–an assyrian derogatory term for Catholics. During this time, a famous satellite program “Assyria Sat” started to not only belittle Catholics but also our brothers and sisters in the Chaldean Church. Soon certain bishops, the very same that accompanied the Patriarch’s meeting with H.H. John Paul II, started to appear on his television program and in front of their church flock speaking against both the Chaldean and Roman Catholic Church. These bishops began to be known as “isolationists” and the bishops that were for unity as “integrationists.” For more information please read the below report on the bishops’ views and some of their controversies. It is quite interesting to see only two bishops (Mar Bawai Soro and Mar Aprem Mookin) as pro-unity and they are also the only educated ones as well.

http://www.zindamagazine.com/html/archives/2002/8.12.02/index.php#TheLighthouse

Some of our people, especially those that remain in the Assyrian Church of the East in light of corruption and reckless mismanagement, seem to have forgotten the oath Mar Dinkha took with His Holiness St. John Paul II. In light of more corruption charges which not only included the adulterous bishop but another bishop in Australia who was accused of not only participating in Ponzi Scheme that bankrupted Australia of over 100 million dollars, but have immoral relations with a divorcee Eva George.

http://www.zindamagazine.com/html/archives/2005/10.5.05/index_wed.php#TheLighthouse

When Mar Bawai in 2005 was mysteriously suspended on grounds that “he disobeyed the patriarch” because he wrote two confidential letters regarding his alarming concern over the illegal abandonment of the unity quest based on the 2004 Common Christological Declaration with Vatican and the 2007 Ecclesiastical Understanding agreement with the Chaldean Catholic Church as well as the inaction towards the grave vow breaking of certain bishops and clergy, many people within the church basically said “enough is enough.”

The Santa Cruz District Court found no fault in Mar Bawai’s finances or his duty as a Bishop. They only ruled that the buildings he was in supervising are no longer his as he had been excommunicated by the ACOE. Regardless if their decision is canonical or not, the churches belonged to the Synod of the ACOE.

Those that actively left the ACOE and who are members of Mar Bawai’s international diocese, are not only active in unity and dialogue with our Chaldean brothers and sisters, but we are also very active with our Ancient Church of the East parishioners. We believe that our sustained movement will not only restore unity and accountability within Christ’s body in the Eastern Christian sect, but more importantly we will be able to better propel Christianity in a world where sin and distraction is force that needs to be reckoned with.

I hope this clears up some of the confusion.

May God lead us in unity and fellowship in order to pursue Christ’s Mission on earth.

God Bless!
************************
Anyone who dares can go look at http://www.betnahrain.org/bbs/ the Assyrian equivalent of ByzCath.

If you don’t want to be brought down and depressed by the sort of comments you would not expect from Christians, you may do well to avoid it.

Additionally this is the sort of shake up that could create ecumenical problems…

BUT, from what I have read and observed, a sort of pan-Assyrian fraternity exists in a fashion where, as I have noted above, it may be more desirable or forgiveable to see a re-alignment than a creation of a new body.

And thank you for answering my question about the Englih congregations. I was uncertain the references there… I had noted some blond-haired, blue-eyed lads & lasses at church youth picnic photos… But that just as easily could have indicated boyfriends/girlfriends were interested in some hamburgers…

How did you come accross this info? Do you know if they are a “western rite” community of sorts, or strictly an English language community using the Assyrian liturgy?

Do those two ex-Anglican parishes use the Assyrian Rite or something Anglican like most Western Rite Orthodox do?

I think the Assyrians under the patriarch are unique among real Eastern churches in that like Anglicans they have a kind of open Communion, allowing Romans and Anglicans to receive (which the Anglicans allow but the Romans don’t unless there is no Roman priest available).

AFAIK the Ancient Assyrian Church of the East is like other Eastern churches: they believe they’re the one true church and no intercommunion.

While Mar Soro served as bishop of the Western diocese of the Assyrian Church (before the difficulties) he authorized two parishes of former Anglicans, one in Seattle, the other I know not where. These are the two English parishes referenced.

BTW, the Assyrian Church has rather warm relations with the Anglicans and as many of its clergy are educated in Anglican institutions as Roman Catholic.

…the next Pope would “get with the program” and ordain lady priests.

Funny how liberal RCs and anti-Romish Protestants and Orthodox ascribe to the Pope a power Pius IX never dared claim. Like he could wave his hand today and Rome would have gay marriage.

Honestly, this could well be. But I am not sure that it is because of the schism per se. We have discussed here there and in other places still some of the difficulties “we easterners” have in transmitting our heritage to a third or fourth assimilated generation.

If I had a dollar for every Eastern Christian (of any stripe) who didn’t practice ANY faith, or went to the local Catholic or megachurch, I would have more than a few dollars.

Perhaps this can be turned on its head a bit and we can wonder, were it not for the nationalism and ethnic factor, would there in turn be more ex-Methodists in the Byzantine Church?

Hard to say.

1) Greek-Catholic/Orthodox split
2) division of Ruthenian/Ukie hiearchy betwen Catholics
3) Ukrainian trusteeship split - the Orthodox kept that parish
4) ACROD/BCC split.

I think.

I do acknowledge and admire your recognition and praise of Roman revival. Certainly you do that. And I should apologize if I seemed overly defensive. It is a mode I go into after typical Rust-belt parochial school indoctrination by Sr. Mary Pantsuit & Father High-criticism… I was raised being told that married RC priests would have to happen, and the next Pope would “get with the program” and ordain lady priests, that NO ONE went to seminary, ABC was NEVER talked about, and that sisters in habits would one day just be a footnote to a black & white photograph in a history book.

Several years on, I grew hip to their efforts at self-fulfilling prophecy. Of course back then, darkest before the dawn, a lot of the “good stuff” that was about to occur and is occuring was only in the dreams of some prayerful hopeful people.

Bp Fick,

I widely share your sentiments here. Really, as a matter of fact, I am of the thinking that that efforts to reach out and regather more groups and individuals still, are part of his vision.

Fr. J wrote about this in a post aptly titled “Benedict the Re-gatherer”. Alas, since I am out of coffee this morning, I am feeling too lazy to create a link in the combox to it. Google it, its worth it!

Strictly speaking, and this is how I use these terms, TAC aren’t Anglicans. They were founded by former Anglicans. An Anglican belongs to the Anglican Communion, which means more or less his bishop is invited to the Lambeth Conference hosted by the Archbishop of Canterbury.

IOW TAC are to Anglicans are Mar Bawai Soro and his diocese are to Assyrians. Exes.

Yes, Abp H is a married former RC priest. But obviously not a liberal one. Somebody wrote recently that he’s willing to step down if it’ll bring TAC into Rome.