Author Topic: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?  (Read 65862 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • A highly skilled and trained Freudian feminist slut
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,880
  • I am the Provisional Supreme Church Authority
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Mercenary Freudianism
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Feminist Coptic
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #360 on: April 18, 2015, 07:38:43 PM »
Isn't it Sunday morning there?  Go to Liturgy, bro.   
OC.NET is full of temptations, but in temptations we are enforced, remember about the thread "Temptation in the Desert: Rachel Weisz and the Undoing of Mor Ephrem". OC.NET helps in becoming unpassionate.

Quote
Oh you Greeks, you are all dumb!

An Athonite

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • A highly skilled and trained Freudian feminist slut
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,880
  • I am the Provisional Supreme Church Authority
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Mercenary Freudianism
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Feminist Coptic
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #361 on: April 18, 2015, 07:40:41 PM »
When you come back, you can reply:

An Ecumenical Synod did give Rome the first place and Constantinople the second place in Order of Precedence.

This Order of Precedence of Honor is the Ecumenical Primacy.  It cannot cease to exist.

Where do the canons refer to "Ecumenical Primacy" and define it as you have?  And where do the canons state that "It cannot cease to exist"? 

Quote
I am not talking about individual Sees.  I am talking about Ecumenical Primacy, which was decreed by an Ecumenical Synod.

Which one? 
OC.NET is full of temptations, but in temptations we are enforced, remember about the thread "Temptation in the Desert: Rachel Weisz and the Undoing of Mor Ephrem". OC.NET helps in becoming unpassionate.

Quote
Oh you Greeks, you are all dumb!

An Athonite

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,766
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #362 on: April 18, 2015, 08:20:46 PM »
Christos anesti!
An Ecumenical Synod did give Rome the first place and Constantinople the second place in Order of Precedence.

This Order of Precedence of Honor is the Ecumenical Primacy.  It cannot cease to exist.

Rome fell and was cut off from Church, Grace, Apostolic Succession and Ecumenical Primacy.  Now it passes to Constantinople.

Next is Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem etc.

I am not talking about individual Sees.  I am talking about Ecumenical Primacy, which was decreed by an Ecumenical Synod.
no matter how much your repeat your talking points, they do not become any truer.

Old Rome had the first place before the First Ecumenical Council. New Rome got its position from Ecumenical Council, i.e. its position was created by the Church. It does not come by divine origin.

The practice has been to let New Rome replace Old Rome since the latter's apostasy.  No Ecumenical Council did that, however.

Alexandria and Antioch had their position before Ecumenical Councils, but the Ecumenical Councils modified them. Ditto Jerusalem.

There is no Ecumenical Primacy, and hence you can not show us the Ecumenical Council decreeing it.
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

Offline Kyrillios Anthonios

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #363 on: April 18, 2015, 09:34:28 PM »
Rome was First in Honor, Constantinople was Second (now First) in Honor, Alexandria was Third (now Second) in Honor, Antioch was Fourth (now Third) in Honor and Jerusalem was Fifth (now Fourth) in Honor.

I am sure you are familiar with this Canon?  That "Honor" there is Ecumenical Primacy.

Can that Honor cease to exist?  It can only pass around if individual Sees fall or return if individual Sees are restored to the Church.

It is the Order of Precedence of Honor that determines that the Ecumenical Honor passes to Constantinople.  The same Order of Precedence of Honor determines that should Constantinople falls, the Ecumenical Honor would pass to Alexandria.  The same Order of Precedence of Honor likewise determines that should Rome be restored, the Ecumenical Honor would pass to Rome again.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,766
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #364 on: April 18, 2015, 09:52:35 PM »
Christus anesti!
Rome was First in Honor, Constantinople was Second (now First) in Honor, Alexandria was Third (now Second) in Honor, Antioch was Fourth (now Third) in Honor and Jerusalem was Fifth (now Fourth) in Honor.

