The Balamand Declaration (1993): Overview and Theological Critique

In this article, we examine the Balamand Declaration concerning the ecumenical dialogue between the post-Conciliar hierarchy and the Eastern Orthodox Churches, and offer an analysis of certain erroneous propositions it contains.

Part I – Balamand Declaration (1993): An Overview

Formally titled Uniatism, Method of Union of the Past, and the Present Search for Full Communion, this report was issued in 1993 by the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches to address ecumenical relations between the two communities.

This document outlines:

Three principles:

1.    Individuals have the freedom to follow their conscience.

2.    Eastern Catholic Churches have the right to exist.

3.    Uniatism is not the current method for achieving full communion.

It also presents two main conclusions:

1.    The Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches are sister churches.

2.    Rebaptism should be avoided.

Document Structure

The report consists of a brief introduction (paragraphs 1–5), followed by two main sections:

I. Ecclesiological Principles (paragraphs 6–18)

• The division between the Churches of the East and West (6–9).
• The situation thus created resulted in tensions and oppositions (10–11).
• Uniatism can no longer be accepted either as a method to be followed or as a model of the unity our Churches are seeking (12).
• The Church as communion: The Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Churches recognise each other as Sister Churches. In the search for reestablishing unity, there is no question of converting people from one Church to another to ensure their salvation (13–15).
• Ecumenical dialogue: These churches should engage in a dialogue of love, mutual respect, reciprocal trust, and theological discussion with all practical implications. (16-18)

II. Practical Rules (paragraphs 19–36)

• Mutual respect between the Churches will increase to the extent that they observe the following practical rules (19–20).
• The first step is to put an end to everything that foments division, contempt, and hatred between the Churches. Pastoral activity in the Catholic Church no longer aims to have the faithful of one Church pass over to the other; that is to say, it no longer aims at proselytising among the Orthodox (21–22).
• Past persecutions and sufferings should not justify triumphalism. It is necessary that bishops and all those with pastoral responsibilities scrupulously respect the religious liberty of the faithful (23–25).
• It is necessary to seek and engage in open dialogue, primarily among those responsible for the Churches at the local level. All violence and every kind of pressure must be absolutely avoided so that freedom of conscience is respected (26–27).
• Faith in sacramental reality implies respect for the liturgical celebrations of the other Church. Bishops and priests have a duty before God to respect the authority given by the Holy Spirit to the bishops and priests of the other Church and therefore to avoid interfering in the spiritual life of the faithful of that Church (28–29).
• Special attention should be given to the preparation of future priests. Their education ought to be objectively positive with respect for the other Church (30).
• Christians must resolve their differences through fraternal dialogue (31).
• Joint re-evangelisation of the secular world (32–33).
• Commitment to theological dialogue (34–35).

Part II – A Critical Analysis of the Balamand Declaration

Proposition 1

Uniatism should be rejected as a method for seeking unity, as it contradicts the common tradition of our Churches. (Paragraph 2)

Pius XI explicitly taught that the return of dissidents is the only method of promoting Christian unity:

'The union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it.' (Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, n, 10)

Likewise, Pope Leo XIII earnestly hopes and desires that schismatics will return to the fold they have abandoned:

'First of all, then, We cast an affectionate look upon the East, from whence in the beginning came forth the salvation of the world.  Yes, and the yearning desire of Our heart bids us conceive and hope that the day is not far distant when the Eastern Churches, so illustrious in their ancient faith and glorious past, will return to the fold they have abandoned.  We hope it all the more, that the distance separating them from Us is not so great: nay, with some few exceptions, we agree so entirely on other heads that, in defense of the Catholic Faith, we often have recourse to reasons and testimony borrowed from the teaching, the Rites, and Customs of the East.' (Leo XIII, Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae)

Censure: Erroneous in theology.

Proposition 2

The division between the Churches of the East and West has never quenched the desire for unity wished by Christ; rather, it has often been an occasion for becoming more deeply conscious of the need to achieve it. (Paragraph 6)

Our Lord did not merely express a desire for unity that remains unfulfilled; He founded His Church as a visible society, permanently united in faith and government. Unity, being an essential mark of the Church, is not something to be achieved in the future, but is a reality that the Church already and perpetually possesses.

