OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 20, 2014, 11:04:07 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: Miscellaneous Split from Russian True Orthodox Church thread  (Read 2165 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
GOCTheophan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« on: December 30, 2008, 02:53:25 AM »

Quote
Just seems unusual to me, given Holy Apostles Convent have provided a lot of good books and icons and yet I can't seem to find out which main Orthodox body they represent.

That's because they are off on their own, doing their own thing. I don't know what word would best describe them--vagante, schismatic, etc.--but they're not part of any "main Orthodox body" like the Antiochians, OCA, etc.

Unfortunately the Patriarchate of Antioch has fallen under the anathemas of the Council of Chalcedon through their false union with the Oriental Orthodox Church and for that reason alone (there are many others) cannot be considered part of the historic Orthodox Church.

Was St Maximus the confessor a vagante or schismatic? The Church is founded on the principle of Law. If a human state becomes lawless and disregards its own criminal code than its citizens no longer owe it their submission. It is the same with the Church...If Patriarchs disregard and willfully flaunt the canons and dogmas of the Church time and time again than the faithful must seek to place themselves under a Church authority that obeys and respects the law. And of course there are cases of acception....How long though has the Patriarchate of Antioch been using the New Calendar? That alone tells us they are to be avoided.

ROAC does have strong claims to canonicity however I would not trust them with my Salvation.

RTOC is to be avoided given the history of it's founder who despite their now "good confession" (which interestingly enough leaves out Name-whorshipping, a heresy which has troubled the Russian Church through out the last century) they still regard as a hero. Archbishop Lazar was responsible for wrecking the relationship between the Catacomb Church in Russia (or large parts of it at least) and the Russian Synod in Exile among his crimes aganist Orthodoxy.


 Warned for hijacking a thread.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 02:18:59 PM by Fr. Anastasios » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1 on: December 30, 2008, 05:34:37 AM »

Unfortunately the Patriarchate of Antioch has fallen under the anathemas of the Council of Chalcedon through their false union with the Oriental Orthodox Church and for that reason alone (there are many others) cannot be considered part of the historic Orthodox Church.
Dear Theophan,

If I remember correctly you hold an extreme zealot position and believe that Orthodoxy and the Holy Mysteries have almost entirely disappeared off the face of the earth.  The only clergy with actual Mysteries are the four or five in the Church to which you belong.   


 Warn for ad hominem misrepresentations of another poster.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 05:36:36 AM by Irish Hermit » Logged
GOCTheophan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #2 on: December 30, 2008, 05:55:55 AM »

Unfortunately the Patriarchate of Antioch has fallen under the anathemas of the Council of Chalcedon through their false union with the Oriental Orthodox Church and for that reason alone (there are many others) cannot be considered part of the historic Orthodox Church.
Dear Theophan,

If I remember correctly you hold an extreme zealot position and believe that Orthodoxy and the Holy Mysteries have almost entirely disappeared off the face of the earth.  The only clergy with actual Mysteries are the four or five in the Church to which you belong.   



Father,

I am not sure what an extreme zealot position is.

We must be guided by the Dogmas and the canons of the Church which taken as a guide and examining the current situation in what is generally described as the Orthodox world would suggest indeed that it is very unlikely that there are more than 20 actually lawfull Bishops left in the world. If we do not follow the objective law we end following the subjective feelings and (fallen) reason of limited human individuals who may or may not be of good will (for instance I believe Metropolitan Philaret to have been of good will though I have my doubts to put it mildly that Archbishop Lazar was).

I am not sure about ROAC. I am however pretty sure RTOC and the Antiochian Patriarchate are not part of the historic Orthodox Church.

Can you explain to me how you see authority and it's role in the Church? I honestly do not understand how people can consider what is refered to as "World Orthodoxy" as the Church though I now accept I should not fill in my lack of understanding by presuming all sorts of dark motives.

Theophan.

« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 06:00:03 AM by GOCTheophan » Logged
prodromas
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Under the Green Pope
Posts: 1,239

Greek Orthodox


« Reply #3 on: December 30, 2008, 06:04:13 AM »

Unfortunately the Patriarchate of Antioch has fallen under the anathemas of the Council of Chalcedon through their false union with the Oriental Orthodox Church and for that reason alone (there are many others) cannot be considered part of the historic Orthodox Church.
Dear Theophan,

If I remember correctly you hold an extreme zealot position and believe that Orthodoxy and the Holy Mysteries have almost entirely disappeared off the face of the earth.  The only clergy with actual Mysteries are the four or five in the Church to which you belong.   



