johnmac
Newbie
 Offline
Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10
|
 |
« on: September 15, 2008, 08:42:45 PM » |
|
Let me put this out there.
Correct me if I am mistaken.
As Orthodox you recognize 7 councils and claim to have the original faith from the Lord.
Has there not been any more councils? Would not new issues need to be discussed?
Thanks,
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
Offline
Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,865
|
|
« Reply #1 on: September 15, 2008, 08:57:40 PM » |
|
It was debates about the very essence of the Faith that brought together the Ecumenical Synods of the first millennium, that resulted in doctrinal definitions, such as, as to the nature of Christ. Such issues are not in dispute today, thanks, probably, to the soundness of those doctrines.
There are administrative disputes, however, that should be dealt with, i.e. the overlapping of jurisdictions outside the territories of the individual Holy Churches of God, the Calendar, and more. Since 1923, they've been planning a "Great and Holy Synod [Council]of the Orthodox Church," convened most of the pre-conciliar commissions for it in the '80's, much to the credit of Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios, of Thrice Blessed Memory. Haven't heard a word about it in 15 years.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 09:00:54 PM by Basil 320 »
|
Logged
|
"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
|
|
|
|
Riddikulus
|
|
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2008, 09:06:30 PM » |
|
As far as I understand it, the ecumenical councils were called primarily to settle controversial teachings concerning or affecting Orthodox Christology - and the outcomes of those councils are "set in concrete". Beyond that, other matters might be a question of personal belief and are not governed by council degree, but the collective opinions of Church Fathers; ancient and modern. The Orthodox Church doesn't dogmatise each and every possibile theological idea or "new issue" - and therefore we might have varied opinions on matters that are not dogmatic.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 09:08:50 PM by Riddikulus »
|
Logged
|
I believe in One God, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible.
Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Theodosius Dobzhansky, Russian Orthodox Christian (1900-1975)
|
|
|
antiderivative
Elder
Offline
Faith: Northeastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: A jurisdiction
Posts: 349
|
|
« Reply #3 on: September 15, 2008, 09:15:04 PM » |
|
There have been several post-Schism councils that would fit under the definition of being ecumenical, but not officially. The Palamite councils in the 14th and 15th century would fall into this category. The Synod of Jerusalem (17th century) dealt with what little Calvinist and Reformed theology there was in the East. Other than that, I don't know of any post-Schism councils on the universal scale dealing with theology. There were many local councils dealing with heresies that were only in certain regions, but I don't know of many universal ones. There were many universal councils held to deal with political issues. One example would be during the Old Rite Schism (Raskol), in 1666 (*GASP* the number of the beast!), where all the patriarchs met in order to "fire" Patriarch Nikon (he wasn't a very nice man). They did affirm his liturgical reforms, because they were already using them anyway!
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 15, 2008, 09:17:02 PM by antiderivative »
|
Logged
|
signature
|
|
|
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
Offline
Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,436
Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina
|
|
« Reply #4 on: September 15, 2008, 10:49:26 PM » |
|
The answer is quite mundane: no more ecumenical councils because there is no more empire.
Councils though continue to occur when needed.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Check out my personal website with 130+ articles: www.anastasioshudson.comDisclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons |
|
|
|
ialmisry
|
|
« Reply #5 on: September 16, 2008, 01:08:16 AM » |
|
The answer is quite mundane: no more ecumenical councils because there is no more empire.
Councils though continue to occur when needed.
There was an empire when Constantinople IV and V took place in it. Yet they are not seen as Ecumenical. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
and both come out of your mouth
|
|
|
|
ialmisry
|
|
« Reply #6 on: September 16, 2008, 01:11:17 AM » |
|
There have been several post-Schism councils that would fit under the definition of being ecumenical, but not officially. The Palamite councils in the 14th and 15th century would fall into this category. The Synod of Jerusalem (17th century) dealt with what little Calvinist and Reformed theology there was in the East. Other than that, I don't know of any post-Schism councils on the universal scale dealing with theology. There were many local councils dealing with heresies that were only in certain regions, but I don't know of many universal ones. There were many universal councils held to deal with political issues. One example would be during the Old Rite Schism (Raskol), in 1666 (*GASP* the number of the beast!), where all the patriarchs met in order to "fire" Patriarch Nikon (he wasn't a very nice man). They did affirm his liturgical reforms, because they were already using them anyway!
