OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 01, 2014, 09:09:48 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Evangelical Orthodox Church  (Read 3665 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
JosephM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 24


« on: October 28, 2008, 10:28:07 AM »

Greetings,

I would like to hear your opinions regarding the non-canonical EOC. As you may know, the majority of the EOC joined the canonical Church, while a minority chose to remain under the EOC banner. I have a hard time understanding the Orthodox tendency to condemn the EOC while affirming other splintered groups as canonical.

Grace and Peace, Joseph
Logged
Tzimis
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 2,374



« Reply #1 on: October 28, 2008, 11:10:54 AM »

Greetings,

I would like to hear your opinions regarding the non-canonical EOC. As you may know, the majority of the EOC joined the canonical Church, while a minority chose to remain under the EOC banner. I have a hard time understanding the Orthodox tendency to condemn the EOC while affirming other splintered groups as canonical.

Grace and Peace, Joseph
Splintered is a loaded term. You can be splintered when you break away not when you are joining. The EOC was never a part of the canonical church, so they can't be called splintered.
Logged

Excellence of character, then, is a state concerned with choice, lying in a mean relative to us, this being determined by reason and in the way in which the man of practical wisdom would determine it. Now it is a mean between two vices, that which depends on excess and that which depends on defect.
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,408


« Reply #2 on: October 28, 2008, 12:57:48 PM »

I have a hard time understanding the Orthodox tendency to condemn the EOC while affirming other splintered groups as canonical.

Can you explain this?  This doesn't make any sense to me.

As far as the few remaining EOC members who did not join 20 years ago (or even more recently as a couple smaller parishes did), I don't really have an opinion - they're just not part of the Church per se.  Anyone can call themselves "Orthodox", but that doesn't make them so.  I have no idea what they believe, their group is like, their praxis, their organizational structure, etc.  And btw, I was an original EOC member.
Logged
JosephM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 24


« Reply #3 on: October 28, 2008, 01:25:02 PM »

I have a hard time understanding the Orthodox tendency to condemn the EOC while affirming other splintered groups as canonical.

Can you explain this?  This doesn't make any sense to me.

As far as the few remaining EOC members who did not join 20 years ago (or even more recently as a couple smaller parishes did), I don't really have an opinion - they're just not part of the Church per se.  Anyone can call themselves "Orthodox", but that doesn't make them so.  I have no idea what they believe, their group is like, their praxis, their organizational structure, etc.  And btw, I was an original EOC member.

I didn't mean to be vague. We know that there are groups within the Group, which did not come from the Orthodox Church, but were grafted into it or eventually accepted by it. I have run into several folks that claim the EOC was not part of the true Church (which it appears you agree with) until they were received into the canonical Church. In my mind, they are saying that the members of the EOC prior to the conversion along with the members who did not join, are not legitimate Christians without being joined to the canonical Church.   

Do you believe you became part of the Body of Christ only when you joined the OCA? Were Fr. Gilquist and the clergy of the the EOC unregenerate prior to the merge? Are the remaining members of the EOC unregenerate? Just curious to how others view the EOC. Some call them Brethren, others deny their legitimacy.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,982


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #4 on: October 28, 2008, 01:30:47 PM »

I didn't mean to be vague. We know that there are groups within the Group, which did not come from the Orthodox Church, but were grafted into it or eventually accepted by it. I have run into several folks that claim the EOC was not part of the true Church (which it appears you agree with) until they were received into the canonical Church. In my mind, they are saying that the members of the EOC prior to the conversion along with the members who did not join, are not legitimate Christians without being joined to the canonical Church.   

Do you believe you became part of the Body of Christ only when you joined the OCA? Were Fr. Gilquist and the clergy of the the EOC unregenerate prior to the merge? Are the remaining members of the EOC unregenerate? Just curious to how others view the EOC. Some call them Brethren, others deny their legitimacy. 

Well - I guess it depends on your use of the terms "brethren" and "Christian."  Some would say that anyone who at least claims Christianity should be called a "brother" and treated as such, even if they have less than the fullness of Christianity (Orthodoxy); however, no communion.  Some would call any human being "brother" because we all have the same Father in Heaven.  Some, including Orthodox Synods of old and many of the Fathers, would say that the only Christians are those in the Church - i.e. if you're not Orthodox, you're not really a Christian, because you don't follow the full teachings of Christ within His Body.  So, depending on the perspective of the person making the statement the EOC members who did not enter the Church may be Brethren, or they may be Heretics/Schismatics, or they may be just misguided.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
JosephM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 24


« Reply #5 on: October 28, 2008, 02:11:43 PM »

Thank you for your answer! 