I am sure you are familiar with this Canon? That "Honor" there is Ecumenical Primacy.
You have merely repeated your assErtion-as I pointed out, that doesn't increase its veracity.  First quote a canon, and then we will address your misunderstanding of it.

Can that Honor cease to exist?
 
the Church existed without it. So yes.

btw, while you are at it, show us the canon that spells out the specifics of that "Honor."
It can only pass around if individual Sees fall or return if individual Sees are restored to the Church.
you first have to demonstrate it exists, and then demonstrate that it can be "passed around."
It is the Order of Precedence of Honor that determines that the Ecumenical Honor passes to Constantinople.  The same Order of Precedence of Honor determines that should Constantinople falls, the Ecumenical Honor would pass to Alexandria.

you do know that the Phanar denies this, no?
The same Order of Precedence of Honor likewise determines that should Rome be restored, the Ecumenical Honor would pass to Rome again.
you first have to prove the existence of that underlying order, before talking of its "restoration."
« Last Edit: April 18, 2015, 10:02:44 PM by ialmisry »
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

Offline Bob2

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 828
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #365 on: April 18, 2015, 10:25:22 PM »
The Russians were in schism until 2007

Not exactly, ROCOR had continuously recognized communion with the Churches of Serbia and Jerusalem, and thus all of canonical world Orthodoxy.  They were following the ukaz issued by Patriarch Tikhon, although admittedly somewhat irregular look at the circumstances... remind me again what happened in 1917? To say that ROCOR was in schism, and had "wandered off the reservation" and was outside the fold of Orthodoxy is ridiculous.  Concelebrations with other jurisdictions (with approval from both bishops) occurred before the 2007 "formal" reunification, our parish has a semi-attached visiting priest that is MP and has celebrated with our rector for years before 2007.

Not quite accurate either. Prior to 2007 ROCOR was not part of Pan Orthodox activities in the United States, it did not participate in Sunday of Orthodoxy services, its priests and bishops did not commune or concelebrate with hierarchs and clergy of the then Standing Conference of Orthodox Bishops in the americas. Revisionist history will not help in bringing us together.

From Orthodoxwiki:
Quote
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Russian_Orthodox_Church_Outside_Russia

Before the reconciliation, ROCOR's status with regard to full communion was not entirely clear-cut. There was never a formal declaration of a break in communion made between ROCOR and most other Orthodox churches, though in many dioceses concelebration had been suspended. In others, concelebration was active.

I know for a fact that intercommunion and concelebrating was occurring in our diocese before formal reconciliation, and with regard to the "faithful" intercommunion happened by the boatful.

My main point was that JamesR's assertion seemed to imply that they lacked grace and had somehow left the faith, not taking into account the historical considerations and logistical matters of those in diaspora in determining how to deal with or not deal with the "godless regime."
« Last Edit: April 18, 2015, 10:32:58 PM by Bob2 »

Offline Kyrillios Anthonios

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #366 on: April 18, 2015, 10:37:27 PM »
That is the Canon, specifying Order of Precedence.  That is the Canon I have quoted.

The Church always has Order of Precedence.

Please stop embarrasing yourself and us all.

Offline ZealousZeal

  • Cosmic Knowledge Fish
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,980
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #367 on: April 18, 2015, 10:46:03 PM »
Please stop embarrasing yourself and us all.

Physician, heal thyself.
You want your belt to buckle, not your chair.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,766
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #368 on: April 18, 2015, 11:07:08 PM »
Christos anesti!
That is the Canon, specifying Order of Precedence.  That is the Canon I have quoted.
You didn't quote a canon. (hint: there is no canon that says "Second (now First)") To show that, give the citation reference.
The Church always has Order of Precedence.
So you claim.
So you have failed to prove.
Please stop embarrasing yourself and us all.
you are only embarrassing yourself.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2015, 11:08:36 PM by ialmisry »
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

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #369 on: April 19, 2015, 01:57:31 AM »
That is the Canon, specifying Order of Precedence.  That is the Canon I have quoted.