Father,

I am not sure what an extreme zealot position is.

We must be guided by the Dogmas and the canons of the Church which taken as a guide and examining the current situation in what is generally described as the Orthodox world would suggest indeed that it is very unlikely that there are more than 20 actually lawfull Bishops left in the world.


Emphasise mine

Yes Theophan that is an extreme zealot position.
Logged

The sins I don't commit are largely due to the weakness of my limbs.

1915-1923 Հայոց Ցեղասպանութիւն ,never again,
ܩܛܠܐ ܕܥܡܐ ܐܬܘܪܝܐ 1920-1914, never again,
השואה  1933-1945, never again,
(1914-1923) Ελληνική Γενοκτονία, never again
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 #4 on: December 30, 2008, 06:06:49 AM »

We must be guided by the Dogmas and the canons of the Church

Yep. Does this include the 1st Apostolic Canon though?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
GOCTheophan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #5 on: December 30, 2008, 06:18:14 AM »

We must be guided by the Dogmas and the canons of the Church

Yep. Does this include the 1st Apostolic Canon though?


In the normal course of events yes however...


Orthodox Christian Education Society: The Rudder, Chicago, 1957, p. 4, lines 11-13 "The Apostolic Injunctions (Book VIII,

chapter 27), on the other hand, commands that anyone ordained by a single

bishop be deposed from office along with the one who ordained him, EXCEPT

ONLY IN CASE OF PERSECUTION or some other impediment by reason whereof a

number of bishops cannot get together and he had to be ordained by one

alone, just as was Siderius ordained bishop of Palaibisca, according to

Synesius, not by three but by one bishop, Philo."
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 #6 on: December 30, 2008, 07:11:42 AM »

We must be guided by the Dogmas and the canons of the Church

Yep. Does this include the 1st Apostolic Canon though?


In the normal course of events yes however...


Orthodox Christian Education Society: The Rudder, Chicago, 1957, p. 4, lines 11-13 "The Apostolic Injunctions (Book VIII,

chapter 27), on the other hand, commands that anyone ordained by a single

bishop be deposed from office along with the one who ordained him, EXCEPT

ONLY IN CASE OF PERSECUTION or some other impediment by reason whereof a

number of bishops cannot get together and he had to be ordained by one

alone, just as was Siderius ordained bishop of Palaibisca, according to

Synesius, not by three but by one bishop, Philo."

This is a commentary, not a Canon. But at any rate, what was the impediment? Were there no other Orthodox Bishops available? Or were they available but unwilling to participate for some reason?
« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 07:13:08 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
recent convert
Orthodox Chrisitan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian (N.A.)
Posts: 1,922


« Reply #7 on: December 30, 2008, 08:00:18 AM »

Quote
Just seems unusual to me, given Holy Apostles Convent have provided a lot of good books and icons and yet I can't seem to find out which main Orthodox body they represent.

That's because they are off on their own, doing their own thing. I don't know what word would best describe them--vagante, schismatic, etc.--but they're not part of any "main Orthodox body" like the Antiochians, OCA, etc.

Unfortunately the Patriarchate of Antioch has fallen under the anathemas of the Council of Chalcedon through their false union with the Oriental Orthodox Church and for that reason alone (there are many others) cannot be considered part of the historic Orthodox Church.

Was St Maximus the confessor a vagante or schismatic? The Church is founded on the principle of Law. If a human state becomes lawless and disregards its own criminal code than its citizens no longer owe it their submission. It is the same with the Church...If Patriarchs disregard and willfully flaunt the canons and dogmas of the Church time and time again than the faithful must seek to place themselves under a Church authority that obeys and respects the law. And of course there are cases of acception....How long though has the Patriarchate of Antioch been using the New Calendar? That alone tells us they are to be avoided.

ROAC does have strong claims to canonicity however I would not trust them with my Salvation.

