Author Topic: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim  (Read 18031 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Iconodule

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,370
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #90 on: March 10, 2011, 09:03:50 PM »
The above post is an example of the type of internet polemic that is not reflective of the life of our Holy Metropolis.

Are you saying that Fr. Ambrose is not accurately representing the views of your church?
Quote
When a time revolts against eternity, the only thing to set against it is genuine eternity itself, and not some other time which has already roused, and not without reason, a violent reaction against itself.
- Berdyaev

If you would like a private forum for non-polemical topics, comment here.

Online Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,332
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #91 on: March 10, 2011, 09:05:58 PM »
The above post is an example of the type of internet polemic that is not reflective of the life of our Holy Metropolis.

Are you saying that Fr. Ambrose is not accurately representing the views of your church?

Fwiw, it was the group that Fr. Anastasios is in that I had in mind when I said the following earlier in the thread: "And then we have groups saying officially that there is no grace, but a significant number of the people in that group think that the official position goes too far and a more agnostic approach is warranted."

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #92 on: March 10, 2011, 09:57:47 PM »
To be fair he did provide a link that shows Patriarch Bartholomew celebrating mass here http://www.trueorthodoxy.org/heretics_world_orthodoxy_bartholomew.shtml
"On June 29, 1995, in the Basilica of St. Peter in Rome, Bartholomew and Pope John Paul II concelebrate a televised Papal High Mass."
And something on each Patriarch here
http://www.trueorthodoxy.org/heretics_world_orthodoxy.shtml

 

On two occasions Patriarch Bartholomew has participated in a limited way in the Liturgy of the Word at a Mass celebrated in the Vatican. The Patriarch has attended Mass, NOT vested in eucharistic vestments but simply in his bishop's mandyas (see the photos) which is worn by non-celebrating bishops at any liturgical service.  

His deacon has read the Gospel in Greek and a Latin deacon in Latin. He also offered some prayer during the Liturgy of the Word; after that he has retired to the side and sat down for the rest of the Mass.

He has taken no part in the actual Eucharist and nor has he partaken of communion. This is a far cry from concelebration of the Eucharist as claimed.

The photos show the truth of what I am saying.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2011, 09:59:39 PM by Irish Hermit »

Offline LizaSymonenko

  • Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,626
    • St.Mary the Protectress Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #93 on: March 10, 2011, 11:02:50 PM »

Thank YOU Fr. Ambrose for clearing that up.

I can now sleep soundly tonight.
Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria

Offline Saint Iaint

  • This Poster Has Ignored Multiple Requests to Behave Better
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 624
  • The Truth Shall Be Reviled
    • Christ Conquers
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #94 on: March 11, 2011, 01:17:55 PM »

Yes, I believe that striving for the reunification of all of God's children is both proper and Orthodox.

 

Striving for "Reunification" with Roman Catholics or even the Protestants is one thing... but what's up with all of the other Malarkey?

Did you watch the video linked to by Yeshua-is-IAM? Did you see how in the outdoor 'ceremonies' it was all gloomy and windy? They were trying to light the candles on some pagan thing and the wind was just blowing! They were having a hard time!

Ha! There was even one part where they were saying  some gobbledy-gook and the thunder crashes and drowns them all out... Awesome.

Anyhow, I could perhaps see having dialogue (as opposed to worship 'ceremonies') with other Trinitarian Christians... but what is the point of allowing all of that booga-booga to be put on an equal footing on the world stage with Holy Orthodoxy and the unique Light of the Truth that is Jesus Christ and His Holy Church?!?

Why did He even bother revealing Himself to us?

Why did He even bother founding His Church?

If we are to unite as Christians under the Banner of Jesus Christ then we must only unite under the Banner of Truth - for they are One and the same.

I tried to put myself in the shoes of those Bishops in the video - who were present at those wacky 'ceremonies'... and I asked myself what I would have done had that been me.

My answer (to myself that is) was and is:

I would have tried to gather as many of my Orthodox and Christian brothers that would follow... and I would have simply walked out.

And in the act of our little Orthodox congregation leaving that malarkey behind, we would have showed ourselves absolutely Orthodox and proper in holding the Truth of Christ above all.

I've seen video of shirtless, 'Chippendales'  men performing for the pope in the Vatican! What are they doing?!?

Christ overturned tables and chased moneychangers from the Temple (with a scourge?)... What does He make of this nonsense?

God desires that we worship Him in Spirit and in Truth. Thus He desires that we worship Him!

He became a Man so we know Who He Is... We have no excuse.

Quote from: Yeshua-is-IAM
Do you want your Orthodox church really united with the Catholics as Patriarch Bartholomew is trying to do?

No.

Quote
 

Do you see what the Roman Catholics are engaged in and allowing?  Pagan tribes in their churches!  Do you want your communion united with this?

No way man.