The OCA, in my view, is no more Christian than the GOC, which is no more Christian than the EOC. It just struck me as odd that many Orthodox Christians count Roman Catholics as Brethren while considering EOC members heathens.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2008, 02:12:57 PM by JosephM » Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,408


« Reply #6 on: October 28, 2008, 02:28:09 PM »

JosephM,

OK, a little more. 

1) The EOC did not join the Orthodox Church under the OCA, but under the AOA (Antiochian Orthodox Archdioces of America).

2) Similar to cleveland's answer, I have no idea what you mean by 'regenerate' except in how cleveland explained it.  The Orthodox Church considers everyone not in communion with her as outside the Church and not fully Christian.

3) The EOC was "Orthodox" because they called themselves such.  It was a group of Campus Crusade leaders that researched what the ancient Church was like and then slowly evolved their group to be like what they thought it should be.  This ended up being close to the Orthodox Church.  As to the majority that joined, I wouldn't even call most of us Orthodox except after at least 5 years or more after conversion.  Sure, we were all Chrismated, but still all stuck in our original communities with our same leaders.  It was a slow, evolving process.

4) What is your fascination with the EOC and why are you asking these questions?
Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,019


WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 28, 2008, 02:32:28 PM »

The OCA, in my view, is no more Christian than the GOC, which is no more Christian than the EOC. It just struck me as odd that many Orthodox Christians count Roman Catholics as Brethren while considering EOC members heathens.

Could you cite a source where someone referred to EOC members as heathens?
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,982


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #8 on: October 28, 2008, 02:40:28 PM »

The OCA, in my view, is no more Christian than the GOC, which is no more Christian than the EOC. 

You're free to approach it that way.  In some ways those who worship Christ should be called Christians, but in some ways they can't.  Unitarians and Mormons most certainly believe in something different than what Anglicans and Catholics and Orthodox do; can they be called "Christian" by the Orthodox POV?  Hardly.

It just struck me as odd that many Orthodox Christians count Roman Catholics as Brethren while considering EOC members heathens.

That would be an interesting position.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
JosephM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 24


« Reply #9 on: October 28, 2008, 02:58:33 PM »

JosephM,

OK, a little more. 

1) The EOC did not join the Orthodox Church under the OCA, but under the AOA (Antiochian Orthodox Archdioces of America).

2) Similar to cleveland's answer, I have no idea what you mean by 'regenerate' except in how cleveland explained it.  The Orthodox Church considers everyone not in communion with her as outside the Church and not fully Christian.

3) The EOC was "Orthodox" because they called themselves such.  It was a group of Campus Crusade leaders that researched what the ancient Church was like and then slowly evolved their group to be like what they thought it should be.  This ended up being close to the Orthodox Church.  As to the majority that joined, I wouldn't even call most of us Orthodox except after at least 5 years or more after conversion.  Sure, we were all Chrismated, but still all stuck in our original communities with our same leaders.  It was a slow, evolving process.

4) What is your fascination with the EOC and why are you asking these questions?


1) Sorry, I had a particular congregation in mind that went from the EOC to the OCA, not the AOA with the majority

2) Unregenerate= still in their sins, unforgiven, not being redeemed, not part of the Kingdom

3) Ok

4) I have been speaking with some folks currently in the EOC and get a wide range of reactions when I mention them to other Orthodox Christians

Quote
Could you cite a source where someone referred to EOC members as heathens?


This was a comment made by an individual during a conversation, referring to the EOC and all those outside the communion of the Church. Something about the group really hit a nerve and I am not sure why it did. The defensive or offensive position people take when this group is mentioned puzzles me. This is part of my reason for asking others their opinions of the EOC. No grand conspiracy, just curiousity.

Grace and Peace, Joseph
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,982


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #10 on: October 28, 2008, 03:03:30 PM »

2) Unregenerate= still in their sins, unforgiven, not being redeemed, not part of the Kingdom

Well, as to this point we can state the following: we don't think that those outside of the Church are "being redeemed, part of the Kingdom," however we cannot ourselves define the boundary of where God's salvific grace will fall, hence we cannot know that they are indeed "unforgiven, still in their sins" until the dred Second Coming, at which point all things will become evident.