'And here it seems opportune to expound and to refute a certain false opinion, on which this whole question, as well as that complex movement by which non-Catholics seek to bring about the union of the Christian churches depends. For authors who favour this view are accustomed, times almost without number, to bring forward these words of Christ: "That they all may be one.... And there shall be one fold and one shepherd," with this signification, however: that Christ Jesus merely expressed a desire and prayer, which still lacks its fulfilment. For they are of the opinion that the unity of faith and government, which is a note of the one true Church of Christ, has hardly up to the present time existed, and does not today exist. They consider that this unity may indeed be desired and that it may even be one day attained through the instrumentality of wills directed to a common end, but that meanwhile it can only be regarded as mere ideal. They add that the Church in itself, or of its nature, is divided into sections; that is to say, that it is made up of several churches or distinct communities, which still remain separate, and although having certain articles of doctrine in common, nevertheless disagree concerning the remainder; that these all enjoy the same rights; and that the Church was one and unique from, at the most, the apostolic age until the first Ecumenical Councils.' (Ibid. n. 7 )

Censure: Temerarious.

Proposition 3

The Catholic Churches and the Orthodox Churches recognise 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. (Paragraph 14)

The Roman Catholic Church and the Church of Christ are one and the same thing (Cf. Pius XII, Humani Generis, n. 27)

'If we would define and describe this true Church of Jesus Christ - which is the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church - we shall find nothing more noble, more sublime, or more divine than the expression "the Mystical Body of Christ" - an expression which springs from and is, as it were, the fair flowering of the repeated teaching of the Sacred Scriptures and the Holy Fathers. That the Church is a body is frequently asserted in the Sacred Scriptures. "Christ," says the Apostle, "is the Head of the Body of the Church." If the Church is a body, it must be an unbroken unity, according to those words of Paul: "Though many we are one body in Christ." But it is not enough that the Body of the Church should be an unbroken unity; it must also be something definite and perceptible to the senses as Our predecessor of happy memory, Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Satis Cognitum asserts: "the Church is visible because she is a body. Hence they err in a matter of divine truth, who imagine the Church to be invisible, intangible, a something merely "pneumatological" as they say, by which many Christian communities, though they differ from each other in their profession of faith, are untied by an invisible bond.' (Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, n. 13-14)

These Eastern schismatic sects are incapable of maintaining the Church of God in fidelity because:

They are outside the Church and therefore have no authority, jurisdiction, or mission within the Mystical Body of Christ (cf. Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, n. 15).

Their separation from the Apostolic See renders them objectively unable to fulfil the divine purpose entrusted to the Church.

Censure: Heretical.

Proposition 4

In the search for re-establishing unity, there is no question of converting people from one Church to the other in order to ensure their salvation. (paragraph 15)

This proposition contradicts the dogma Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus. Schismatics must return to the Catholic Church in order to attain eternal salvation (at least by implicit desire):

'It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart "into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.' (Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, D. 714)

Censure: Heretical.

Proposition 5

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. (Paragraph 29)

'No one, therefore, unless in communion with Peter can share in his authority, since it is absurd to imagine that he who is outside can command in the Church.' (Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum , n. 15)

Schismatic bishops and priests are outside the Catholic Church and therefore do not possess any ecclesiastical authority.

This proposition denies the necessity of canonical mission:

'If anyone says that…those who have been neither rightly ordained nor sent by ecclesiastical and canonical authority, but come from a different source, are lawful ministers of the word and of the sacraments: let him be anathema.' (Council of Trent, sess. 23, can. 7; D. 960).

Censure: Heretical.

The Origin of Life and The Creation of Man: A Philosophical and Theological Overview

Pius XII and Darwin - Grok

Article I.            The Origin of Life

Section 1.01 The Material Origin of Life

(a)    Spontaneous Generation Hypothesis

 This hypothesis holds that life arises through abiogenesis, that is, from the interaction of inorganic materials and forces, gradually diversifying and improving.

A distinction must be made:

From a Philosophical Perspective:

 This hypothesis is untenable, as vital activity surpasses that of inanimate entities and cannot be explained by them. According to the principle of causality, the lesser cannot give rise to the greater.

From a Scientific Perspective:

 It contradicts experimental evidence. The principle omne vivum ex vivo (“all life comes from life”) holds, as demonstrated by Pasteur’s refutation of spontaneous generation.

Aristotle and the Scholastics attributed spontaneous generation to the influence of incorruptible celestial bodies moved by spiritual beings.

(b)   Panspermia Hypothesis

 This hypothesis asserts that the genesis of life may be traced to extraterrestrial origins.

 Main proponents: Richter, Helmholtz, Cohn.