†IC XC†
†NI KA†
Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute...

Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.

Offline Saint Iaint

  • This Poster Has Ignored Multiple Requests to Behave Better
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 624
  • The Truth Shall Be Reviled
    • Christ Conquers
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #95 on: March 11, 2011, 01:17:55 PM »
 

Do you use Jewish doctors as Asterikkos pointed out? (Quinisext, Canon 11)

No. I feel that a Christian would care more for me. If the man follows the Talmud - I could be in deep trouble.

Quote

You, as a lay person, can't just  pick up the Rudder or some similar work and say, I like this one, or  Hey, this one is cool, or the always popular 'Oh, no, that one doesn't apply anymore.'  Nor can any one priest, Elder, Bishop etc..with their own point of view.

And, don't post claims about 'masses' and 'concelebrating' without sourcing. Otherwise you are idly gossiping.

Did you even watch the video? Obviously not.

Quote
You are free to have your own opinion, but you are bound by the same set of facts as are we all. How about Jewish lawyers or butchers or bakers?


Not if I could help it... Their 'holiest' texts say that it's OK for them to steal from me, in fact say that we (as 'Gentiles') are outside of the protection of the Law and that God has exposed our money as 'up for grabs' to them.

Quote
Do you search all of your groceries to make certain that they don't have a kosher rabbinical seal on them?
 

Yes, as a matter of fact I do try to avoid giving them any money (I also fully support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement)... Why should the (not inconsequential) costs of Kosher certification be passed along to non-Pharisaic consumers - who just happen to make up the vast majority (98%) of those who actually buy the products?

†IC XC†
†NI KA†
Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute...

Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.

Offline Saint Iaint

  • This Poster Has Ignored Multiple Requests to Behave Better
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 624
  • The Truth Shall Be Reviled
    • Christ Conquers
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #96 on: March 11, 2011, 01:17:55 PM »
Yeshua-is-IAM,

This site might interest you:

Orthodox Christian
 

†IC XC†
†NI KA†
 
Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute...

Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.

Offline Saint Iaint

  • This Poster Has Ignored Multiple Requests to Behave Better
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 624
  • The Truth Shall Be Reviled
    • Christ Conquers
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #97 on: March 11, 2011, 01:18:02 PM »
Am I going to go to hell for saying the Lord's Prayer with a buncha guys on skidrow?

Did you participate in a prayer of invocation to the 'goddess Isis' with them in the next sentence as well?

†IC XC†
†NI KA†
Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute...

Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.

Offline CBGardner

  • Site Supporter
  • High Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 614
  • Ask w/ tears, seek w/ obedience, knock w/ patience
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #98 on: March 11, 2011, 01:53:08 PM »
There are many claims the Patriarch Bartholomew is a mason. Does anyone know about the validity of this?

Quote from: http://ecumenizm.tripod.com/ECUMENIZM/id29.html
486 The beginning of modernism in the bosom of the Church of Constantinople coincides with the first years of the 20th century, "when Patriarchs of Constantinople would go to England to get theological education and there joined Masonic lodges. (See the collection: "Protests of the Orthodox World against the Visit of the Patriarch of Constantinople to the Pope of Rome in December 1987. Published by "Riurik", p. 5; journal Orthodoxy or Death, No. 1, Moscow, 1997, pp. 66-7). Meletius (Metaxakis) was known under No. 44 in the Masonic lodge "Harmony", as stated by the Masonic publication "Pythagore - Equerre" (vol. 4, part 7 - 8, 1935). His brothers-successors were also high-ranking Masons. Basileus III (Georgiadis) was a member of the English lodge "Valewood"; Athenagoras (Spire) (the one who willfully lifted the anathema off the Latins) was the 30th degree Mason in the lodge "Athenian East" (Orthodoxos Typos, 16.7.1982); the late Dimitri (Papandopulos), too, was one of them. The present "Patriarch" Bartholomeos (Archondonis) was elected the Chairman of the Masonic lodge "H.A.N."
http://mymartyrdom.com/orthomason.htm
Authentic zeal is not directed towards anything but union in Christ, or against anything but our own fallenness.

"Beardliness is next to Godliness."- Asteriktos

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #99 on: March 11, 2011, 02:01:13 PM »
We are all God's children and it is not for me to question or doubt the Orthodoxy of any of the posters whose opinions on this thread differ from those that I and others have expressed.

But I do want the non-Orthodox visitors or inquirers who may have stumbled upon this thread to truly understand that the harshest opinions expressed here do not represent the position or teachings of the traditional Orthodox Patriarchates and their local churches or of Orthodoxy as a whole.

Orthodoxy can be a demanding and difficult Faith to follow, but it is neither hateful, vengeful nor close-minded.

