This short paper on the
question of communion was
presented on November 2,
2005, by Bishop Bawai Soro
to the assembled members of
the Holy Synod of the
Assyrian Church of the East
held in Chicago,
Bishop Bawai Soro
Assyrian Church of the East
Courtesy Of Zinda Magazine
Issue 61 19 November 2005
1. A true Apostolic Church
cannot possibly remain
isolated and alone without
being in full ecclesial
communion with other
Apostolic Churches. If the
Apostles of the Lord:
Thomas, Andrew, James, John
and Peter were bound
together in Apostolic
communion then also their
churches must also be bound
with the same communion of
their founders. However, due
to historical factors,
namely, political and
geographical, between the
Persian and the Roman
Empires, ecclesial ties
between the Assyrian Church
of the East and the rest of
Christendom, i.e., the three
major ecclesiastical
families in Christianity:
the Catholic, Oriental
Orthodox and Eastern
Orthodox, communion was
ruptured for many centuries.
As a result of this
regrettable reality, we
notice that today the
Assyrian Church of the East
is not in ecclesial
communion with any other
Apostolic Church.
2. Therefore, the state in
which we find our Church in
today is for many legitimate
reasons contrary to
ecclesial logic and true
theological and apostolic
understanding. The following
points below are the basis
for us, as a church, to seek
the restoration of communion
with other Apostolic
churches:
a. The dogmatic
prayers of Jesus Christ
in the Gospel of Saint
John in which Jesus
prays to the Father that
all His followers be one
just as He and His
Father are one (Jn 17).
b. The ecclesial
reality of the early New
Testament Church shows
the Apostles never were
independent from one
another but all were
united in communion,
prayer and charity (Acts
2: 42-47).
c. Model of communion
between our Church of
the East and the Western
Church during the first
five centuries of
Christianity was
characterized by the
willingness of our
Church Fathers to
receive from the Western
Fathers church teachings
(creeds), liturgical
texts and instructions
and canonical
legislations. An
excellent example of
such communion is the
Synod of Mar Isaac in
410 AD.
d. Common sense
dictates that in today’s
world there is a need
for Christians from all
churches and traditions
to form a strong bound
of brotherly witness so
that the world may
believe in Jesus Christ.
Furthermore, our
people’s instinct of
spiritual and cultural
survival demands that we
unite and form communion
with other Apostolic
churches to maximize our
people’s chances of such
survival in a world that
is increasingly becoming
more hostile by the day.
e. Various liturgical,
canonical and patristic
texts used and accepted
until today in the
Assyrian Church of the
East during the Holy
Qurbana and the Office
for Prayer would
certainly teach us two
fundamental standpoints:
(i) The Assyrian
Church of the East
belongs to the Great
Body (Gushma Rabba)
of the one Holy
Catholic Church
established by our
Lord, which is also
the holy undivided
Body of Christ (I
Corinthians 12:27;
Eph. 4:12). The
following segment of
a prayer recited by
every priest and
bishop celebrating
the Holy Qurbana
every Sunday
illustrates the
above point: “In
your mercifulness,
my Lord, you have
deemed the vileness
of our feeble nature
worthy to be made
recognized member in
the Great Body of
the Holy Catholic
Church, to
administer spiritual
assistance to the
souls of the
faithful.” Within
the one body of the
Lord, which is the
Church, there cannot
be independence
because the body is
one. There can only
be mutual
recognition,
respect, harmonized
planning and action
among Christian
brethren. In a body,
the hand cannot go
independently from
the feet and still
belonging to the
same body (I
Corinthians
12:14-21). On the
contrary in every
functioning of the
body there is
inter-dependence and
mutuality. Indeed,
in the history of
the Church there
were and still are
several particular
churches who have
their autonomy
(self-government)
but organically they
are harmonized as
one in the Body of
the Lord Jesus
Christ, i.e., His
Holy Church. Such
sacred objective of
the unity of
Christ’s Church must
however be developed
from an
ecclesiological
mentality not
political, from an
apostolic way of
thinking not
secular. Because, in
a civic or political
context a group of
people ought to seek
objectives as
freedom and
independence but in
an ecclesiastical
and spiritual
reality, churches
are a part of the
holy Body of Christ
and therefore are
tied together in a
communion that is
characterized by
charity, hope and
faith. Again, we
ought to learn how
to think and behave
like a church from
the New Testament
model of the early
church to see how
these churches were
actually living in
communion (Acts 2:
42-47).
(ii) The Church of
the East attributes
a prominent role to
Saint Peter
and a significant
place for the Church
of Rome in her
liturgical,
canonical and
Patristic thoughts.