The Church always has Order of Precedence.

Please stop embarrasing yourself and us all.
I'm sorry, but you are the only person I see here embarrassing himself.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2015, 01:57:55 AM by PeterTheAleut »
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Stratopedarches
  • **************
  • Posts: 18,604
  • You're my guardian angel hiding in the woods
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Enemy State Orthodox Church Abroad
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #370 on: April 19, 2015, 01:59:59 AM »
That is the Canon, specifying Order of Precedence.  That is the Canon I have quoted.

That is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the Canon

Oh, well now it makes sense!
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #371 on: April 19, 2015, 02:04:13 AM »
That is the Canon, specifying Order of Precedence.  That is the Canon I have quoted.

That is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the Canon

Oh, well now it makes sense!
I see a lot of canon fodder there. ;)
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Kyrillios Anthonios

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #372 on: April 19, 2015, 09:18:02 AM »
So you don't know of the Canon regarding Order of Precedence?  That's your problem, not the Church's.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,766
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #373 on: April 19, 2015, 09:30:55 AM »
That is the Canon, specifying Order of Precedence.  That is the Canon I have quoted.

That is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the CanonThat is the Canon

Oh, well now it makes sense!
So you don't know of the Canon regarding Order of Precedence?  That's your problem, not the Church's.
Ah, now I see your problem-or rather, one of them.

Let me help you:
quote
kwōt
verb
1.
repeat or copy out (a group of words from a text or speech), typically with an indication that one is not the original author or speaker.
"he quoted a passage from the Psalms"
synonyms:   recite, repeat, reproduce, retell, echo, parrot, iterate; More
repeat a passage from (a work or author) or statement by (someone).
"the prime minister was quoted as saying that he would resist all attempts to “sabotage” his government"
mention or refer to (someone or something) to provide evidence or authority for a statement, argument, or opinion.
"they won't be here at all in three years time— you can quote me on that"
synonyms:   cite, mention, refer to, name, instance, specify, identify; More
put forward or describe someone or something as being.
"heavy teaching loads are often quoted as a bad influence on research"
2.
give someone (the estimated price of a job or service).
"the agent quoted a fare of $180"
STOCK MARKET
give (a company) a quotation or listing on a stock exchange.
"an organization that is quoted on the Stock Exchange"
noun
noun: quote; plural noun: quotes
1.
a quotation from a text or speech.
"a quote from Wordsworth"
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

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #374 on: April 19, 2015, 10:58:26 AM »
So you don't know of the Canon regarding Order of Precedence?  That's your problem, not the Church's.
Humor us. Show us this Canon regarding Order of Precedence. Show us that you're not just pulling it out of your nether regions.
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #375 on: April 19, 2015, 11:24:31 AM »
Well, it seems Alexandria, Cyprus, Greece, and Albania also treat OCA as autocephalous as they don't have parishes in the Us or Canada.

To be fair, one doesn't necessarily follow from the other.

I'm not saying it does. Just trying to follow thread's logic.
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline Kyrillios Anthonios

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #376 on: April 19, 2015, 12:02:59 PM »
You do know that Rome was given first, Constantinople second, Alexandria third, Antioch fourth and Jerusalem fifth in Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence, right?

And you do know that presently Constantinople holds first, Alexandria second, Antioch third and Jerusalem fourth in Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence, right?

I am guessing you don't even know this.  Yeah Autocephaly is still a looong way to go.  Try Catechism.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • Monahos.net: "Lawful Evil"; OC.net: "Chaotic Evil"
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #377 on: April 19, 2015, 12:27:21 PM »
Today we learn that search engines are blocked in Indonesia.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Stratopedarches
  • **************
  • Posts: 18,604
  • You're my guardian angel hiding in the woods
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Enemy State Orthodox Church Abroad
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #378 on: April 19, 2015, 01:03:13 PM »
So you don't know of the Canon regarding Order of Precedence?  That's your problem, not the Church's.

Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,766
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #379 on: April 19, 2015, 04:58:36 PM »
Christ is risen!
Today we learn that search engines are blocked in Indonesia.
yes, and the Pedalion as well (though that may not be a bad thing).
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

Offline Kyrillios Anthonios

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #380 on: April 19, 2015, 09:43:00 PM »
Are you telling me that you deny that Rome was given first, Constantinople second (presently first), Alexandria third (presently second), Antioch fourth (presently third) and Jerusalem fifth (presently fourth) in the Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence?

Yes or no.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,766
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #381 on: April 19, 2015, 10:13:32 PM »
Christos anesti!
Are you telling me that you deny that Rome was given first, Constantinople second (presently first), Alexandria third (presently second), Antioch fourth (presently third) and Jerusalem fifth (presently fourth) in the Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence?

Yes or no.
I am telling you the plain and obvious truth-those are your words, not the canons'.

Quote the canon you claim confirms your contentions. Then we'll deal with your misunderstanding of it.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2015, 10:14:08 PM by ialmisry »
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

Offline Kyrillios Anthonios

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #382 on: April 19, 2015, 10:18:40 PM »
So you deny that Rome was given first, Constantinople second (presently first), Alexandria third (presently second), Antioch fourth (presently third) and Jerusalem fifth (presently fourth) in the Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence?

You don't need Autocephaly.  You need Catechism.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,766
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #383 on: April 21, 2015, 10:48:03 AM »
Christos anesti!
So you deny that Rome was given first, Constantinople second (presently first), Alexandria third (presently second), Antioch fourth (presently third) and Jerusalem fifth (presently fourth) in the Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence?

You don't need Autocephaly.  You need Catechism.
I would say that you needed a dictionary, but since I've already given you the definition of "quote" from the dictionary, it seems your needs would lie in remedial reading.

Like I said, quote the canon you claim confirms your contentions-not repeat your pontifications. Then we'll deal with your misunderstanding of it.
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

Offline Kyrillios Anthonios

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #384 on: April 21, 2015, 11:31:49 PM »
Just answer:  Do you deny that Rome was given first, Constantinople second (presently first), Alexandria third (presently second), Antioch fourth (presently third) and Jerusalem fifth (presently fourth) in the Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence?

Do you deny this existing Orthodox Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence?

Offline Marc1152

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 14,838
  • Probiotic .. Antibiotic
  • Jurisdiction: Rocor
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #385 on: April 22, 2015, 03:10:33 PM »
OCA is Canonical, it is part of the Church of Russia.

But it is not Autocephalous.  The claim is not recognized by the majority of the Church.

Period.

Canonical is A and Autocephaly is B.

Are you asking me for Canon about Ecumenical Primacy?

And you called me ignorant?

Please.  Know the subject before you embarrass yourself.

I know the subject and a lot more.  I'm going to show you something called "proof":



Get one of ^these and then come back and we can talk.  Otherwise you are wasting our time because yes, you are most certainly ignorant of Orthodox theology, canonical discipline, and a whole host of other things.   

I don't think I have ever once seen someone post a picture of their diploma as a way to assert themselves and end a debate.

Very very impressive.
Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm

Offline jah777

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,153
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #386 on: April 22, 2015, 03:33:15 PM »
OCA is Canonical, it is part of the Church of Russia.

But it is not Autocephalous.  The claim is not recognized by the majority of the Church.

Period.

Canonical is A and Autocephaly is B.

Are you asking me for Canon about Ecumenical Primacy?

And you called me ignorant?

Please.  Know the subject before you embarrass yourself.

I know the subject and a lot more.  I'm going to show you something called "proof":



Get one of ^these and then come back and we can talk.  Otherwise you are wasting our time because yes, you are most certainly ignorant of Orthodox theology, canonical discipline, and a whole host of other things.   