Take them for what they are worth and consider that you can find troubling and extreme views from a Catholic Traditionalist or an Evangelical or any manner of denomination that do not necessarily represent the views and teachings of those faiths as well.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #100 on: March 11, 2011, 06:29:32 PM »
Yeshua-is-IAM,

This site might interest you:

Orthodox Christian
 

†IC XC†
†NI KA†
 
Thank you for the link.
 
I do believe that many who are pro-ecumenism did NOT watch the video.

Also those who are arguing the importance of the Canon of the Holy Apostles, I'll cite another source for you.


This excerpt (taken in fair use) is from:

Service book of the Holy Orthodox-Catholic Apostolic Church
by: Isabel Florence Hapgood - revised edition with endorsement from Patriarch Tikhon

Page 327 - Order of Electing and Consecrating a Bishop - midway down page

Then the bishop-elect is led upon the head of the eagle, and after the Proto-Deacon hath proclaimed his preferment, as above described, and hath placed him on the head of the eagle, the Bishop saith to him:

Declare unto us, also, what thou thinkest concerning the Canons of the holy Apostles and the holy Fathers, and the traditions and regulations of the Church:

And the Bishop-elect immediately readeth, in a loud voice, the THIRD CONFESSION OF FAITH:

In this my confession of the holy faith, I promise to observe the Canons of the holy Apostles, and of the Seven Ecumenical Councils, and of the pious Provincial Councils, the traditions of the Church, and the decrees, orders and regulations of the Holy Fathers.  And all things whatsoever they have accepted I also accept; and whatsoever things they have rejected those will I also reject.
.... END....

So here we have the THIRD CONFESSION OF FAITH (It was all caps in the service book)  The Bishop-elect agrees to accept ALL THINGS (Canons) the holy Apostles & Fathers have accepted, and reject all things they have rejected.

This is in lieu of people saying the Canons have a "grayer area".

Canon violation that calls for clergy to be deposed & excommunicated (that the clergy clearly agreed to) should be followed. 

I ask though that everybody forgive any mistakes I have made, I'm trying to be upfront, truthful, and honest as possible.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline LizaSymonenko

  • Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
  • Global Moderator
  • Hoplitarches
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,626
    • St.Mary the Protectress Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #101 on: March 11, 2011, 07:08:39 PM »
It's a disturbing video to be sure.

However, I cannot believe that Patriarch Bartholomew would agree with walking through aboriginal purifying smoke.

I also know that I don't know much of anything.   However, I have faith that our hierarchs would not lead us astray.  Maybe, they know something we don't.  Maybe, they have a "plan" that we are simply not aware of.

Personally, you wouldn't find me sitting in those pews letting that smoke envelope me and someone cover me with some multicolored cloth.  I would have beat a hasty retreat, or stood up and made a spectacle of myself!   ;)  

Gosh.....I felt like I was betraying Orthodoxy when I attended a ByzCatholic service...(I was taking icon writing lessons at their church, and it happened to be some holiday, and class was delayed...so, I went in to take a peak.)  I can't imagine attending something like the video showed.  Even though they talked of Christ, I didn't see Him anywhere.



« Last Edit: March 11, 2011, 07:08:50 PM by LizaSymonenko »
Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria

Online Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,332
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #102 on: March 11, 2011, 07:20:05 PM »
I do believe that many who are pro-ecumenism did NOT watch the video.

I can't speak for others, but I have certainly watched such videos, read related books, read countless articles on the internet, etc. over the years. I used to be quite anti-ecumenical--obnoxiously, irrationally so (I am not implying that you are obnoxious or irrational, I'm just speaking about myself).

Offline android

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 161
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #103 on: March 11, 2011, 10:46:29 PM »
"Jesus ate with tax collectors and prostitutes out of love; ergo, Jesus was a tax collector and of ill-repute."

-- The applied logic of tinfoil hate "Orthodox" whose faith revolves almost exclusively about fighting the battle of ecumenism and calendars with their fellow Orthodox as opposed to focusing on the gospel.

Seriously, without those 2 issues and the laundry list of enemies to rail against, there really isn't much more to the "Genuine" or "Traditional" orthodox churches.

I'm sure Nestorians, Arians and others had the same self-righteous, forest-for-the-trees, besieged mentality that these groups do.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2011, 10:49:52 PM by android »

Offline Iconodule

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,370
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #104 on: March 11, 2011, 10:56:21 PM »
I am anti-ecumenist insofar as I think almost everything under the umbrella of "ecumenism" is a bad idea, but I think the cries of "heresy!" tend to be hyperbolic.

As for the canons, it's true, our hierarchs should not be praying with heretics. The canons exist against it because of the possibility that it make the heretics seem almost legitimate. And, if we are honest, we must admit that this happens at many of these ecumenical meetings.

