Topic: What do we call each other?

[Irish Hermit]

I think that all of the Orthodox synods have received and endorsed the Second Agreed Statement....

I do not think that the two Churches with which I am most familiar have done so, the Serbian and the Russian.   Serbia sent simply one laymen to the  meeting of the Commission and Russia sent two laymen.   What makes me doubt any endorsement by either the Church of Serbia or the Church of Russia is 1)  it is not an unimportant thing and I would know of it, and 2) there would have been a reaction from various conservative elements in both Churches and also in the Russian Church Abroad.  I suspect that the two Churches simply did nothing about the Agreed Statement but filed it on a shelf.   But I would be pleased to learn specifics if you think they have endorsed it, and I shall make enquiries from my end.

[Father Peter]

When I say 'Orthodox' on this forum I always mean my own Church, and will speak of your own communion with some form of modifier, unless I am speaking very generally.

I mean that all of the Oriental Orthodox Churches have accepted it, as it stands, and in so far as it says what it says.

I know that the Romanian Synod received it warmly. I am not sure what the status is with regard to other Eastern Orthodox Churches. I imagine the Antiochians have accepted it.

Father Peter

[Irish Hermit]

When I say 'Orthodox' on this forum I always mean my own Church, and will speak of your own communion with some form of modifier, unless I am speaking very generally.

Ah, this explains the confusion since you have reversed the terminology used by the hierarchs of both families in the Agreed Statement  They invariably use "the Orthodox" to mean 'the Eastern Orthodox" and they use "the Oriental Orthodox" to mean "the Oriental Orthodox." I tend to use their terminology given that it is the choice of both families in a high level document.

Second Agreed Statement:
http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state02.html

[Salpy]

This was split off from this thread:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,28731.msg453669.html#msg453669

[88Devin12]

When I use "Orthodox" i tend to mean the Eastern Orthodox Church, but I never really qualify it unless I'm being specific because I believe our two Churches are close enough to one another that we really hold the same faith and I pray that union isn't too far off...

[Salpy]

When I say 'Orthodox' on this forum I always mean my own Church, and will speak of your own communion with some form of modifier, unless I am speaking very generally.

Ah, this explains the confusion since you have reversed the terminology used by the hierarchs of both families in the Agreed Statement  They invariably use "the Orthodox" to mean 'the Eastern Orthodox" and they use "the Oriental Orthodox" to mean "the Oriental Orthodox." I tend to use their terminology given that it is the choice of both families in a high level document.

Second Agreed Statement:
http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state02.html

As I explained just last night (or was it this morning?) in another thread, either OO's or EO's may use the word "Orthodox" to exclusively refer to their Church, as long as they refer to other Churches with terminology that is polite.  Fr. Anastasios is the one who has set the policy, and as far as I know he has not been using the Second Agreed Statement as a guide for his policies here at OCnet.

[Irish Hermit]

I think that all of the Orthodox synods have received and endorsed the Second Agreed Statement....

I do not think that the two Churches with which I am most familiar have done so, the Serbian and the Russian.   Serbia sent simply one laymen to the  meeting of the Commission and Russia sent two laymen.   What makes me doubt any endorsement by either the Church of Serbia or the Church of Russia is 1)  it is not an unimportant thing and I would know of it, and 2) there would have been a reaction from various conservative elements in both Churches and also in the Russian Church Abroad.  I suspect that the two Churches simply did nothing about the Agreed Statement but filed it on a shelf.   But I would be pleased to learn specifics if you think they have endorsed it, and I shall make enquiries from my end.

Beyond this?

Statement of the Russian Orthodox Church on the Theological Dialogue
Decisions of the Holy Synod, Moscow, Russia, December 1994

The Synod of hierarchs, having heard the report of the Theological Commission of the on the question of the Second Agreed Statement and Recommendations to Churches (1990) of the Joint Commission between the Theological Dialogue of the Orthodox Churches, presented by His Eminence Metropolitan Philaret of Minks, President of the Theological Commission, has decided:

1. To approve the report of the Synodal Theological Commission;

2. To judge that the "Second Agreed Statement and Recommendations to Churches" cannot be considered as a definitive text and that it is necessary for the Joint Commission of the Dialogue between Orthodox Church and the Oriental Orthodox Churches to continue its work;

3. To give the Synodal Theological Commission the task of preparing a more detailed study of the the previous meetings of theologians of both sides as well as of the discussions with the members of the theological dialogue from other Orthodox Churches. Following these steps the Russian Orthodox Church will make its opinion known to the Joint Commission of the theological dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the Oriental Orthodox Churches;

4. Having in mind the need for the People of God, who - according to the message of the Eastern Patriarchs - are the "guardian of the ancient piety", to participate in the cause of unity, the Synod considers that the time has come for organizing a discussion of the question with the participation of the whole Church.

http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state11.php

Second Statement of the Russian Orthodox Church on the Theological Dialogue
Decisions of the Holy Synod, Moscow, Russia, December 1997

Having heard the report of the Synodal Theological Commission of the Russian Orthodox Church presented by His Eminence Metropolitan Filaret of Minsk and Slutsk, Patriarchal Exarch of All Belarus, on the history and theological pre-conditions for participation in the work of international Christian organizations and in bi-lateral dialogues between the Orthodox Church and the Oriental [non-Chalcedonian] Orthodox Churches, the blessed Bishops' Council decided:

1. To approve the report of the Synodal Theological Commission;

[...]