There are more than
50 liturgical,
canonical and
Patristic citations
that explicitly
express such a
conviction.
The
question before us
therefore is,
why
there must be a
primacy attributed
to Saint Peter in
the Church?
If there is no
primacy in the
universal church, we
shall not be able to
legitimize a primacy
of all the
Catholicos-Patriarchs
in the other
apostolic churches.
If the
patriarchs of the
apostolic churches
have legitimate
authority over their
own respective
bishops it is so
because there is a
principle of primacy
in the universal
Church. If the
principle of primacy
is valid for a local
Church (for example,
the Assyrian Church
of the East), it is
so because it is
already valid for
the universal
church. If there is
no Peter for the
universal church
there could not be
Peter for the local
Church. If all the
apostles are equal
in authority by
virtue of the gift
of the Spirit, and
if the bishops are
the successors of
the Apostles, based
on what then one of
these bishops (i.e.,
the Catholicos-Patriarchs)
has authority over
the other bishops?
The
Church of the East possesses
a theological, liturgical
and canonical tradition in
which she clearly values the
primacy of Peter
among the rest of the
Apostles and their churches
and the relationship Peter
has with his successors in
the Church of Rome.
The
official organ of our Church
of the East, Mar Abdisho of
Soba,
the last theologian in our
Church before its fall,
based himself on such an
understanding when he
collected his famous
Nomocanon in which he
clearly states the
following: “To the Great
Rome [authority] was given
because the two pillars are
laid [in the grave]
there,
Peter,
I say, the head of the
Apostles,
and Paul, the teacher of the
nations. [Rome] is the first
see and the head of the
patriarchs.” (Memra 9; Risha
1) Furthermore, Abdisho
asserts “. . . . And as the
patriarch has authority to
do all he wishes in a
fitting manner in such
things as are beneath his
authority,
so the patriarch of Rome has
authority over all
patriarchs, like the blessed
Peter over all the
community,
for he who is in
Rome
also keeps the office of
Peter in all the church. He who
transgresses against these
things the ecumenical synod
places under anathema.” (Memra
9; Risha 8). I would like to
ask here the following: who
among us would dare to think
that he or she is more
learned than Abdisho of
Soba, or that they are more
sincere to the church of our
forefather than Mar Abdisho
himself? This is true
especially since we the
members of the Holy Synod
have in 2004 affirmed Mar
Abdisho’s List of Seven
Sacraments as the official
list of the Assyrian Church
of the East. How much more
then we ought to consider
examining and receiving
Abdisho’s Synodical
legislation in his Nomocanon?
3. As an implementation of
the above mentioned
principles of full-Communion
and Christian Unity, the
restoration of ecclesial
unity with the Old Calendar
and the Chaldean Churches
would be the most
historically fulfilling
objective from any other
project we may seek to
fulfill. In fact this noble
aim has been already
recognized by our hierarchs
in the past decade when
letters of reconciliation
and unity were exchanged
with the Old-Calendar
segment of the Church of the
East, and a dialogue was
opened and an agreement was
reached and signed by the
two Catholicos-Patriarchs
and the rest of our bishops
to bring about a
comprehensive formula of
unity between the Chaldean
Church and the Assyrian
Church of the East.
Unfortunately, this serious
dialogue has been
interrupted and paralyzed
from 1998 until the present
time. In my opinion, this
noble quest for unity is the
only valid way for the
Church of our forefathers,
the Church of the East, to
fulfill its historic destiny
and thrive in the future.
Such an action would be a
solid ground for our people
to activate the mechanism
that may also lead one day
to a national unity.
The above statement is also
my conviction in front of
God, you my brothers, and my
own church and nation. This
conviction
I have learned from Mar
Abdisho of Soba and cannot
abandon it,
for it will be a betrayal to
my church fathers and to my
duty as a bishop of the
Church and a shepherd of my
people. Accordingly,
I do believe that we
ought to Implement these
principles
with caution and in a
Christian manner in order to
fulfill the objective of
church unity and ecclesial
communion. This is done so
that the Assyrian Church of
the East could unite with
both the Chaldean and the
Old Calendar Churches and
all three of them can once
again become one United
Church of the East. Then and
there,
this united Church of the
East could formulate a
common position to negotiate
with the Catholic Church how
this New United Church of
the East could preserve its
spirituality, canon law,
liturgy, theological
terminology and
self-governance but at the
same time be in
full-communion with the
Universal Church.
Nineveh On Line highlighted
portion of this letter to
help the reader focus on the
MAIN IMPORTANT ISSUES.