My point on stigmata still stands. It is something that is not seen in Orthodoxy, and many of the things that accompany the receiving of so-called stigmata certainly are not known to Orthodox ascetic practice/experience.
You, and the authors of your quoted article, are not familiar with the Synaxarion entry for St. Gregory Palamas then?
"In addition to the other many and great gifts and preeminent qualities, which he had, he was also adorned with the wounds of Christ, bearing also in himself Christ’s, according to Paul."
(Emphasis added by me)
I don't see how that is equivalent to stigmata?
No mention of it in these links:St. Gregory Palamas - OCASt. Gregory Palamas - GOASt. Gregory Palamas - Antiochian Archdiocese St. Gregory Palamas - OrthodoxWikiSt. Gregory Palamas - AbbaMoses.comSt. Gregory Palamas - Monachos.netSt. Gregory Palamas Monastery
Not even Wikipedia
Nor Catholic Online
I don't really see how you think your argument that St. Gregory Palamas had stigmata has any legs at all... Maybe in the Byzantine Catholic Church, but certainly not in the Eastern Orthodox Church.
It seems to me that the phrase you quoted is simply just a figure of speech. He suffered for Christ and bore his Cross, thus he figuratively (and literally through his sufferings) "bore the wounds of Christ". We aren't to think of this literally, that he literally had scars on his wrists (or hands), a scar on his side and scars on his back... I would argue that any suffering of martyrdom or torture for Christ is bearing the Cross with him.
These people that suffered for Christ bore his wounds much more powerfully and truthfully than anyone who claims to have had a vision and claims they now wear the scars Christ wore....
The Most Holy Catholic Apostolic Assyrian Church of the East, founded by the Apostles Peter, Thomas, and the Disciplers Mar Mari and Addai, with jurisdiction over the entire East (confirmed numerous times by opposing patriarchs, including the papacy in 1288 via sacred bull of Nicholas IV);btw, we have no interest in what the pope of Rome has to say after they adopted the filioque.
And Antioch, according to the Ecumenical Fathers, has jurisdiction over all the East.
the holy church which is upholder of Syriac Christianity
That would be the Syriac Patriarch of Antioch.
and the sacred language of Aramaic
Which the Assyrians don't speak. Aramaic is only spoken by Melkites/EO and Maronites. And oddly enough, the Muslims of Malula.
who's Holy script was used by the Holy ProphetsNo, they used the (Paleo-)Hebrew script (Ragatz)
and our Lord the Messiah
Not exactly. He used the Aramaic alphabet and the Assyrians use the derived Eastern Syriac script.
to express the Divine Will affirms with the full might of its Apostolic Succession,
Having left the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church after the Third Council, not exactly.
being the only Church outside the Roman sphere,Romania? Moravia (Czech and Slovak lands)? Georgia? Armenia? Ethiopia? India? Yemen? Nubia?
that differences in communion between the Orthodox Church and Roman Catholic Church are merely political and that both are the two lungs of the Western Church in their respective cultural perspectives.
Since it is neither Orthodox nor in submission to the Vatican, how is it in the position to say that?
(Emphasis added by me)
Ditto what ialmisry said... The Antiochian Church is the true Church of the East. And the Eastern Orthodox Church is not "the other lung", we are the body of Christ (singular), we are the only true Church.
As for Padre Pio, my statement still stands that he is not a Saint. I greatly respect many people in the west, whether they be Mother Theresa, Pope John Paul II, the monastics or others. However, I don't believe they are Saints. They are certainly closer to the truth than others such as Ghandi, Buddha or the Dalai Lama, but they are still outside of the Church. I pray and hope that although their absence from the Church can be dangerous for them, that they are still led to God through their own faith and what truth may be in there.
Padre Pio was no Saint, as we said before, he led someone from Orthodoxy, and no Saint standing in the heavenly kingdom would actively lead people here away from Orthodoxy.
I hope and pray that he is in heaven, and that this "vision" is simply a deception of Satan. But we ultimately cannot truly know if he is or not, because it is up to God. But we can know for certain that this was not of God. "You will know them by their fruits", the fruit of this "healing" was not in line with Holy Orthodoxy, and thus we can conclude that it probably didn't have holy origins.
However, I won't say the healing was not from God either... It is certainly possible that the healing was from God, but Satan deceived these people into attributing it to Padre Pio so they would leave the safety of Christ's Church. I pray that the healing was from God and these people simply were deceived & led away by Satan.
No matter the origins, these people made a grave mistake. Let's pray they repent and return to Holy Orthodoxy.