However, it should be noted that our position is this: it is to one's eternal peril to encounter Christ's Church and not enter into it.  This is the source of our disdain for those who have been exposed to Orthodoxy and still reject it.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
JosephM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 24


« Reply #11 on: October 28, 2008, 03:12:40 PM »

2) Unregenerate= still in their sins, unforgiven, not being redeemed, not part of the Kingdom

Well, as to this point we can state the following: we don't think that those outside of the Church are "being redeemed, part of the Kingdom," however we cannot ourselves define the boundary of where God's salvific grace will fall, hence we cannot know that they are indeed "unforgiven, still in their sins" until the dred Second Coming, at which point all things will become evident.

However, it should be noted that our position is this: it is to one's eternal peril to encounter Christ's Church and not enter into it.  This is the source of our disdain for those who have been exposed to Orthodoxy and still reject it.

Thank you for your explanation, I appreciate it greatly!
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,982


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #12 on: October 28, 2008, 03:13:20 PM »

Thank you for your explanation, I appreciate it greatly!

Glad I/we could be of service.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,408


« Reply #13 on: October 28, 2008, 03:23:57 PM »

JosephM,

1) OK, maybe it is a parish I heard about in the midwest a couple of years ago that joined the OCA under Archbishop JOB.  I've lived in CA all my life, so don't know much about them.

2) See cleveland's answer.  I will only add that what he means by "not entering Christ's Church" or "being exposed to Orthodoxy", is that the Orthodox Church means those that realize that the Orthodox Church IS the Church but willfully do not join it.  If someone knows about the Orthodox Church, but is unconvinced of her Truth (e.g. hasn't investigated enough, ignorance, hasnt been led there by the Holy Spirit, etc.), then the person can't be "guilty" in that sense.

3) When the EOC joined the Church 20 years ago, it was a huge event - approx 2000 people joined among several parishes.  Nothing like this had happened in America in modern times.  It made a lot of press.  During both the journey and the initial years, there was a) questioning of how they were received (i.e. congregation and many clergy possibly not received properly as in cathechesis/training/mentoring), b) difficulties regarding misunderstandings on praxis/authority and other things as well.  Again, keep in mind that all of the EOC parishes where in their own "subdiocese" called the AEOM (Antiochian Evangelical Orthodox Mission) for several years, which resulted in all of the parishoners being sheltered but the EOC leaders and kept in their older ways.

Logged
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #14 on: October 28, 2008, 05:16:31 PM »

Thank you for your answer! 

The OCA, in my view, is no more Christian than the GOC, which is no more Christian than the EOC. It just struck me as odd that many Orthodox Christians count Roman Catholics as Brethren while considering EOC members heathens.
Sigh. It's a good thing God doesn't judge us thus, by our jurisdictional affiliations.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
JosephM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 24


« Reply #15 on: October 28, 2008, 09:26:46 PM »

Thank you for your answer! 

The OCA, in my view, is no more Christian than the GOC, which is no more Christian than the EOC. It just struck me as odd that many Orthodox Christians count Roman Catholics as Brethren while considering EOC members heathens.
Sigh. It's a good thing God doesn't judge us thus, by our jurisdictional affiliations.

So, would you consider EOC on par with the AOA, OCA or GOC even though they are not considered a canonical group? It would be nice to know that someone here shared my conviction on this matter.

Grace and Peace, Joseph
Logged
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #16 on: October 28, 2008, 09:35:23 PM »

What on earth does it matter.
Logged
JosephM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 24


« Reply #17 on: October 28, 2008, 09:40:34 PM »

What on earth does it matter.

Just trying to understand your position as I value the opinions of other Christians. I apologize.

Blessings, Joseph
Logged
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #18 on: October 28, 2008, 09:44:56 PM »

If someone is a Christian, it's between them and God.  If this church is legit in your eyes, than that should be good enough for you.
Logged
JosephM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 24


« Reply #19 on: October 28, 2008, 09:51:30 PM »

If someone is a Christian, it's between them and God.  If this church is legit in your eyes, than that should be good enough for you.

As it is. I am just saddened by the divisions of the Faith and know there will be no reconciliation without first addressing the walls we have set up to divide the various congregations. Lord have mercy.

Blessings, Joseph
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #20 on: October 28, 2008, 09:55:06 PM »

Just trying to understand your position as I value the opinions of other Christians. I apologize.