Thanks Mor!  Now I can photoshop my name in and flash it around on various Orthodox forums any time my expertise is challenged.  ;)
« Last Edit: April 22, 2015, 03:34:22 PM by jah777 »

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #387 on: April 22, 2015, 04:39:59 PM »
Just answer:  Do you deny that Rome was given first, Constantinople second (presently first), Alexandria third (presently second), Antioch fourth (presently third) and Jerusalem fifth (presently fourth) in the Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence?

Do you deny this existing Orthodox Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence?
Kyrillios, neither Isa nor anyone else on this thread bears any responsibility to answer any of your questions until you first answer the request for proof that so many of us have made of you. Satisfy the burden of proof you have taken upon yourself, and then maybe we'll be able to actually engage your debate points.
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline ZealousZeal

  • Cosmic Knowledge Fish
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,980
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #388 on: April 22, 2015, 04:46:33 PM »
Just answer:  Do you deny that Rome was given first, Constantinople second (presently first), Alexandria third (presently second), Antioch fourth (presently third) and Jerusalem fifth (presently fourth) in the Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence?

Do you deny this existing Orthodox Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence?

Just skip all around this back-and-forth: provide the canon you're speaking of and there will be no way for anyone to deny it, right? Easy peasy.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2015, 04:46:59 PM by ZealousZeal »
You want your belt to buckle, not your chair.

Offline Kyrillios Anthonios

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #389 on: April 23, 2015, 09:54:35 PM »
I don't need to quote the Canon for you.  It is as it is.

The fact is that Rome was given first, Constantinople second (presently first), Alexandria third (presently second), Antioch fourth (presently third) and Jerusalem fifth (presently fourth) in the Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence.

If anybody would like to contest this, please make a public statement to provide some entertainment.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #390 on: April 24, 2015, 09:51:54 AM »
So you deny that Rome was given first, Constantinople second (presently first), Alexandria third (presently second), Antioch fourth (presently third) and Jerusalem fifth (presently fourth) in the Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence?

You don't need Autocephaly.  You need Catechism.
If you are referring to this:

Quote
Following in all things the decisions of the holy Fathers, and acknowledging the canon, which has been just read, of the One Hundred and Fifty Bishops beloved-of-God (who assembled in the imperial city of Constantinople, which is New Rome, in the time of the Emperor Theodosius of happy memory), we also do enact and decree the same things concerning the privileges of the most holy Church of Constantinople, which is New Rome. For the Fathers rightly granted privileges to the throne of old Rome, because it was the royal city. And the One Hundred and Fifty most religious Bishops, actuated by the same consideration, gave equal privileges to the most holy throne of New Rome, justly judging that the city which is honoured with the Sovereignty and the Senate, and enjoys equal privileges with the old imperial Rome, should in ecclesiastical matters also be magnified as she is, and rank next after her; so that, in the Pontic, the Asian, and the Thracian dioceses, the metropolitans only and such bishops also of the Dioceses aforesaid as are among the barbarians, should be ordained by the aforesaid most holy throne of the most holy Church of Constantinople; every metropolitan of the aforesaid dioceses, together with the bishops of his province, ordaining his own provincial bishops, as has been declared by the divine canons; but that, as has been above said, the metropolitans of the aforesaid Dioceses should be ordained by the archbishop of Constantinople, after the proper elections have been held according to custom and have been reported to him

It really doesnt back up what you're saying. It just stipulates stuff for Rome and Constantinople, not all the other sees.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #391 on: April 24, 2015, 09:59:08 AM »
Ah. I found what he is talking about.

Council of Trullo - 692, Canon 36.