(c)     Eternal Life Hypothesis

 According to this theory, life has always existed on Earth (W. Preyer), even during its incandescent phase (pyrozoans), with inanimate matter regarded as the residue of living beings.

Section 1.02 The Divine Origin of Life

 Life can only be imparted by the One who has power over being, either indirectly, through a seminal force in matter (as in moderate transformism, which holds that God created the world as a seed with certain potentialities that developed over time), or directly, by producing in matter a greater or lesser number of living species.

Article II.          The Evolution of Life

Natural Species: Share a common essence, which suffices to explain their similar real properties.

Systematic Species: Described by naturalists; not all systematic species correspond to true natural species.

Specific Criteria:

Anatomical or physiological characteristics that allow the differentiation of natural species.

Genetic Criterion: Beings that belong to the same species produce fertile offspring.

Qualitative Criterion: Differences between two individuals of the same species are merely quantitative or ornamental.

Human Criterion: Derived from the unity of the human species, as affirmed by philosophy and revelation. Differences perceptible to human reason do not constitute distinct species.

Article III.       The Problem of the Origin of Species (Proposed Solutions)

Section 3.01    Theory of Specific Constancy, or Fixism (Cuvier, Jussieu, Agassiz, Quatrefages):

 God directly created all existing species, which may have undergone accidental variations over the centuries.

Section 3.02 Theory of Intraspecific Transformations (Improper Transformism):

 God created a limited number of natural species. While the specific organisation, determined by the substantial form, remains unchanged, accidental modifications arise from the activity of the vital principle, allowing for the emergence of subspecies.

Section 3.03 Theory of Specific Transformations (Proper Transformism):

 Living species are derived from slow, successive transformations, either from simple organisms (Haeckel’s monera) or from general types that gradually differentiated into classes, orders, genera, and species.

 Among transformists, some acknowledge divine intervention; some extend the theory to the mineral, vegetable, and animal kingdoms, while others restrict it to the vegetable and animal kingdoms.

Section 3.04 Lamarck vs. Darwin

Lamarck

• Does not extend transformism to humans.
• Active influence of the environment on variation in forms.
• Need creates the organ.
• The environment changes the form (modification occurs in the adult).

Darwin

• Extends transformism to humans.
• The environment has no direct influence on form modification; variations arise by chance.
• The environment acts only as a filter through natural selection.
• The environment selects the forms (natural selection; germinal modification).

Section 3.05 Critique of Proper Transformism

 If it seeks to explain the origin and perfection of life without God:

• It contradicts the principle of causality by deriving the more perfect from the less perfect.
• Even if divine intervention is admitted, it remains unintelligible to derive current individuals and species from primitive types.
• It is consistently contradicted by experience: specific transformations have never been verified, nor has the inheritance of individual characteristics been demonstrated.
• Neither necessity nor function can independently create new organs.

Section 3.06 Transformist Arguments

Embryological Argument:

The history of the germ is a summary of the species’ history (Haeckel). Ontogeny (the biological development of an individual from fertilisation to maturity) recapitulates phylogeny (the evolutionary history of a species).

Response: Similar organs are transient and soon develop into specific structures, determined by an internal principle of organisation.

Morphological Argument:

The gradual development of species and the presence of rudimentary organs are evidence of evolution.

Response: Structural similarity does not necessarily imply descent.

Palaeontological Argument:

The history of species can be traced through successive geological layers, which is evidence of descent.

Response: Succession in the fossil record does not necessarily imply descent (post hoc ergo propter hoc). No ancestral form of a class, order, or family has ever been conclusively found.

Article IV.       The Origin of Man

1. The First Man was created by God.

 'Firmly we believe and we confess simply that the true God is… [the] creator of all visible and invisible things, of the spiritual and of the corporal; who by His own omnipotent power at once from the beginning of time created each creature from nothing, spiritual, and corporal, namely, angelic and mundane, and finally the human, constituted as it were, alike of the spirit and the body. '(Fourth Lateran Council, D. 428)

2. Human souls are immediately created by God out of nothing.

'For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. However, this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favourable and those unfavourable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faith. Some however, rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, when they act as if the origin of the human body from pre-existing and living matter were already completely certain and proved by the facts which have been discovered up to now and by reasoning on those facts, and as if there were nothing in the sources of divine revelation which demands the greatest moderation and caution in this question.' (Pius XII, Humani Generis, n. 36)

3. All humanity descends from Adam and Eve.

'When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.' (Ibid., 37.)