Talk:Full communion

Assyrians?

Considering that the Assyrian Church of the East practices open communion (albeit with certain provisions), how does it understand full communion? If the Roman Catholic Church was willing to reunite with the Assyrian Church of the East only a few years ago, was it an issue related to full communion which prevented this?

Untitled

How about comming up with a list of Full Communion Bodies to insert in the article.

Here is a tiny start

• UCC
• The Papacy
• CCG(for Unitarians)
• URC
• OOC
• EOC

Please use the List of Christian denominations to make lists of Christian denominations. And, for readability's sake, please sign your posts with three or four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Mkmcconn 16:12, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

A perplexing question

• Given:

1. The Mar Thoma Syrian Church of India is in full communion with the Anglican Communion.
2. Part of the Anglican Communion is the Episcopal Church in the United States of America.
3. The Episcopal Church in the United States of America is in full communion with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
4. The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America is in full communion with the Moravian Church.

• • Is the Mar Thoma Syrian Church of India in full communion with the Moravian Church?--Pharos 06:22, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

answer:

a friend of mine was explaining this to me. One church might be in full comunion with two churches that are not in full comunion with each other. So in theory you could "jump" from one to the other to the other, but not directly. I know it's kind of weird but that's the way they work. Cjrs 79 08:52, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

In mathematical language, one would say that the relationship of full communion is not transitive. Michael Hardy 18:21, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

First and Last mentioned?

There is a list. Then discussion of the first and last. Not clear - is it the first x entries or just the first one. Ditto re last - one or all-bar-the-first?

The Catholic Communion

The Catholic Communion is the name of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church whose head is the Holy Father (Pope). The 23 (or 24, I can't remember exactly) sui juris Churches that make up this communion all have their own traditional rites and ways of expressing their Catholic faith are Catholic, but aren't Roman. Hence why Catholic Communion is used and not the Roman Catholic Church. For instance, the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church is NOT the Roman Catholic Church but they are not Eastern Orthodox and they are in Communion with the Successor of St. Peter.

Anonymous user

"The Catholic Communion is the name of ..." Please give even one instance in which the Church whose visible head is the Holy Father, the Pope, has called itself "The Catholic Communion". There are thousands, doubtless tens of thousands or even more, of documents in which it refers to itself as "The Catholic Church", including the Decree of the Second Vatican Council on the Catholic Eastern Churches. There are hundreds, indeed almost certainly thousands, of documents, especially those it has issued in its dialogues with other Christian Churches, in which it accepts the name "The Roman Catholic Church". There seems to be no document in which it calls itself "The Catholic Communion". How then can this be the name of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church whose visible head is the Holy Father, the Pope?

It might be helpful to read the Roman Catholic Church article.

Lima 14:48, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

See: SYRO-MALABAR CHURCH IN THE CATHOLIC COMMUNION. The Catholic Church is one all over the world with the same faith and the same sacraments as well as the same ... www.thesyromalabarchurch.org/communion.htm - 16k - Cached - Similar pages

Also see... http://vatican.mondosearch.com/search_en.aspx?query=CATHOLIC+COMMUNION&x=25&y=10

Here we have a transcript of a speech given by the late John Paul the Great himself using the phrase Catholic communion to describe all the sui juris churches in communion with Rome.

5. In harmony with the tradition handed down from the earliest centuries, the Patriarchal Churches have a unique place in the Catholic communion. One need only think that in these Churches the highest authority for any action, including the right to elect Bishops within the borders of the patriarchal territory, is constituted by the Patriarchs with their Synods, without prejudice to the inalienable right of the Roman Pontif to intervene “in singulis casibus” (cf. Orientalium Ecclesiarum, n. 9).

From: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/1998/september/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19980929_patriarca_en.html

Anonymous user

Thanks. And congratulations on your research.

Lima 19:00, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Definition of full communion not NPOV

This article should be NPOV, particularly in its assessment of the different perspectives on full communion. While it may be true that the Porvoo model is somewhat less than the Roman model in certain regards, don't expect the Porvoo churches to agree with that assessment. The Canadian example of the Anglican/Evangelical Lutheran full communion agreement is pertinent here. The two churches state very clearly that the full communion that they enter into is the fullness of visible unity, as they understand Christ's prayer in Jn 17. They do not say that this full communion is the final state of their relations. In the fullness of time, their relatuionship will undoubtedly change and may very well lead to organic unity. However, they are clear that full communion and organic unity are not synonymous. Perhaps this article would benefit from beginning with the World Council of Churches' Toronto Statement of 1950. A definition of full communion is offered there that describes what is part of, and not part of, full communion. It also distinguishes it from "intercommunion." Another area to consider would be the WCC's Canberra Statement on Unity from 1991. The reflection on "koinonia" helps to understand the character of full communion. Njesson 15 December 2005

Indeed. One of the details of Porvoo model is of exclusive episcopal boundaries. So the Norwegian, Swedish and Finnish churches/seamen's missions in south-east London are nominally subject to the Bishop of Southwark, not Nordic bishops. That rule does not seem to apply to Eastern Catholics whose various territories ovelap. --Henrygb 02:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Eh?

The article includes the text:

The United Church of Christ and the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches are in talks for either full communion or merger, and several Independent Catholic groups have indicated interest and willingness to enter into full communion with such a body if concerns about the Historic Episcopate and the Eucharist can be addressed.

I am an UCC member and I consider myself to be reasonably informed about denominational affairs, and I have not heard boo about anything of this sort. Does anyone have a reference? aliceinlampyland 22:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC).

Financial/practical effects?

Please forgive me, but my mind has a secular tendency, and when I read that various churches are in full communion with one another, especially small churches with the Roman Catholic, what I don't understand is whether this implies any, well, "real world" agreements, such as the transfer of money or property, a legally enforceable chain of command, right to use each others' resources, etc. Or are these agreements simply theological concordances? 70.15.116.59 16:05, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

The image of a commercial or financial company is inapplicable to the Roman Catholic Church. The various entities within the Church own their own property. The properties of the United States dioceses do not belong either in canon law or in civil law to the Pope - he isn't that rich! They do not with their resources help other entities within the Church because of a strictly legal obligation, but they are urged to do so for moral reasons. Full communion, as indicated in the article, is a matter of completeness of bonds of "faith, sacraments and pastoral governance". What chain of command there is concerns only these matters, not ownership of property. That chain of command is, in a sense, not really legally enforceable, since the only penalties that the Church can apply are spiritual ones, the most extreme being excommunication. But of course the various entities within the Church can decide to enter into contracts with each other that are legally enforceable in civil law.

I am sure there are other editors who can explain the situation more clearly than I can. Lima 18:17, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

That's more or less correct. The Eastern Catholic Churches have title to their own property. Majoreditor (talk) 05:49, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Tarheelz/Lima disagreement

Tarheelz wants this included. But all cases of dialogue between churches have the ultimate aim of reaching full communion. I think it altogether inappropriate to mention as relevant to this article the talks between the Catholic Church and the World Methodist Council. They are not yet precisely about establishing full communion. Should we add also the talks between the Catholic Church and all the other groups mentioned here? They include the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Coptic Church, the Assyrian Church of the East, Lutherans, Reformed, Evangelicals, Baptists, Disciples of Christ, Pentecostals ... And should we add also the dialogues between, for instance, the Eastern Orthodox Church and various Western groups? I don't think so. Lima (talk) 04:38, 13 June 2009 (UTC)