4. Having considered the information on the dialogue between the Orthodox and the Oriental [non-Chalcedonian] Orthodox Churches, to welcome the spirit of fraternity, mutual understanding and common aspiration to be faithful to the Apostolic and Patristic Tradition expressed by the Joint Commission of the theological dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the Oriental Orthodox Churches in "The Second Agreed Statement and Recommendations ot the Churches" [Chambesy, Switzerland, 1990].

"The Statement" should not be regarded as a final document sufficient for the restoration of full communion between the Orthodox Church and the Oriental Orthodox Churches as it contains ambiguities in some Christological formulations. To express hope in this regard that Christological formulations should be clarified in the course of studying the questions pertaining to the restoration of church communion between the two families of Churches of the Orthodox tradition of the Orthodox Churches.

5. To note that the Russian Orthodox Church has special historical and ecclesiastical reasons and grounds to promote the success of the dialogue with the Oriental Orthodox Churches. Our Church throughout her history has protected and defended the Orthodox East. An obvious example are the activities of the Imperial Palestine Society and of the Russian Orthodox Mission in Jerusalem, the works of Bishop Kyrill Naumov and Archimandrite Antonin Kapustin, the activities of Bishop Porfiry Uspensky in the cause of the reunion with the Coptic Church, of Prof. V. Bolotov of reunion with the Urmi Assyrian Nestorians, and of Prof. B. Turaev on the rapprochment with the Ethiopian Church.

6. To entrust the Holy Synod and udner its guidance the Department for External Church Relations, the Education Committee, the Department for Religious Education and Catechization, the Department for Mission and the Publications Board to develop a plan of scholarly conferences and symposiums, of the publication of theological and historical and informative nature which would help introduce clergymen and faithful of our Church to the problems and development of the theological dialogue with the Oriental Orthodox Churches.

http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state12.php

Thanks, Ia, these are valuable documents but extraneous to the intent of this thread as to how we call each other.  Would they be better discussed somewhere else, for example in the current  "Second Agreed Statement" thread?

[Irish Hermit]

When I say 'Orthodox' on this forum I always mean my own Church, and will speak of your own communion with some form of modifier, unless I am speaking very generally.

Ah, this explains the confusion since you have reversed the terminology used by the hierarchs of both families in the Agreed Statement  They invariably use "the Orthodox" to mean 'the Eastern Orthodox" and they use "the Oriental Orthodox" to mean "the Oriental Orthodox." I tend to use their terminology given that it is the choice of both families in a high level document.

Second Agreed Statement:
http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state02.html

As I explained just last night (or was it this morning?) in another thread, either OO's or EO's may use the word "Orthodox" to exclusively refer to their Church, as long as they refer to other Churches with terminology that is polite.  Fr. Anastasios is the one who has set the policy, and as far as I know he has not been using the Second Agreed Statement as a guide for his policies here at OCnet.

Is he aware of the official terminology used by the hierarchs of the two families?  It makes good sense and it is repectful to our hierarchs to follow their preferred use.

[Salpy]

The post you are quoting in reply 6 has been moved to:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,28756.0.html

[Salpy]

Is he aware of the official terminology used by the hierarchs of the two families?  It makes good sense and it is repectful to our hierarchs to follow their preferred use.

I guess you can ask him.  

I'm not sure if Fr. Anastasios' Church has accepted the Second Agreed Statement.

[Father Peter]

I don't see it is the 'Official Terminology' as you are trying to suggest.

It is A terminology used occasionally in this one document, and we don't know who translated documents or who decided on the terms used. Generally the documents speak of 'wto Orthodox families' and 'Orthodox Churches'

It's not a terminology I ever use.

Father Peter

[Irish Hermit]

It is A terminology used occasionally in this one document,

It is the *only* terminology used in the Second Agreed Statement, and frequently.

See http://www.orthodoxunity.org/state02.html

Generally the documents speak of 'wto Orthodox families' and 'Orthodox Churches'

In this you are correct but it occurs when documents are speaking of our two Churches together.  When they speak of them separately it is as "the Orthodox Church" (i.e., the Eastern Orthodox) and "the Oriental Orthodox."

[Father Peter]

I think that as a priest I would know if there is an official terminology. There isn't.

This is a non-issue you are trying to press.