Author Topic: The breakdown of the unity talks  (Read 507 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tonedawg

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
The breakdown of the unity talks
« on: August 04, 2015, 05:40:47 PM »
Hello everyone,

I'm not sure if this was touched on by another post, and if it did, please forgive me because I haven't found it, but does anyone know what happened after the agreed statements of the 90s between the two orthodox churches? It seems that both sides made so much progress together and we were on the verge of real unification. I know there were issues from mount athos and Russia from the EO side and Ethiopia from the OO side. Nevertheless, both sides seemed to agree on all things that basically divided us, especially the christological formulas and the wills and energy issue.

Thanks,

Tony

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,342
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2015, 05:44:34 PM »
Probably just the Holy Spirit preventing a union without repentance and conversion, based on political correctness and wishful thinking only.
Many energies, three persons, two natures, one God, one Church, one Baptism.

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,090
  • Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #2 on: August 04, 2015, 05:47:27 PM »
Pope Tawadros, on his visit to Russia, seems to have agreed on revamping the dialogue.  Let's see what happens.

(pay no attention to the troll Fabio)
« Last Edit: August 04, 2015, 05:48:01 PM by minasoliman »
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,342
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2015, 06:32:49 PM »
It's not trolling.

Just the reasonable assumption that the key decision makers involved stretched the kumbaya discourse to its natural limits and noticed that from that point on any action would either mean Chalcedonians treat the council as invalid or Non-Chalcedoneans subscribe to it.

*Any* union between these two groups necessarily means one of those things in concrete terms. Any person who acts as if the two churches were one has either proclaimed, particularly, that Chalcedon is optional, and therefore it is not what it proclaims to be (Ecumenical and mandatory), thus proclaiming it invalid, at least as an Ecumenical Council, *or* the person has accepted that it is indeed a valid Ecumenical Council and that separation is unjust insubordination.

There is no third option.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2015, 06:33:16 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many energies, three persons, two natures, one God, one Church, one Baptism.

Offline eddybear

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 640
  • Faith: post-Anglican, pre-Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Heading towards Diocese of Sourozh
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2015, 06:33:14 PM »
Here is an account of the meeting last October between Patriarch Kirill and Pope Tawadros.

http://theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/news/2014/10/historic-meeting-of-pope-tawadros-ii-of-alexandria-and-patriarch-kirill-of-Moscow-all-russia/

It sounds positive, but I don't know what has happened since.

Offline kijabeboy03

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
  • "The glory of God is in man fully alive."
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #5 on: August 04, 2015, 11:31:42 PM »
It's not trolling.

Just the reasonable assumption that the key decision makers involved stretched the kumbaya discourse to its natural limits and noticed that from that point on any action would either mean Chalcedonians treat the council as invalid or Non-Chalcedoneans subscribe to it.

*Any* union between these two groups necessarily means one of those things in concrete terms. Any person who acts as if the two churches were one has either proclaimed, particularly, that Chalcedon is optional, and therefore it is not what it proclaims to be (Ecumenical and mandatory), thus proclaiming it invalid, at least as an Ecumenical Council, *or* the person has accepted that it is indeed a valid Ecumenical Council and that separation is unjust insubordination.

There is no third option.

We're all aware that "ecumenical" is more an imperial Roman reference than it is a universal authority claim, yes? And honestly, given the number of our canons we Byzantine Orthodox ignore or sidestep with frequency, putting some of Chalcedon in that category would hardly be revolutionary :-D.
"This is the Apostolic Faith, the Orthodox Faith, and the Faith of the Fathers. Having this wonderful treasure, let us preserve it, let us keep it, and let us also use it in such a way that this treasure becomes the victory of Christ in us and in His Church." ~ St. Severus of Antioch ~

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,090
  • Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #6 on: August 04, 2015, 11:43:43 PM »
Given the apparent Orthodoxy of St. Dioscorus, I don't mind if we unify with those who renounce those post-450 councils or consider it of secondary importance to count with one's fingers how many councils one should dogmatically hold.
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline Dominika

  • Troublesome Sheep
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,480
  • Serbian/Polish
    • My youtube channel
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Sth different than my heart belongs to
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #7 on: August 05, 2015, 08:48:42 AM »
Here is an account of the meeting last October between Patriarch Kirill and Pope Tawadros.

http://theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/news/2014/10/historic-meeting-of-pope-tawadros-ii-of-alexandria-and-patriarch-kirill-of-Moscow-all-russia/

It sounds positive, but I don't know what has happened since.