But the canons don't apply themselves, and, while breach of canons is unfortunate, it is not the kind of deal-breaker some make it to be. As has been pointed out already, many canons have been routinely ignored or broken throughout the Church's history. 
Quote
When a time revolts against eternity, the only thing to set against it is genuine eternity itself, and not some other time which has already roused, and not without reason, a violent reaction against itself.
- Berdyaev

If you would like a private forum for non-polemical topics, comment here.

Offline android

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 161
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #105 on: March 12, 2011, 08:45:36 AM »
I am anti-ecumenist insofar as I think almost everything under the umbrella of "ecumenism" is a bad idea, but I think the cries of "heresy!" tend to be hyperbolic.

As for the canons, it's true, our hierarchs should not be praying with heretics. The canons exist against it because of the possibility that it make the heretics seem almost legitimate. And, if we are honest, we must admit that this happens at many of these ecumenical meetings.

But the canons don't apply themselves, and, while breach of canons is unfortunate, it is not the kind of deal-breaker some make it to be. As has been pointed out already, many canons have been routinely ignored or broken throughout the Church's history.  

I'm anti-betraying Orthodoxy. I don't see "mere membership" in an organization geared towards healing wounds to be a betrayal. We should take a humble and loving spirit with us into the world, without giving in on theological matters.

I'm not 100% happy with the joint statements and would be 100% opposed to a reconciliation, except one where, in effect, the heterodox became orthodox- yet, the hysterics of the "genuine", "traditional" and other splinter groups is beyond the pale.

We are supposed to work with our one holy catholic and apostolic church and provide direction, correction and encouragement in love. Severing oneself such that you are floating adrift, without apostolic succession, in anger, and traveling down a road of pride/ego (we few are the "true" Christians and everyone else is whore of babylon) over 2 concepts/issues (the calendar and ecumenism) of tangential relevance/importance to the primary missions of the church seems patently unadvisable.

Some people look for reasons to fight, enemies, heretics and take great and disturbing pleasure in attempting to be a part of some tradition of opposition to authority that does exist within Orthodoxy. It's a lot more fun/inspiring to be railing, fighting and seeing oneself as beseiged and campaigning than it is sitting in quite contemplation....there have been many justified examples of fighting the man in Orthodoxy but these folks seem like they are forcing it.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2011, 08:52:28 AM by android »

Offline Gypsy

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 77
  • St. Theodosia, Defender of the Holy Icons
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #106 on: March 12, 2011, 09:15:29 AM »
Thank you Podkarpatska for your comment of a few posts ago.
Wish I could figure out how to copy your words and insert - here!

Inquirers are indeed going to 'stumble' on this thread and wonder what sort of Faith is this Orthodoxy as a whole!
  Fortunately - even a very green inquirer like myself can figure out that there are very rational, thoughtful and prayerful people in Orthodoxy who take the time to post in same fashion...!  Android, Bogdan, Ialmisry and the other Fathers and Elders whose words make thing clearer and In a non inflammatory manner - yes - they are the posts that I look for......

Even when you may disagree - it is respectful words and intentions used that make me think through the position and follow up with research.  The rest I try to ignore.  It was nice of you to realize we are watching and reading....

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #107 on: March 12, 2011, 09:30:15 AM »
I am anti-ecumenist insofar as I think almost everything under the umbrella of "ecumenism" is a bad idea, but I think the cries of "heresy!" tend to be hyperbolic.

As for the canons, it's true, our hierarchs should not be praying with heretics. The canons exist against it because of the possibility that it make the heretics seem almost legitimate. And, if we are honest, we must admit that this happens at many of these ecumenical meetings.

But the canons don't apply themselves, and, while breach of canons is unfortunate, it is not the kind of deal-breaker some make it to be. As has been pointed out already, many canons have been routinely ignored or broken throughout the Church's history. 

This is where I disagree some.  The Canons of the Holy Apostles is the reason we have Orthodoxy.  Without the Canon of the church, the Orthodox can basically "do anything" including become Protestant (which some argue ecumenism is) or allow tribal pagans to do rituals right through the royal doors.

We must follow the Canon.  As a layman, I see a tremendous and great importance in this.  The Bishop's

Now I'm NOT saying if a Bishop or Priest happens to get snapped in a photo or two it makes them look bad etc. that they are violating Canon.  (ie - they were in the wrong spot at the wrong time and people label it as an issue) I'm saying that time and time again if photos, videos, and witnesses can testify - any member of a clergy worshiping & conducting services outside of Orthodoxy that they are breaking Canon time and time again.  The Canon of the Holy Apostles is vitally important or else the Bishop would not have to give his THIRD CONFESSION of faith which directly states he will follow the Canon.

I've posted many photos from many sources not just "shaky sources".  The videos have a ton of videos (spliced together) over time of the Orthodox doing this.

The question I hope many of you will decide to ask yourself - If you truly believe that any member of the clergy, even in the sacred position of a Patriarch, has the right under Canon itself to violate the Canon of the Holy Apostles.