RTOC is to be avoided given the history of it's founder who despite their now "good confession" (which interestingly enough leaves out Name-whorshipping, a heresy which has troubled the Russian Church through out the last century) they still regard as a hero. Archbishop Lazar was responsible for wrecking the relationship between the Catacomb Church in Russia (or large parts of it at least) and the Russian Synod in Exile among his crimes aganist Orthodoxy.


It is so pleasing to hear that my Patriarch has fallen under anathemas by your authority whatever that may be. Please do not snow an average layperson like me with selective applications of canons that I know little about (as also your alleged authority). His Beatitude Ignatius of Antioch is of apostolic succession.
Logged

Antiochian OC N.A.
GOCTheophan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #8 on: December 30, 2008, 08:14:35 AM »


This is a commentary, not a Canon. But at any rate, what was the impediment? Were there no other Orthodox Bishops available? Or were they available but unwilling to participate for some reason?

It references a canon.

Are you asking those questions sarcastically? I ask this in all honesty seeing as you yourself I have been given to understand once belonged under a Synod that could be described as "Old Calendarist". Bishop Germanos of the Cyclades was imprisoned by the government for ordaining priests. The others had come to see it would appear from some of their statements that the Old Calendarists were not the Church as such but rather some type of "watch dog", the New Calendar schismatics not having fallen in their view which was their reason for not consecrating more Bishops("We assure all the Church and State authorities that, having full awareness that we are only simple keepers of an institution of Pan-Orthodox importance as the old calendar is, and not representatives of a rebellious church, we shall never and in no case whatsoever carry out ecclesiastical acts such as the consecrations of bishops."- possibly the Metropolitan of Florina, Chrysostom, though I will have to verify this fact). There was still hope at that time for a restoration of order. You most know that in less grave circumstances single handed consecrations have been carried out.

"VI. Augustine's sixth question. Whether a bishop may be consecrated without other bishops present, if they are at so great a distance from one another that they cannot easily meet. "Gregory answered: In the English Church of which you are as yet the only Bishop, it is not possible for you to consecrate a bishop otherwise than alone. For how often do bishops come from Gaul who can assist as witnesses at the consecration of a Bishop? But, my brother, we wish you to consecrate bishops in order that they may not be separated by long distances, and thus there will be no lack, so that at the consecration of a bishop, other pastors may easily be present: for their presence is extremely useful."

The Ecclesiastical History of the English People.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 08:29:46 AM by GOCTheophan » Logged
GOCTheophan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #9 on: December 30, 2008, 08:21:09 AM »


It is so pleasing to hear that my Patriarch has fallen under anathemas by your authority whatever that may be. Please do not snow an average layperson like me with selective applications of canons that I know little about (as also your alleged authority). His Beatitude Ignatius of Antioch is of apostolic succession.
[/quote]

Please this is not difficult to understand.

The Oriental Orthodox Churches were anathemized by the fourth Ecumenical Council, the Council of Chalcedon and still to this day reject the Tome of St Leo the Great which was endorsed by that Ecumenical Council.

Your Church considers their saints saints, their Fathers Fathers, etc of the Orthodox Church. Therefore you are under anathema.

I do not doubt that you possess Apostolic Sucession in the formal sense but so do the Roman Catholics...Is the Pope of Rome in the Church according you?

We all make mistakes. Me probably more than you. However we all must seek to correct those mistakes.

Let me ask you this question....

Does Christ have One Will or Two? Is it heresy to confess that He has only One?
Logged
recent convert
Orthodox Chrisitan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian (N.A.)
Posts: 1,922


« Reply #10 on: December 30, 2008, 08:36:15 AM »

Jesus Christ has 2 wills; one divine and one human since He took flesh. The Coptic Church claims it is not monophysite.  Trying to understand the whole theology of this confusion the best example I found as fault in the Non-Chalcedonians was that some (evidently not all) chanted the Trisagion with the added "was crucified for us" (cited by Henry Chadwick in The Early Christian Church) There is no formal union with the designated Non-Chalcedonian churches and any intercommunion is based mostly on economy for isolated communities.

(Offensive terminology changed to something more appropriate, in accordance with forum rules.
Salpy)
« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 12:46:28 PM by Salpy » Logged

Antiochian OC N.A.
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 #11 on: December 30, 2008, 08:37:17 AM »

It references a canon.
Spiffing. Now answer the real question:
This is a commentary, not a Canon. But at any rate, what was the impediment? Were there no other Orthodox Bishops available? Or were they available but unwilling to participate for some reason?