Blessings, Joseph

Joseph,
Christianity is not only between the individual and God, but, by definition, between the individual and the Church. No one can be a Christian outside of the Church, so the question we need to ask is: "where is the Church?" The often quoted Orthodox position on this is that "we can say where the Church is, but we cannot say where the Church is not."

George
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #21 on: October 29, 2008, 06:55:15 AM »

So, would you consider EOC on par with the AOA, OCA or GOC even though they are not considered a canonical group? It would be nice to know that someone here shared my conviction on this matter.

Grace and Peace, Joseph
I consider those who are being saved in one jurisdiction on par with those who are being saved in any other or no jurisdiction. Canonicity counts--which the OCA has as well as any other American jurisdiction--because then we can follow our bishop's instructions as we would follow those of the Apostles. But God will not say on the Last Judgment, "Well, I know you, but I do not know your bishop. Sucks to be you." There will certainly be those in non-canonical jurisdictions who are part of the Body of Christ. Like George said above, "We know where the Church is; we do not know where it is not."
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #22 on: October 29, 2008, 10:27:39 AM »

So, would you consider EOC on par with the AOA, OCA or GOC even though they are not considered a canonical group?
I don't think anyone that is in the AOA, OCA or GOC would consider what is left of the EOC on par with them. There is a reason that they have chosen not to enter into Orthodoxy and only they can answer that. I think that there are many who were in the EOC who still hold friendships with those who are still in the EOC and in turn would call them brothers and sister but they would not look at them as being Orthodox and in the Church.

I would suggest you visit this site http://www.ogreatmystery.com/eoc/ so that you might read more into event of 6 years ago when the strong majority of the parishes who were left in the EOC came into Orthodoxy via the OCA.
Logged

Joseph
JosephM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 24


« Reply #23 on: October 29, 2008, 11:13:43 AM »

So, would you consider EOC on par with the AOA, OCA or GOC even though they are not considered a canonical group?
I don't think anyone that is in the AOA, OCA or GOC would consider what is left of the EOC on par with them. There is a reason that they have chosen not to enter into Orthodoxy and only they can answer that. I think that there are many who were in the EOC who still hold friendships with those who are still in the EOC and in turn would call them brothers and sister but they would not look at them as being Orthodox and in the Church.

I would suggest you visit this site http://www.ogreatmystery.com/eoc/ so that you might read more into event of 6 years ago when the strong majority of the parishes who were left in the EOC came into Orthodoxy via the OCA.

Some do consider the EOC to be on par with other Orthodox groups, even though that is not the popular opinion. I am familiar with the history of the EOC and the various mergers that have taken place, including that particular one. I decided to go and meet with the present EOC leadership in the next couple of weeks and listen to their story. I appreciate you sharing your positions and welcome others to share theirs.

Grace and Peace, Joseph
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,408


« Reply #24 on: October 29, 2008, 01:14:40 PM »

JoesphM,

I still fail to see your fascination with this former group.  I say former, because it looks like that there are only 4 rather isolated parishes (Canada, Sweden and two in the Midwest USA) left.

Given the evolution of the group in general, I have no idea what they believe in now.  As far as I'm concerned, the whole group thing is just history.  Either you're Orthodox or not.
Logged
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #25 on: October 29, 2008, 01:23:01 PM »

Just do what you want and ignore everyone else.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,383



« Reply #26 on: October 30, 2008, 03:51:24 AM »

Quote
The often quoted Orthodox position on this is that "we can say where the Church is, but we cannot say where the Church is not."

It is indeed common to hear someone say that "we can know where the Church is, but we cannot know where the Church is not". But can't we sometimes say where the Church is not? Didn't the Councils do that when they anathematized people for not holding to certain dogmas? Wasn't that like a warning that "the Church is not with them, don't follow them"?
Logged

"Change is the process of becoming more like who we are."
JosephM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 24


« Reply #27 on: October 30, 2008, 08:43:20 AM »

Quote
The often quoted Orthodox position on this is that "we can say where the Church is, but we cannot say where the Church is not."

It is indeed common to hear someone say that "we can know where the Church is, but we cannot know where the Church is not". But can't we sometimes say where the Church is not? Didn't the Councils do that when they anathematized people for not holding to certain dogmas? Wasn't that like a warning that "the Church is not with them, don't follow them"?