Canon 65: If any Clergyman, or Layman, enter a synagogue of Jews, or of heretics, to pray, let him be both deposed and excommunicated.
"For what portion hath a believer with an infidel?" (II Cor. 6:15)

Love & Blessings.

(I still can't find the Holy Apostles Canon about going to a Jewish physician)
http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/cannons_apostles_rudder.htm



I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #108 on: March 12, 2011, 09:33:45 AM »
I am anti-ecumenist insofar as I think almost everything under the umbrella of "ecumenism" is a bad idea, but I think the cries of "heresy!" tend to be hyperbolic.

As for the canons, it's true, our hierarchs should not be praying with heretics. The canons exist against it because of the possibility that it make the heretics seem almost legitimate. And, if we are honest, we must admit that this happens at many of these ecumenical meetings.

But the canons don't apply themselves, and, while breach of canons is unfortunate, it is not the kind of deal-breaker some make it to be. As has been pointed out already, many canons have been routinely ignored or broken throughout the Church's history.  

I'm anti-betraying Orthodoxy. I don't see "mere membership" in an organization geared towards healing wounds to be a betrayal. We should take a humble and loving spirit with us into the world, without giving in on theological matters.

I'm not 100% happy with the joint statements and would be 100% opposed to a reconciliation, except one where, in effect, the heterodox became orthodox- yet, the hysterics of the "genuine", "traditional" and other splinter groups is beyond the pale.

We are supposed to work with our one holy catholic and apostolic church and provide direction, correction and encouragement in love. Severing oneself such that you are floating adrift, without apostolic succession, in anger, and traveling down a road of pride/ego (we few are the "true" Christians and everyone else is whore of babylon) over 2 concepts/issues (the calendar and ecumenism) of tangential relevance/importance to the primary missions of the church seems patently unadvisable.

Some people look for reasons to fight, enemies, heretics and take great and disturbing pleasure in attempting to be a part of some tradition of opposition to authority that does exist within Orthodoxy. It's a lot more fun/inspiring to be railing, fighting and seeing oneself as beseiged and campaigning than it is sitting in quite contemplation....there have been many justified examples of fighting the man in Orthodoxy but these folks seem like they are forcing it.


I do respect what you are saying.

They Bishops should by all means work in this world in a loving way an for the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

They should feel free to meet with the Pope at anytime.

Meeting and talking is way different than holding Mass with him.  This is against the Holy Apostles Canon.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #109 on: March 12, 2011, 09:41:19 AM »
"Jesus ate with tax collectors and prostitutes out of love; ergo, Jesus was a tax collector and of ill-repute."

-- The applied logic of tinfoil hate "Orthodox" whose faith revolves almost exclusively about fighting the battle of ecumenism and calendars with their fellow Orthodox as opposed to focusing on the gospel.

Seriously, without those 2 issues and the laundry list of enemies to rail against, there really isn't much more to the "Genuine" or "Traditional" orthodox churches.

I'm sure Nestorians, Arians and others had the same self-righteous, forest-for-the-trees, besieged mentality that these groups do.

I've seen 2 quotes kind of like this, of course one from our Holy Scripture, and the other talking about ministry to those on skid-row.  This is way different what our savior and Lord did than what those who practice ecumenism do.  When Jesus did this, he was being a "minister" & teacher. When we do these things we are being "ministers" & teachers to laymen.  We can even minister to clergy perhaps as we read of Nicodemus.  But the Clergy can not HOLD WORSHIP along side the clergy of non-Orthodox.  Major difference.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

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: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #110 on: March 12, 2011, 03:10:31 PM »
I am anti-ecumenist insofar as I think almost everything under the umbrella of "ecumenism" is a bad idea, but I think the cries of "heresy!" tend to be hyperbolic.

As for the canons, it's true, our hierarchs should not be praying with heretics. The canons exist against it because of the possibility that it make the heretics seem almost legitimate. And, if we are honest, we must admit that this happens at many of these ecumenical meetings.

But the canons don't apply themselves, and, while breach of canons is unfortunate, it is not the kind of deal-breaker some make it to be. As has been pointed out already, many canons have been routinely ignored or broken throughout the Church's history. 

This is where I disagree some.  The Canons of the Holy Apostles is the reason we have Orthodoxy.  Without the Canon of the church, the Orthodox can basically "do anything" including become Protestant (which some argue ecumenism is) or allow tribal pagans to do rituals right through the royal doors.
The Pharisees followed the canons, but did that save them?
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #111 on: March 12, 2011, 09:58:52 PM »
I am anti-ecumenist insofar as I think almost everything under the umbrella of "ecumenism" is a bad idea, but I think the cries of "heresy!" tend to be hyperbolic.