Iasi (Jassy) 1642 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
and both come out of your mouth
|
|
|
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
Offline
Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490
|
|
« Reply #7 on: September 16, 2008, 01:24:15 AM » |
|
The answer is quite mundane: no more ecumenical councils because there is no more empire.
Councils though continue to occur when needed.
There was an empire when Constantinople IV and V took place in it. Yet they are not seen as Ecumenical. Probably because the councils were not approved by Rome, while Rome and Constantinople broke communion in the 11th century, it took a while longer for the other patriarchates to do so and a few would enter in and out of communion with Rome for centuries. As one could guess from Balsamon, Zonaras, and Arestenos' writings there was long understanding that an 'oecumenical synod' could not be summoned without the approval of the five patriarchates...thus everyone settled for imperial councils that carried the weight of the Empire, but not necessarily the approval of the entire Christian world. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
|
|
|
|
orthodoxlurker
|
|
« Reply #8 on: September 16, 2008, 06:13:24 AM » |
|
The answer is quite mundane: no more ecumenical councils because there is no more empire.
Councils though continue to occur when needed.
There was an empire when Constantinople IV and V took place in it. Yet they are not seen as Ecumenical. On the day we proclaim some of post1054 Councils as Ecumenical, we will shut the door for Rome's return. Otherwise, Orthodox could do that already. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Curse the Pope, for he is the root and cause of these disasters! - St. Nektarios of Aegina
You don't get to circumvent your post moderation by calling out the moderators in your signature. ~Veniamin, Global Moderator
|
|
|
|
ialmisry
|
|
« Reply #9 on: September 16, 2008, 07:08:35 AM » |
|
The answer is quite mundane: no more ecumenical councils because there is no more empire.
Councils though continue to occur when needed.
There was an empire when Constantinople IV and V took place in it. Yet they are not seen as Ecumenical. Probably because the councils were not approved by Rome, while Rome and Constantinople broke communion in the 11th century, it took a while longer for the other patriarchates to do so and a few would enter in and out of communion with Rome for centuries. As one could guess from Balsamon, Zonaras, and Arestenos' writings there was long understanding that an 'oecumenical synod' could not be summoned without the approval of the five patriarchates...thus everyone settled for imperial councils that carried the weight of the Empire, but not necessarily the approval of the entire Christian world. That doesn't explain Constantinople IV. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
and both come out of your mouth
|
|
|
ignatius
Baptacathadox
OC.net guru
Offline
Faith: Roman Catholic > Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA - Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,690
My Son Aidan... :-)
|
|
« Reply #10 on: September 16, 2008, 08:59:42 AM » |
|
The answer is quite mundane: no more ecumenical councils because there is no more empire.
Councils though continue to occur when needed.
There was an empire when Constantinople IV and V took place in it. Yet they are not seen as Ecumenical. Probably because the councils were not approved by Rome, while Rome and Constantinople broke communion in the 11th century, it took a while longer for the other patriarchates to do so and a few would enter in and out of communion with Rome for centuries. As one could guess from Balsamon, Zonaras, and Arestenos' writings there was long understanding that an 'oecumenical synod' could not be summoned without the approval of the five patriarchates...thus everyone settled for imperial councils that carried the weight of the Empire, but not necessarily the approval of the entire Christian world. Wasn't the privileges of Rome 'transferred' to Constantinople? I recently read "You are Peter" by Olivier Clement and I recall him pointing that out in one of the later chapters. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
St Basil the Great (330-379 A.D.): “I think then that the one goal of all who are really and truly serving the Lord ought to be to bring back to union the churches who have at different times and in diverse manners divided from one another.”
|
|
|
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
Offline
Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,436
Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina
|
|
« Reply #11 on: September 16, 2008, 09:37:42 AM » |
|
The answer is quite mundane: no more ecumenical councils because there is no more empire.
Councils though continue to occur when needed.
There was an empire when Constantinople IV and V took place in it. Yet they are not seen as Ecumenical. Which councils do you mean specifically as there is a Latin anti-Council of 869. The 879 council and the Hesychast councils are considered ecumenical by some (such as me). Other councils were local always though, such as Blacharnae, but its statement of faith is the faith we accept. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Check out my personal website with 130+ articles: www.anastasioshudson.comDisclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. I served as an Orthodox priest from June 2008 to April 2013, before resigning for personal reasons |
|
|
|