Quote
Renewing the enactments by the 150 Fathers assembled at the God-protected and imperial city, and those of the 630 who met at Chalcedon; we decree that the see of Constantinople shall have equal privileges with the see of Old Rome, and shall be highly regarded in ecclesiastical matters as that is, and shall be second after it. After Constantinople shall be ranked the See of Alexandria, then that of Antioch, and afterwards the See of Jerusalem

Quinisext is viewed as part of the 5th and 6th Council, is it not?

PP
« Last Edit: April 24, 2015, 10:00:39 AM by primuspilus »
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #392 on: April 24, 2015, 12:34:20 PM »
I don't need to quote the Canon for you.  It is as it is.

The fact is that Rome was given first, Constantinople second (presently first), Alexandria third (presently second), Antioch fourth (presently third) and Jerusalem fifth (presently fourth) in the Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence.

If anybody would like to contest this, please make a public statement to provide some entertainment.
Everyone thinks you're lying. That's just the way it is.
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #393 on: April 24, 2015, 12:47:23 PM »
I don't need to quote the Canon for you.  It is as it is.

The fact is that Rome was given first, Constantinople second (presently first), Alexandria third (presently second), Antioch fourth (presently third) and Jerusalem fifth (presently fourth) in the Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence.

If anybody would like to contest this, please make a public statement to provide some entertainment.
So, is what I said above correct?

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #394 on: April 24, 2015, 12:55:27 PM »
Just for the sake of argument, the fact that the ROCOR returned to full, canonical communion with historic Orthodoxy through the omophor of the Patriarch of Moscow and did not submit in its North American parishes to the jurisdiction of the OCA over North America and such other autonomous or autocephalous Churches which might cover some territory where they exist. would seem to be circumstantial evidence that neither the ROCOR or even the MP truly view the OCA as an autocephalous body.  One could posit an argument that in say, Austrialia, where there is neither  an autonomous nor an autocephalous body but rather a collection of jurisdictions tied to a 'motherland' that would be proper, but if the OCA is in fact by consensus recognized as self-ruling and self-maintaining, why would ROCOR be subject at all in North America to Moscow? Didn't that just muddle the canonical inconsistencies in the so-called 'new world.'? 

I'm not sure that I buy this argument but there it is for comment at least.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • A highly skilled and trained Freudian feminist slut
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,880
  • I am the Provisional Supreme Church Authority
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Mercenary Freudianism
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Feminist Coptic
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #395 on: April 24, 2015, 01:32:22 PM »
Just for the sake of argument, the fact that the ROCOR returned to full, canonical communion with historic Orthodoxy through the omophor of the Patriarch of Moscow and did not submit in its North American parishes to the jurisdiction of the OCA over North America and such other autonomous or autocephalous Churches which might cover some territory where they exist. would seem to be circumstantial evidence that neither the ROCOR or even the MP truly view the OCA as an autocephalous body.  One could posit an argument that in say, Austrialia, where there is neither  an autonomous nor an autocephalous body but rather a collection of jurisdictions tied to a 'motherland' that would be proper, but if the OCA is in fact by consensus recognized as self-ruling and self-maintaining, why would ROCOR be subject at all in North America to Moscow? Didn't that just muddle the canonical inconsistencies in the so-called 'new world.'? 

I'm not sure that I buy this argument but there it is for comment at least.

I wouldn't say ROCOR was out of "full, canonical communion with historic Orthodoxy", they were in full communion with two of the fourteen or fifteen Churches and their status with regard to the rest was something different from that.  Nevertheless, I don't think "ignoring" the OCA is too high a price to pay to correct that problem, and I'm not sure that on its own says anything about how Moscow views the OCA.  In trying to resolve the division between ROCOR and almost everyone else, why should Moscow be uniquely bound to respect canonical discipline in America?  It was the first jurisdiction to arrive in America and that was eventually not respected by the others, they granted autocephaly to the OCA and that didn't resolve canonical issues here, so if America is already a mess, I'm not sure why everyone else can be dirty but not them.       
OC.NET is full of temptations, but in temptations we are enforced, remember about the thread "Temptation in the Desert: Rachel Weisz and the Undoing of Mor Ephrem". OC.NET helps in becoming unpassionate.