As for the canons, it's true, our hierarchs should not be praying with heretics. The canons exist against it because of the possibility that it make the heretics seem almost legitimate. And, if we are honest, we must admit that this happens at many of these ecumenical meetings.

But the canons don't apply themselves, and, while breach of canons is unfortunate, it is not the kind of deal-breaker some make it to be. As has been pointed out already, many canons have been routinely ignored or broken throughout the Church's history.  

This is where I disagree some.  The Canons of the Holy Apostles is the reason we have Orthodoxy.  Without the Canon of the church, the Orthodox can basically "do anything" including become Protestant (which some argue ecumenism is) or allow tribal pagans to do rituals right through the royal doors.
The Pharisees followed the canons, but did that save them?

I don't know if it gave them salvation or  let them enter Gan Eden, which is different than the Heaven we know of.  Or did they have to go through a spiritual temporal period of Sheol, which is not hell as we Christians define it.  To the point,   I don't know the outcome nor judgment that God has for people.  There were Pharisees for a long time before Christ was here.  Were they saved?  Is that even fair since many were born before our Savior?  We don't know, and in kindness, this digresses from the topic at hand - too many variables to answer.  

Our Canons of the Holy Apostles were from those given the succession from God.  They were formed at the Ecumenical councils.  

A person who becomes a Bishop must give his agreement to follow the Canons.
Canon states that if he enters in worship with the others, that he is to be deposed & excommunicated.

It's NOT my rules.  These rules were setup for us.

The Canon of the Holy Apostles was completely and utterly broken.  That's why I say that I feel many suffer from cognitive dissonance because it's easier to excuse it, make excuses for it, make reasons for it, make dodges on it, attack the messenger, flank the topic, and/or dissolve the extremity of the issue.  Ecumenism hurts me badly.   Not lemon juice on a paper cut bad, but my spirit aches and cries to see this happening to the church which I love so much.

The Canon should be followed in preservation of tradition, Orthodoxy, respect for the Ecumenical Councils, and to keep the church true that our God in the flesh established here for our salvation.

When any clergy participates in the Mass of the Roman Catholic church, you must understand that the Roman Catholics have their "Eucharist" as well.  
The "sacrament" is transmuted / blessed.  What a paradigm to have a clergy of the "real church" present and participating in the Mass!

These are the reasons for the Canons, to keep that from happening!  

Is this an attack on the Clergy from me?  No.

This is an attack on God's church by the Clergy.  Even the monks in the videos state that.

I undoubtedly feel that the Canon of the Holy Apostles, which Bishops must agree to (by their OWN choice), clearly backs my stand against ecumenism or any clergy that participates in worship outside of Orthodoxy.

I'm sorry.  It's disturbing.  This is why those on the Holy mountain Athos are fighting it so hard.  Watch the videos of these old school elders speaking of it being a heresy!  

So if I'm missing a point here and I should be accepting our Bishops holding Mass with the Pope, tell me where I have gone wrong?

I mean can we take communion in the Roman Catholic church with one of our Bishops there?  Would you take the wafer? Well I guess if you do, you could end up in purgatory if you are wrong.  :-\   Ecumenism makes a true mess out of things. This is why we need our Canon recognized & used to depose and excommunicate those who hold worship (not speaking of ministry, but services in  conjunction) with the non-Orthodox.  Or do you believe in purgatory?

This is why the monks at Esphigmenou (http://www.esphigmenou.com/) fly flags that state "Orthodoxy or Death".  

Blessings!
« Last Edit: March 12, 2011, 09:59:33 PM by yeshuaisiam »
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,579
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #112 on: March 12, 2011, 10:20:03 PM »
Quote
A person who becomes a Bishop must give his agreement to follow the Canons.
Canon states that if he enters in worship with the others, that he is to be deposed & excommunicated.

It's NOT my rules.  These rules were setup for us.

The Canon of the Holy Apostles was completely and utterly broken.  That's why I say that I feel many suffer from cognitive dissonance because it's easier to excuse it, make excuses for it, make reasons for it, make dodges on it, attack the messenger, flank the topic, and/or dissolve the extremity of the issue.  Ecumenism hurts me badly.   Not lemon juice on a paper cut bad, but my spirit aches and cries to see this happening to the church which I love so much.

Well, then, it seems your place in life is to become a bishop, so that you can enforce the canons as you see fit. Oh, hang on, you need to become a monastic first, before you'll even be considered for episcopal service.
Quote
Is this an attack on the Clergy from me?  No.

Like hell it isn't. Or, if it isn't, make up your mind which it is.
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #113 on: March 13, 2011, 08:12:11 AM »
Quote
A person who becomes a Bishop must give his agreement to follow the Canons.
Canon states that if he enters in worship with the others, that he is to be deposed & excommunicated.

It's NOT my rules.  These rules were setup for us.