There is constantly something happening, for instance:
http://doctorantura.ru/en/news/1787-sostoyalos-zasedanie-rabochej-gruppy-po-akademicheskomu-sotrudnichestvu-mezhdu-russkoj-pravoslavnoj-tserkovyu-i-koptskoj-tserkovyu-4

There is also a cooperation between Russian and Armenian seminaries at quite high level.

There was also an important in Greece last year:
http://www.cerkiew.pl/index.php?id=58&tx_ttnews%5Bpointer%5D=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=21511&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=58&cHash=b4e570695578f3335f17df7cb3b6f354
(I'm sorry the link is in Polish, but as I translated it from English, for sure you can find the original article somewhere).

And so on.

I think the main issue is that in the Church nothing can be introduced and adopted very fast; we should remember that EO and OO were out of communion for ages, and because of meeting each other in growing diaspora and new technologies the dialogue has occurred.

Fortunately, there is confirmed the teaching of both branches of the Orthodox Church is the same and there is sometimes even intercommunion and various common initiatives.. There is just need of time, and to discuss over the formalities (e.g patriarchal sees, diocesesis etc.) and the history narration.

I would love that EO hierarchy invited OOs to the Synod 2016 and the case of Oriental Churches was discussed, instead of some other controversial points.
Pray for persecuted Christians, especially in Serbian Kosovo and Raška, Egypt and Syria

Offline Tonedawg

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #8 on: August 05, 2015, 06:40:59 PM »
Probably just the Holy Spirit preventing a union without repentance and conversion, based on political correctness and wishful thinking only.
Repentance of what exactly? Might you elaborate on this?

Online TheTrisagion

  • The cat is back and its better than ever!
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,271
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #9 on: August 05, 2015, 06:53:40 PM »
Probably just the Holy Spirit preventing a union without repentance and conversion, based on political correctness and wishful thinking only.
Repentance of what exactly? Might you elaborate on this?
Before you get that elaboration, be aware that there are some on this forum who tend to be rather anti-Miaphysite.  :-\
Praise to be kelly the all-benificent for granting me permission to change my sig line.

Obligatory: "It's a mystery! Ask your priest/spiritual father. Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future. Marital fasting."

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,090
  • Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #10 on: August 05, 2015, 06:55:33 PM »
Probably just the Holy Spirit preventing a union without repentance and conversion, based on political correctness and wishful thinking only.
Repentance of what exactly? Might you elaborate on this?

I think he answered the question in his "no third option" post.  In other words, he does not believe in unity without one side repenting to the other.
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline Tonedawg

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #11 on: August 05, 2015, 08:57:17 PM »
Probably just the Holy Spirit preventing a union without repentance and conversion, based on political correctness and wishful thinking only.
Repentance of what exactly? Might you elaborate on this?
Before you get that elaboration, be aware that there are some on this forum who tend to be rather anti-Miaphysite.  :-\
I know and I have seen this before I decided to join this forum but I have also seen that there are many who aren't anti Mia-physite

Offline Tonedawg

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #12 on: August 05, 2015, 09:01:26 PM »
Probably just the Holy Spirit preventing a union without repentance and conversion, based on political correctness and wishful thinking only.
Repentance of what exactly? Might you elaborate on this?

I think he answered the question in his "no third option" post.  In other words, he does not believe in unity without one side repenting to the other.
So it's either one side repents for not accepting Chalcedon and then accepting it in full or the other sides repents of the "errors" of Chalcedon and doesn't force it on the other side. I don't see why there can't be a third option, why do we have to be conciliar fundamentalists? Is not Christ our aim, do we not confess the same Christ? Both God and Man who is fully United hypostatically?