His Beatitude Ignatius of Antioch is of apostolic succession.
And no doubt he was Ordained a Bishop by more than one Bishop in accordance with the 1st Apostolic Canon.

Now let's hear GOCTheophan's answer to my question.....
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
GOCTheophan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #12 on: December 30, 2008, 08:40:31 AM »

It references a canon.
Spiffing. Now answer the real question:
This is a commentary, not a Canon. But at any rate, what was the impediment? Were there no other Orthodox Bishops available? Or were they available but unwilling to participate for some reason?

His Beatitude Ignatius of Antioch is of apostolic succession.
And no doubt he was Ordained a Bishop by more than one Bishop in accordance with the 1st Apostolic Canon.

Now let's hear GOCTheophan's answer to my question.....

I told you the other Orthodox Bishops in Greece who were not in prison did not want to consecrate new Bishops because they felt that the New Calendarists were still the Church and they therefore did not want to alienate them further.

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 #13 on: December 30, 2008, 08:45:35 AM »

I told you the other Orthodox Bishops in Greece who were not in prison did not want to consecrate new Bishops because they felt that the New Calendarists were still the Church and they therefore did not want to alienate them further.
I see. So the New Calendarists and anyone in Communion with them are not the Church then?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
GOCTheophan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #14 on: December 30, 2008, 08:46:25 AM »

Jesus Christ has 2 wills; one divine and one human since He took flesh. The Coptic Church claims it is not monophysite.  Trying to understand the whole theology of this confusion the best example I found as fault in the monophysites was that some (evidently not all) chanted the Trisagion with the added "was crucified for us" (cited by Henry Chadwick in The Early Christian Church) There is no formal union with the designated monophysite churches and any intercommunion is based mostly on economy for isolated communities.

The Coptic Church clearly teaches that the Christ has ONLY One Will (and believe me I respect the Copts much more than any New Calendarist Church you care to mention) and they venerate as Saints and teachers those Anathemized by an Ecumenical Council.

And wrong the Patriarchate of Antioch has gone as lot further in saying that Fathers of the Oriental Orthodox are Fathers of the Church. Read the below if you do not believe me.

http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state13.php

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 #15 on: December 30, 2008, 08:48:24 AM »

I told you the other Orthodox Bishops in Greece who were not in prison did not want to consecrate new Bishops because they felt that the New Calendarists were still the Church and they therefore did not want to alienate them further.
I see. So the New Calendarists and anyone in Communion with them are not the Church then?
Does this also include anyone who thinks the New Calendarists and those in Commnion with them are the Church? Are they also not in the Church?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
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 #16 on: December 30, 2008, 08:49:40 AM »

I told you the other Orthodox Bishops in Greece who were not in prison did not want to consecrate new Bishops because they felt that the New Calendarists were still the Church and they therefore did not want to alienate them further.
I see. So the New Calendarists and anyone in Communion with them are not the Church then?
Does this also include anyone who thinks the New Calendarists and those in Commnion with them are the Church? Are they also not in the Church?

Perhaps it would be simpler if you just told us who exactly constitutes the Church.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
GOCTheophan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #17 on: December 30, 2008, 08:50:38 AM »

I told you the other Orthodox Bishops in Greece who were not in prison did not want to consecrate new Bishops because they felt that the New Calendarists were still the Church and they therefore did not want to alienate them further.
I see. So the New Calendarists and anyone in Communion with them are not the Church then?

New Calendarists are not the Church.

As for whether anyone in Communion with them is not the Church that is another question but at this point in history I believe it would be safest to say yes...No one in Communion with New Calendarists today is in the Church. I could ask you whether you believe the whole of the Latin Church fell away in 1056?
Logged
GOCTheophan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #18 on: December 30, 2008, 08:53:16 AM »

I told you the other Orthodox Bishops in Greece who were not in prison did not want to consecrate new Bishops because they felt that the New Calendarists were still the Church and they therefore did not want to alienate them further.
I see. So the New Calendarists and anyone in Communion with them are not the Church then?
Does this also include anyone who thinks the New Calendarists and those in Commnion with them are the Church? Are they also not in the Church?