The Canon of the Holy Apostles was completely and utterly broken.  That's why I say that I feel many suffer from cognitive dissonance because it's easier to excuse it, make excuses for it, make reasons for it, make dodges on it, attack the messenger, flank the topic, and/or dissolve the extremity of the issue.  Ecumenism hurts me badly.   Not lemon juice on a paper cut bad, but my spirit aches and cries to see this happening to the church which I love so much.

Well, then, it seems your place in life is to become a bishop, so that you can enforce the canons as you see fit. Oh, hang on, you need to become a monastic first, before you'll even be considered for episcopal service.
Quote
Is this an attack on the Clergy from me?  No.

Like hell it isn't. Or, if it isn't, make up your mind which it is.

Perfect example of what I'm talking about.  You did not present a challenge of my facts, rather you personally attacked.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,579
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #114 on: March 13, 2011, 08:30:28 AM »
Quote
Perfect example of what I'm talking about.  You did not present a challenge of my facts, rather you personally attacked.

Not at all. I am pointing out the fallacy of your approach. You have claimed that certain canons were broken, and that excommunications were therefore in order. Yet, the bishops of the Church has seen it fit not to apply these canons in the same way which you, a layman, wish to see them applied. You claim you are not attacking the clergy, yet, you refuse to recognise episcopal authority to administer the canons, which is part of their job. Here are your words again:

Quote
The Canon of the Holy Apostles was completely and utterly broken.  That's why I say that I feel many suffer from cognitive dissonance because it's easier to excuse it, make excuses for it, make reasons for it, make dodges on it, attack the messenger, flank the topic, and/or dissolve the extremity of the issue.

Your words, not mine.
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline Saint Iaint

  • This Poster Has Ignored Multiple Requests to Behave Better
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 624
  • The Truth Shall Be Reviled
    • Christ Conquers
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #115 on: March 13, 2011, 10:40:08 AM »
I am anti-ecumenist insofar as I think almost everything under the umbrella of "ecumenism" is a bad idea, but I think the cries of "heresy!" tend to be hyperbolic.

As for the canons, it's true, our hierarchs should not be praying with heretics. The canons exist against it because of the possibility that it make the heretics seem almost legitimate. And, if we are honest, we must admit that this happens at many of these ecumenical meetings.

But the canons don't apply themselves, and, while breach of canons is unfortunate, it is not the kind of deal-breaker some make it to be. As has been pointed out already, many canons have been routinely ignored or broken throughout the Church's history. 

This is where I disagree some.  The Canons of the Holy Apostles is the reason we have Orthodoxy.  Without the Canon of the church, the Orthodox can basically "do anything" including become Protestant (which some argue ecumenism is) or allow tribal pagans to do rituals right through the royal doors.
The Pharisees followed the canons, but did that save them?

The Pharisees followed (and continue to follow in the Talmud) the 'traditions of men' which make the commandments of God of no effect.

†IC XC†

†NI KA†
Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute...

Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.

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: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #116 on: March 13, 2011, 10:40:59 AM »
The Pharisees followed (and continue to follow in the Talmud) the 'traditions of men' which make the commandments of God of no effect.

You aren't Baptist, are you?
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 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: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #117 on: March 13, 2011, 10:56:29 AM »
I am anti-ecumenist insofar as I think almost everything under the umbrella of "ecumenism" is a bad idea, but I think the cries of "heresy!" tend to be hyperbolic.

As for the canons, it's true, our hierarchs should not be praying with heretics. The canons exist against it because of the possibility that it make the heretics seem almost legitimate. And, if we are honest, we must admit that this happens at many of these ecumenical meetings.

But the canons don't apply themselves, and, while breach of canons is unfortunate, it is not the kind of deal-breaker some make it to be. As has been pointed out already, many canons have been routinely ignored or broken throughout the Church's history. 

This is where I disagree some.  The Canons of the Holy Apostles is the reason we have Orthodoxy.  Without the Canon of the church, the Orthodox can basically "do anything" including become Protestant (which some argue ecumenism is) or allow tribal pagans to do rituals right through the royal doors.
The Pharisees followed the canons, but did that save them?

The Pharisees followed (and continue to follow in the Talmud) the 'traditions of men' which make the commandments of God of no effect.
Yes, you get my point. I fear that yeshuaisiam may be doing the same by following his own traditions which make the commandments of God of no effect.
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Saint Iaint

  • This Poster Has Ignored Multiple Requests to Behave Better
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 624
  • The Truth Shall Be Reviled
    • Christ Conquers
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #118 on: March 13, 2011, 03:38:38 PM »
The Pharisees followed (and continue to follow in the Talmud) the 'traditions of men' which make the commandments of God of no effect.

You aren't Baptist, are you?

Oh, absolutely.