Yes they did condemn heresies. One such heretic, Paul of Samosata Bishop of Antioch, who denied the Trinity among other things, is listed in the apostolic succession. The succession did not prevent heresies or make men holy. I won't go into the gaps, inconsistencies, heresies and usual problems with the various succession lists, but it seems that apostolic succession is the definitive issue for most folks here, not sound doctrine, theology, faithfulness, etc.. When succession first began to be an issue, the Church was trying to discredit heresies that were later found within the succession (such as denying the Trinity). The divisions between the RCC and the OC and the subsequent divisions of each should be proof enough that succession does not guarantee orthodoxy, unity or authenticity of faith. When we ignore Paul's instructions to "avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless", we judge people by their pedigrees (which are questionable) instead of the content of their character. Protestants aren't the only ones who need to circumvent their pasts to return to authentic, apostolic Christianity.

Grace and Peace, Joseph
« Last Edit: October 30, 2008, 08:44:18 AM by JosephM » Logged
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #28 on: October 30, 2008, 11:03:03 AM »

Thank you for your answer! 

The OCA, in my view, is no more Christian than the GOC, which is no more Christian than the EOC. It just struck me as odd that many Orthodox Christians count Roman Catholics as Brethren while considering EOC members heathens.
Sigh. It's a good thing God doesn't judge us thus, by our jurisdictional affiliations.

So, would you consider EOC on par with the AOA, OCA or GOC even though they are not considered a canonical group? It would be nice to know that someone here shared my conviction on this matter.

Grace and Peace, Joseph

Can the EOC trace their bishops back to the Apostles? Can they trace when they broke away from AOA, OCA, GOA, ROCOR, ROA....ect.?


If not then you are mixing apples with oranges. You can't really compare the two. It wouldn't be fair, accurate, nor right to do so.


I understand that you have your own personal feelings about this, but you have to understand that based on pure reason alone........it is unfair to compare EOC to AOA, OCA & GOA.

I personally would put the EOC in the same category as the "charismatic episcopal church" (ICCEC), and the African Orthodox Church (AOC). One can make that comparison,

Why?

Because they both are self start up churches.......self apointed churches.

 but you couldn't make the comparision you were making. It's unfair!



If I hurt your feelings, please let me know.






JNORM888
« Last Edit: October 30, 2008, 11:14:14 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #29 on: October 30, 2008, 11:20:23 AM »

Quote
The often quoted Orthodox position on this is that "we can say where the Church is, but we cannot say where the Church is not."

It is indeed common to hear someone say that "we can know where the Church is, but we cannot know where the Church is not". But can't we sometimes say where the Church is not? Didn't the Councils do that when they anathematized people for not holding to certain dogmas? Wasn't that like a warning that "the Church is not with them, don't follow them"?

Yes they did condemn heresies. One such heretic, Paul of Samosata Bishop of Antioch, who denied the Trinity among other things, is listed in the apostolic succession. The succession did not prevent heresies or make men holy. I won't go into the gaps, inconsistencies, heresies and usual problems with the various succession lists, but it seems that apostolic succession is the definitive issue for most folks here, not sound doctrine, theology, faithfulness, etc.. When succession first began to be an issue, the Church was trying to discredit heresies that were later found within the succession (such as denying the Trinity). The divisions between the RCC and the OC and the subsequent divisions of each should be proof enough that succession does not guarantee orthodoxy, unity or authenticity of faith. When we ignore Paul's instructions to "avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless", we judge people by their pedigrees (which are questionable) instead of the content of their character. Protestants aren't the only ones who need to circumvent their pasts to return to authentic, apostolic Christianity.

Grace and Peace, Joseph

It's all the above. Those of the EOC who are still holding out can still come in, but they first have to want to. The same is true for the AOC and ICCEC who are holding out. They first have to want to.

But you want to pick on the OCA, AOA, & GOA. I personally find it unreasonable.




JNORM888
« Last Edit: October 30, 2008, 11:22:28 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
JosephM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 24


« Reply #30 on: October 30, 2008, 11:33:09 AM »

Thank you for your answer! 

The OCA, in my view, is no more Christian than the GOC, which is no more Christian than the EOC. It just struck me as odd that many Orthodox Christians count Roman Catholics as Brethren while considering EOC members heathens.
Sigh. It's a good thing God doesn't judge us thus, by our jurisdictional affiliations.

So, would you consider EOC on par with the AOA, OCA or GOC even though they are not considered a canonical group? It would be nice to know that someone here shared my conviction on this matter.