Perhaps it would be simpler if you just told us who exactly constitutes the Church.

Those who continue to confess the historic Orthodox Faith and possess valid Apostolic Sucession and remain apart from all heretics and schismatics.

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 #19 on: December 30, 2008, 08:59:27 AM »

New Calendarists are not the Church.
Okie dokie. That's settled then. So the Churches of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Greece, Cyprus, Romania, Poland, and Bulgaria are out then

.No one in Communion with New Calendarists today is in the Church.
And there goes the Churches of Jerusalem, Russia, Serbia, Georgia, Bulgaria, Mount Athos.......


 
I could ask you whether you believe the whole of the Latin Church fell away in 1056?
You could, but I think you mean 1054.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
GOCTheophan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #20 on: December 30, 2008, 09:06:37 AM »

 "You could, but I think you mean 1054."

Thank you for correcting me.

Do you believe that the entire Latin Church fell away in 1054?

The historic Orthodox Church has expressed her mind on the Papal menion many times since it's inception by the Pope of Rome. Indeed it falls under the anathema of three Pan-Orthodox councils. If people choose to commit crimes that is there business and may God forgive us all...However by commiting certain crimes we legally place ourselves outside of the Church. This is what the New Calendarists have done.

However you know that there are more serious dogmatic issues seperating what you consider to be the present day local Churches from historic Orthodoxy (Sergianism, Ecumenism).

However back to my question- Do you consider the entire Latin Church to have fallen away in 1054?


« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 09:07:45 AM by GOCTheophan » Logged
recent convert
Orthodox Chrisitan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian (N.A.)
Posts: 1,922


« Reply #21 on: December 30, 2008, 09:08:42 AM »

Jesus Christ has 2 wills; one divine and one human since He took flesh. The Coptic Church claims it is not monophysite.  Trying to understand the whole theology of this confusion the best example I found as fault in the monophysites was that some (evidently not all) chanted the Trisagion with the added "was crucified for us" (cited by Henry Chadwick in The Early Christian Church) There is no formal union with the designated monophysite churches and any intercommunion is based mostly on economy for isolated communities.

The Coptic Church clearly teaches that the Christ has ONLY One Will (and believe me I respect the Copts much more than any New Calendarist Church you care to mention) and they venerate as Saints and teachers those Anathemized by an Ecumenical Council.

And wrong the Patriarchate of Antioch has gone as lot further in saying that Fathers of the Oriental Orthodox are Fathers of the Church. Read the below if you do not believe me.

http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state13.php


So now any New Calendar church is suspect & not worthy of respect? By whose authority? Personally I have been catechised to understand the old calendar observance is Orthodox especially since we are in communion with some old calendar churches. Saying I am wrong re Patriarch Ignatius is confusing to me; you say you respect the Coptic church but the Patriarch of Antioch cannot (because you are not in communion with him?)? Additionally Pascha remains in the old calendar. All I am receiving is almost anonymous instruction that the apostolic Patriarch of Antioch is anathema.....Not buying it. Anyway, whatever alleged rationalizations you may make re ther Patriarch and mononphysitism is moot since he was "anathema" since the implemenation of the new calendar. Just like blessed St Maria (Skobtsova) said re petty quibblers who rangled about this while hundreds of thousands of Orthodox died from Ottoman and Communist oppression.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 09:17:37 AM by recent convert » Logged

Antiochian OC N.A.
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 #22 on: December 30, 2008, 09:11:47 AM »

"You could, but I think you mean 1054."

Thank you for correcting me.

Do you believe that the entire Latin Church fell away in 1054?

The historic Orthodox Church has expressed her mind on the Papal menion many times since it's inception by the Pope of Rome. Indeed it falls under the anathema of three Pan-Orthodox councils. If people choose to commit crimes that is there business and may God forgive us all...However by commiting certain crimes we legally place ourselves outside of the Church. This is what the New Calendarists have done.

However you know that there are more serious dogmatic issues seperating what you consider to be the present day local Churches from historic Orthodoxy (Sergianism, Ecumenism).

However back to my question- Do you consider the entire Latin Church to have fallen away in 1054?