Quote
Oh you Greeks, you are all dumb!

An Athonite

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #396 on: April 24, 2015, 01:50:47 PM »
Just for the sake of argument, the fact that the ROCOR returned to full, canonical communion with historic Orthodoxy through the omophor of the Patriarch of Moscow and did not submit in its North American parishes to the jurisdiction of the OCA over North America and such other autonomous or autocephalous Churches which might cover some territory where they exist. would seem to be circumstantial evidence that neither the ROCOR or even the MP truly view the OCA as an autocephalous body.  One could posit an argument that in say, Austrialia, where there is neither  an autonomous nor an autocephalous body but rather a collection of jurisdictions tied to a 'motherland' that would be proper, but if the OCA is in fact by consensus recognized as self-ruling and self-maintaining, why would ROCOR be subject at all in North America to Moscow? Didn't that just muddle the canonical inconsistencies in the so-called 'new world.'? 

I'm not sure that I buy this argument but there it is for comment at least.

I wouldn't say ROCOR was out of "full, canonical communion with historic Orthodoxy", they were in full communion with two of the fourteen or fifteen Churches and their status with regard to the rest was something different from that.  Nevertheless, I don't think "ignoring" the OCA is too high a price to pay to correct that problem, and I'm not sure that on its own says anything about how Moscow views the OCA.  In trying to resolve the division between ROCOR and almost everyone else, why should Moscow be uniquely bound to respect canonical discipline in America?  It was the first jurisdiction to arrive in America and that was eventually not respected by the others, they granted autocephaly to the OCA and that didn't resolve canonical issues here, so if America is already a mess, I'm not sure why everyone else can be dirty but not them.       
I think that everyone has a hand in it. Alot of it, I think, has to deal with the cultural aspect. Antioch wanted to minister to the Middle EAsterners here in the US. Greeks, Bulgarians, etc. all did the same. However, I think the churches also saw the complete cash cow the US was going to be, and wanted a piece of the pie.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • A highly skilled and trained Freudian feminist slut
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,880
  • I am the Provisional Supreme Church Authority
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Mercenary Freudianism
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Feminist Coptic
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #397 on: April 24, 2015, 01:55:51 PM »
I think that everyone has a hand in it. Alot of it, I think, has to deal with the cultural aspect. Antioch wanted to minister to the Middle EAsterners here in the US. Greeks, Bulgarians, etc. all did the same. However, I think the churches also saw the complete cash cow the US was going to be, and wanted a piece of the pie.

I agree with you on both points. 
OC.NET is full of temptations, but in temptations we are enforced, remember about the thread "Temptation in the Desert: Rachel Weisz and the Undoing of Mor Ephrem". OC.NET helps in becoming unpassionate.

Quote
Oh you Greeks, you are all dumb!

An Athonite

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,766
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #398 on: April 24, 2015, 09:20:55 PM »
Christos anesti!
I don't need to quote the Canon for you.  It is as it is.
That it is.

but you are not, if you are trying to pass yourself off as a canonist.
The fact is that Rome was given first, Constantinople second (presently first), Alexandria third (presently second), Antioch fourth (presently third) and Jerusalem fifth (presently fourth) in the Ecclesiastical Order of Precedence.

If anybody would like to contest this, please make a public statement to provide some entertainment.
your inability to quote a basis for what you contend is entertainment enough.
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,766
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #399 on: April 24, 2015, 09:22:13 PM »
Christ is risen!
Ah. I found what he is talking about.

Council of Trullo - 692, Canon 36.