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,090
  • Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #13 on: August 05, 2015, 09:13:35 PM »
I don't mind the third option.  St. Cyril practiced the third option, so I am down with it.
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline rakovsky

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,067
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #14 on: August 05, 2015, 10:39:36 PM »
Isn't there a true answer as to the question of whether Chalcedon's creed is rationally correct? If it is, wouldn't the ideal thing be for the Churches to say that and unite? Alternately, if Chalcedon's creed is incorrect, wouldn't the ideal be for our Eastern Orthodox Churches to cease considering it to be a major statement of the Orthodox faith?

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,090
  • Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #15 on: August 05, 2015, 11:07:19 PM »
Or devise a reunion formula that clarifies our beliefs and use that to make sure that our respective traditions are interpreted in light of this formula.
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Offline Minnesotan

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,140
  • From the Land of 10,000 Lakes
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #16 on: August 05, 2015, 11:53:02 PM »
Strictly speaking, aren't all the ecumenical councils (the councils themselves, maybe not the more basic truths that they simply reaffirmed) optional? I mean, the Church in 200 had not yet held any ecumenical councils, and yet its faith was hardly any less complete than that of the Church in 800. I don't think anyone would deny that Christianity would have been better off in the long run had there been no Arian controversy (for example), yet without those controversies there would have been no need for the councils, so I don't see how the councils can be called the foundation of the faith in any real sense. To say otherwise is to subscribe to the "linear" view of church history (some kind of Newmanesque doctrinal development view) and I'm not comfortable doing that. (Protestants try to have it both ways, they deny the developments that occurred in medieval Catholicism were legitimate, but on the other hand most of them who are intellectually honest do admit that the Reformation was a development -- since, after all, no one before then had taught "sola fide" as an essential doctrine in the way Protestants do). I'm not comfortable with such a view of church history because it implies that doctrines and/or practices that were okay at some point in the past are not okay now (or vice versa). Maybe that's just the change-hating Asperger's tendency in me. I'm not sure.

Ecumenical councils seem to be a relic of a bygone Constantinian era, anyway. With no emperor, the most that could happen now is a "pan-Orthodox synod". (Unless Akihito or one of his successors were to convert, but even then, there is no real continuity between Rome/Byzantium and Japan so it would be apples and oranges).

By analogy with the term "Gutenberg Parenthesis", I would like to propose the analogous concept of the "Constantine Parenthesis", which would mean that in some ways, from the standpoint of church/Christian history, the foreseeable future will have more in common with the pre-Constantinian era than it did with the era from Constantine to the modern era, and that this is good in many ways, maybe not so good in others.

Some might argue that the American Revolution dealt the deathblow to Constantinianism since it showed that it was possible to have a society with no official religion, that such a society was just as safe if not safer for Christians than a "Constantinian" society was, and that the more technologically modernized a society becomes, the more true this is. Others might set the endpoint earlier (the fall of Byzantium) or later (the fall of Tsarist Russia) depending on whether one takes a Western- or Eastern-centered view. Likewise, the start of the Constantinian Parenthesis is somewhat nebulous as well since Trdat and Ezana both converted before Constantine did, and Constantine himself did not enshrine Christianity as the official religion of Rome (Theodosius did). Nevertheless the general pattern seems to be valid overall.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2015, 12:02:36 AM by Minnesotan »
I'm not going to be posting as much on OC.Net as before. I might stop in once in a while though. But I've come to realize that real life is more important.

Offline minasoliman

  • Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
  • Section Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,090
  • Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic
Vain existence can never exist, for "unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain." (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.

Online TheTrisagion

  • The cat is back and its better than ever!
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,271
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #18 on: August 06, 2015, 08:42:37 AM »
Or devise a reunion formula that clarifies our beliefs and use that to make sure that our respective traditions are interpreted in light of this formula.
+1

Whether we like it or not, Chalcedon has a ton of baggage associated with it. Rather than try to shoehorn OO into Chalcedon or get EO to abandon it, it is much more profitable to look to the future and avoid the polemics that have plagued both houses for so many years.
Praise to be kelly the all-benificent for granting me permission to change my sig line.