Grace and Peace, Joseph

Can the EOC trace their bishops back to the Apostles? Can they trace when they broke away from AOA, OCA, GOA, ROCOR, ROA....ect.?


If not then you are mixing apples with oranges. You can't really compare the two. It wouldn't be fair, accurate, nor right to do so.


I understand that you have your own personal feelings about this, but you have to understand that based on pure reason alone........it is unfair to compare EOC to AOA, OCA & GOA.

I personally would put the EOC in the same category as the "charismatic episcopal church" (ICCEC), and the African Orthodox Church (AOC). One can make that comparison,

Why?

Because they both are self start up churches.......self apointed churches.

 but you couldn't make the comparision you were making. It's unfair!



If I hurt your feelings, please let me know.






JNORM888

No hurt feelings, your point is well taken.

All Churches are start up churches, the question becomes who they were started by. In my prior post, I stated a few of my problems with the dogmatic stance on apostolic procession. Obviously, just because you received your ordination from Bishops of apostolic procession, that doesn't make you qualified for the position. I wish I could have spoke with Fr. Alexander Schmemann on the subject.

Clement of Rome

We are of opinion, therefore, that those appointed by them, or afterwards by other eminent men, with the consent of the whole Church, and who have blamelessly served the flock of Christ in a humble, peaceable, and disinterested spirit, and have for a long time possessed the good opinion of all, cannot be justly dismissed from the ministry. For our sin will not be small, if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties. Blessed are those presbyters who, having finished their course before now, have obtained a fruitful and perfect departure [from this world]; for they have no fear lest any one deprive them of the place now appointed them. But we see that ye have removed some men of excellent behaviour from the ministry, which they fulfilled blamelessly and with honour.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2008, 11:38:23 AM by JosephM » Logged
JosephM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 24


« Reply #31 on: October 30, 2008, 11:44:57 AM »

Quote
The often quoted Orthodox position on this is that "we can say where the Church is, but we cannot say where the Church is not."

It is indeed common to hear someone say that "we can know where the Church is, but we cannot know where the Church is not". But can't we sometimes say where the Church is not? Didn't the Councils do that when they anathematized people for not holding to certain dogmas? Wasn't that like a warning that "the Church is not with them, don't follow them"?

Yes they did condemn heresies. One such heretic, Paul of Samosata Bishop of Antioch, who denied the Trinity among other things, is listed in the apostolic succession. The succession did not prevent heresies or make men holy. I won't go into the gaps, inconsistencies, heresies and usual problems with the various succession lists, but it seems that apostolic succession is the definitive issue for most folks here, not sound doctrine, theology, faithfulness, etc.. When succession first began to be an issue, the Church was trying to discredit heresies that were later found within the succession (such as denying the Trinity). The divisions between the RCC and the OC and the subsequent divisions of each should be proof enough that succession does not guarantee orthodoxy, unity or authenticity of faith. When we ignore Paul's instructions to "avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless", we judge people by their pedigrees (which are questionable) instead of the content of their character. Protestants aren't the only ones who need to circumvent their pasts to return to authentic, apostolic Christianity.

Grace and Peace, Joseph

It's all the above. Those of the EOC who are still holding out can still come in, but they first have to want to. The same is true for the AOC and ICCEC who are holding out. They first have to want to.

But you want to pick on the OCA, AOA, & GOA. I personally find it unreasonable.




JNORM888

I'm not picking on the OCA, AOA or GOA. Personally, I could care less about their succession lists. I don't think it says anything about the validity of their faith, which is my point. As long as they are running their race well, Praise God! They will not be judged according to the men that preceded them, nor will the EOC, AOC or ICCEC. Each will be judged according to their own works, genealogies aside.

Grace and Peace, Joseph
« Last Edit: October 30, 2008, 11:46:09 AM by JosephM » Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #32 on: October 30, 2008, 12:45:17 PM »

I think you meant to say "couldn't care less"... Wink
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
The young fogey
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,530


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #33 on: October 30, 2008, 09:24:08 PM »

Denying the remaining EOC are Christian doesn't sound true of the Orthodox. This has been answered. The EOC were never in the Orthodox Church.
Logged

PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,629


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #34 on: October 31, 2008, 01:04:16 AM »

The goofy little tangent on the uses and misuses of English grammar has been split off and moved to Other Topics : Some Notes on English Grammar
Logged
Tags: Evangelical Orthodox Church 
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.124 seconds with 61 queries.