What do you care what I think? According to you I'm not only an heretic, I am outside the Church (which apparently consists of your own jurisdiction started by a single-handed cheirotonia of a Bishop and a few other strange groups).
So shouldn't you bunker down and get ready for the Apocalypse rather than waste time talking with those on the road to perdition? Smiley
« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 09:12:11 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
GOCTheophan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #23 on: December 30, 2008, 09:14:23 AM »

Jesus Christ has 2 wills; one divine and one human since He took flesh. The Coptic Church claims it is not monophysite.  Trying to understand the whole theology of this confusion the best example I found as fault in the monophysites was that some (evidently not all) chanted the Trisagion with the added "was crucified for us" (cited by Henry Chadwick in The Early Christian Church) There is no formal union with the designated monophysite churches and any intercommunion is based mostly on economy for isolated communities.

The Coptic Church clearly teaches that the Christ has ONLY One Will (and believe me I respect the Copts much more than any New Calendarist Church you care to mention) and they venerate as Saints and teachers those Anathemized by an Ecumenical Council.

And wrong the Patriarchate of Antioch has gone as lot further in saying that Fathers of the Oriental Orthodox are Fathers of the Church. Read the below if you do not believe me.

http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state13.php


So now any New Calendar church is suspect & not worthy of respect? By whose authority? Personally I have been catechised to understand the old calendar observance is Orthodox especially since we are in communion with some old calendar churches. Saying I am wrong re Patriarch Ignatius is confusing to me; you say you respect the Coptic church but the Patriarch of Antioch cannot (because you are not in communion with him?)? Additionally Pascha remains in the old calendar. All I am receiving is almost anonymous instruction that the apostolic Patriarch of Antioch is anathema.....Not buying it.

By the authority of the Church which has ANATHEMIZED the Papal Calendar in three Pan-Orthodox Synods.

I respect the Copts for their piety and their traditional values. Things lacking among the New Calendarists who accept such evils as artifical contraception. I do not respect their refusual to accept the Mind of the Church on Christology.

The fact remains that they are heretical in the understanding of the Orthodox Church. Read what I posted from your Bishops and than read the anathemas attached to the Council of Chalcedon and put 2 and 2 together.

I am not setting myself up as an authority. I am just stating what the Church confesses.

Logged
GOCTheophan
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


« Reply #24 on: December 30, 2008, 09:17:08 AM »

"You could, but I think you mean 1054."

Thank you for correcting me.

Do you believe that the entire Latin Church fell away in 1054?

The historic Orthodox Church has expressed her mind on the Papal menion many times since it's inception by the Pope of Rome. Indeed it falls under the anathema of three Pan-Orthodox councils. If people choose to commit crimes that is there business and may God forgive us all...However by commiting certain crimes we legally place ourselves outside of the Church. This is what the New Calendarists have done.

However you know that there are more serious dogmatic issues seperating what you consider to be the present day local Churches from historic Orthodoxy (Sergianism, Ecumenism).

However back to my question- Do you consider the entire Latin Church to have fallen away in 1054?




What do you care what I think? According to you I'm not only an heretic, I am outside the Church (which apparently consists of your own jurisdiction started by a single-handed cheirotonia of a Bishop and a few other strange groups).
So shouldn't you bunker down and get ready for the Apocalypse rather than waste time talking with those on the road to perdition? Smiley


Seriously I am curious...Please indulge me.

And who said I was a Matthewite?

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 #25 on: December 30, 2008, 09:19:16 AM »

By the authority of the Church which has ANATHEMIZED the Papal Calendar in three Pan-Orthodox Synods.
Golly! Just as well they didn't adopt the "Papal Calendar" then!

Seriously I am curious...
No you're not. There's nothing on TV and you're bored, that's all.
 Ad hominem against a poster one disagrees with.
 
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #26 on: December 30, 2008, 02:24:45 PM »

I am nipping this one in the bud.

1) Don't hijack threads
2) Don't misrepresent other posters.
3) Don't insinuate things about other posters.

Thread is locked to prevent further back and forth.

Fr Anastasios
Administrator
« Last Edit: December 30, 2008, 02:25:09 PM by Fr. Anastasios » Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Tags: bishops Ordination 
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 0.127 seconds with 54 queries.