Obligatory: "It's a mystery! Ask your priest/spiritual father. Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future. Marital fasting."

Offline Severian

  • Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me and help my unbelief!
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,738
  • The Patriarch Saint Severus of Antioch
    • St. Jacob Baradeus' Orthodox Christian Fellowship
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of Alexandria (Coptic)
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #19 on: August 06, 2015, 09:14:49 AM »
Welcome to the forum, Tonedawg
These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world. -The Lord Jesus

The Saviour is made of elements which are distinct from one another yet He is not two Persons. God forbid! For both natures are one by the combination. -St. Gregory Nazianzen

Offline seekeroftruth777

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 663
  • O Most Holy Theotokos save us!
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodoxy
  • Jurisdiction: GOARCH but my heart belongs to the JP
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #20 on: August 06, 2015, 09:23:30 AM »
Probably just the Holy Spirit preventing a union without repentance and conversion, based on political correctness and wishful thinking only.
Repentance of what exactly? Might you elaborate on this?

I think he answered the question in his "no third option" post.  In other words, he does not believe in unity without one side repenting to the other.
So it's either one side repents for not accepting Chalcedon and then accepting it in full or the other sides repents of the "errors" of Chalcedon and doesn't force it on the other side. I don't see why there can't be a third option, why do we have to be conciliar fundamentalists? Is not Christ our aim, do we not confess the same Christ? Both God and Man who is fully United hypostatically?

I would think because both view themselves as the fullness of faith while the other is atleast in error look at this way would the Eastern Orthodox or the Oreintal Orthodox allow reunion with Rome without the Catholic repenting of papal Infalibality, Original Sin, the Filioque, Prugatory, The Immaculate Conception , etc. if they did then why claim being the one true church? still I hope union happens in the appropiste way as the Copts are closer to the E.O. then say Catholics or most forms of Protestantism.
pray for the persecuted Christians in Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Syria, Occupied Palestine, Nigeria, Pakistan, Eriteria & Kosovo.

Lord Jesus Christ Son of God have Mercy on me a Sinner!

Offline Tonedawg

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #21 on: August 06, 2015, 03:37:44 PM »
Welcome to the forum, Tonedawg
Thank you Severian :-)

Offline seekeroftruth777

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 663
  • O Most Holy Theotokos save us!
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodoxy
  • Jurisdiction: GOARCH but my heart belongs to the JP
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #22 on: August 06, 2015, 03:58:43 PM »
by the way welcome to the forum Tonedawg and Is that a Coptic Icon in your Pic? it is beautiful, Coptic Icons are beautiful now correct me if I'm wrong but don't they seem even less realistic than many in the Eastern Orthodox Church
pray for the persecuted Christians in Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Syria, Occupied Palestine, Nigeria, Pakistan, Eriteria & Kosovo.

Lord Jesus Christ Son of God have Mercy on me a Sinner!

Offline Tonedawg

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Faith: Oriental Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox
Re: The breakdown of the unity talks
« Reply #23 on: August 06, 2015, 04:09:57 PM »
by the way welcome to the forum Tonedawg and Is that a Coptic Icon in your Pic? it is beautiful, Coptic Icons are beautiful now correct me if I'm wrong but don't they seem even less realistic than many in the Eastern Orthodox Church
Thank you Seeker, yes it's something that I made but it's not quite an icon. You are correct in that Coptic icons aren't as "realistic" as Eastern Orthodox icons, but we can even argue that a lot of Eastern Orthodox icons aren't meant to be realistic either. Coptic icons are more abstract, especially the neo-Coptic school. There is definitely a child like innocence to them. Some of the really old Coptic icons, that you can see in Coptic monasteries are similar in the sense that they are also abstract but some do retain certain Byzantine quality to them.