Quote
Renewing the enactments by the 150 Fathers assembled at the God-protected and imperial city, and those of the 630 who met at Chalcedon; we decree that the see of Constantinople shall have equal privileges with the see of Old Rome, and shall be highly regarded in ecclesiastical matters as that is, and shall be second after it. After Constantinople shall be ranked the See of Alexandria, then that of Antioch, and afterwards the See of Jerusalem

Quinisext is viewed as part of the 5th and 6th Council, is it not?

PP
Yes, but you shouldn't do his homework for him. That's how he has remained in ignorance.
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,766
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #400 on: April 24, 2015, 09:37:25 PM »
Christos voskese!
Just for the sake of argument, the fact that the ROCOR returned to full, canonical communion with historic Orthodoxy through the omophor of the Patriarch of Moscow and did not submit in its North American parishes to the jurisdiction of the OCA over North America and such other autonomous or autocephalous Churches which might cover some territory where they exist. would seem to be circumstantial evidence that neither the ROCOR or even the MP truly view the OCA as an autocephalous body.

No, as 1) the Tomos of autocephaly has a clause exempting uncanonical bodies from the OCA's automatic jurisdiction in North America 2) the Tomos only speaks of the jurisdiction Moscow had in 1970, and specifically does not speak for the jurisdictions which denied its jurisdiction over North America 3) the Act of Canonical Communion did not require, for instance, the commemoration of the Patriarch of Moscow by ROCOR.

One could posit an argument that in say, Austrialia, where there is neither  an autonomous nor an autocephalous body but rather a collection of jurisdictions tied to a 'motherland' that would be proper, but if the OCA is in fact by consensus recognized as self-ruling and self-maintaining, why would ROCOR be subject at all in North America to Moscow? Didn't that just muddle the canonical inconsistencies in the so-called 'new world.'?
Easy-the same economia that was exercised in not requiring ROCOR to commemorate the Patriarch of Moscow. If such economia was not applied-but rather the akreveia you are talking about-ROCOR would still be out of communion: how would that fix the canonical inconsistencies in the New (and Old-ROCOR has parished all over Western Europe) World? Why does Moscow not break communion now over the Phanar's intrusion into Estonia?

Btw, of course, until recently one of those jurisdictions in Australia was the OCA.
I'm not sure that I buy this argument but there it is for comment at least.
Moldavia.
Hungary.
Slovakia.
Serbian Temišvar.
Romanian Dacia Felix.
The Greek New Lands.
Qatar.
And of course the above mentioned Estonia.
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

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #401 on: April 25, 2015, 10:25:45 AM »
I know the subject and a lot more.  I'm going to show you something called "proof":



Get one of ^these and then come back and we can talk.  Otherwise you are wasting our time because yes, you are most certainly ignorant of Orthodox theology, canonical discipline, and a whole host of other things.   

Even at the diploma you are referred as Mor Ephrem. Awesome.
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Stratopedarches
  • **************
  • Posts: 18,604
  • You're my guardian angel hiding in the woods
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Enemy State Orthodox Church Abroad
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #402 on: April 25, 2015, 03:27:36 PM »
That is serious dedication to the OCnet username.

But it could be "Mason Edwards" or some really "white " name.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2015, 03:28:27 PM by hecma925 »
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,826
  • Excelsior
    • Archive of Our Own works
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #403 on: April 25, 2015, 03:30:13 PM »
Michael Epstein?

Matthew Edwards?

Melanie Edelman?
https://archiveofourown.org/users/Parakeetist/works Warning: stories have mature content.

"Some people only feel good when they are praising the Lord." - Coptic bishop

Mt. 21:31 Jesus said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you that tax collectors and harlots enter the kingdom of God before you."

"Our Lord will *never* stop loving us." - Fr. Michael P.

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Stratopedarches
  • **************
  • Posts: 18,604
  • You're my guardian angel hiding in the woods
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Enemy State Orthodox Church Abroad
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #404 on: April 25, 2015, 03:41:48 PM »
^Good ones!

Maybe he went with the more approachable "Mike" or "Matt".

Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"