How'd you figure me out?

~~~ ~~~ ~~~

I am anti-ecumenist insofar as I think almost everything under the umbrella of "ecumenism" is a bad idea, but I think the cries of "heresy!" tend to be hyperbolic.

As for the canons, it's true, our hierarchs should not be praying with heretics. The canons exist against it because of the possibility that it make the heretics seem almost legitimate. And, if we are honest, we must admit that this happens at many of these ecumenical meetings.

But the canons don't apply themselves, and, while breach of canons is unfortunate, it is not the kind of deal-breaker some make it to be. As has been pointed out already, many canons have been routinely ignored or broken throughout the Church's history. 

This is where I disagree some.  The Canons of the Holy Apostles is the reason we have Orthodoxy.  Without the Canon of the church, the Orthodox can basically "do anything" including become Protestant (which some argue ecumenism is) or allow tribal pagans to do rituals right through the royal doors.
The Pharisees followed the canons, but did that save them?

The Pharisees followed (and continue to follow in the Talmud) the 'traditions of men' which make the commandments of God of no effect.
Yes, you get my point. I fear that yeshuaisiam may be doing the same by following his own traditions which make the commandments of God of no effect.

Hmmmm...

I don't think it's right to equate the Pharisaic 'traditions of men' with the Tradition of the Church.

The Church was (is) guided by the Holy Spirit...

The Pharisees... not so much!

Having said that - I don't think I would let ecumenism keep me from attending Church...

People can affect (or resist) changes more readily from inside of the Church. And those who are inside likely wouldn't listen to anyone outside in the first place.

In closing, I would like to quote someone you all may know...

Quote
"I will let the canons speak for themselves, (...)  I don't know what is in the Patriarch's mind or his heart. I am not permitted to judge that aspect of him.  But as an Orthodox Christian, I am entitled to--indeed called to--point out that this public action is against the canons of the Church. I am saddened by this. Let us pray for him."

And...

"The (canons) reflect the faith of the Church.  If you think that you or modern, non-Orthodox scholars can opine their validity away, then you are basically putting yourself or them above the God-inspired Elders and Church Fathers, who were in deification and received the teaching from the Holy Spirit.

In Christ,

Fr. Anastasios"

Taken from Re: 'Serbian Patriarch Irinei has celebrated Hannukah in a synagogue'... also see HERE

†IC XC†
†NI KA†
Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute...

Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #119 on: March 13, 2011, 04:05:55 PM »
I am anti-ecumenist insofar as I think almost everything under the umbrella of "ecumenism" is a bad idea, but I think the cries of "heresy!" tend to be hyperbolic.

As for the canons, it's true, our hierarchs should not be praying with heretics. The canons exist against it because of the possibility that it make the heretics seem almost legitimate. And, if we are honest, we must admit that this happens at many of these ecumenical meetings.

But the canons don't apply themselves, and, while breach of canons is unfortunate, it is not the kind of deal-breaker some make it to be. As has been pointed out already, many canons have been routinely ignored or broken throughout the Church's history. 

This is where I disagree some.  The Canons of the Holy Apostles is the reason we have Orthodoxy.  Without the Canon of the church, the Orthodox can basically "do anything" including become Protestant (which some argue ecumenism is) or allow tribal pagans to do rituals right through the royal doors.
The Pharisees followed the canons, but did that save them?

The Pharisees followed (and continue to follow in the Talmud) the 'traditions of men' which make the commandments of God of no effect.
Yes, you get my point. I fear that yeshuaisiam may be doing the same by following his own traditions which make the commandments of God of no effect.

Following MY own traditions?  What??? How can you possibly say that?

Here, these are NOT my words, but words from MANY monks on Mt. Athos from different monasteries.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilMbERpn9wk

This is a personal attack accusing me of "following my own traditions" when obviously the traditions in the sacred Canon of the Holy Apostles is being violated.  I'm merely bringing up the Canon which arguably IS THE TRADITION of the Church and NOT "my own".

Remember when our savior Jesus Christ asked in:
John 18:23  23 “If I said something wrong,” Jesus replied, “testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?”

I presented the Canon of the Holy Apostles, photos & videos of the Canon being broken, and an Ordination excerpt where a Bishop directly agrees to follow the Canon, and now the letter from many monks on Mt. Athos. 

Are these facts wrong?  Why am I being accused of making up tradition?  Why are the facts I'm merely just presenting being contorted?

I don't know where I have gone wrong but I could be as I am no where near perfect as our Savior was perfect.  Perhaps I deserve the attacks.  If I am wrong, please show me how.
 
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline Iconodule

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 14,370
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #120 on: March 13, 2011, 08:41:33 PM »
People have shown you several examples of canons that are routinely ignored or broken throughout the history of the church. Not that we should be ignoring or breaking canons, but breach of canon in itself does not warrant such an extreme reaction as forming a schismatic group.
Quote
When a time revolts against eternity, the only thing to set against it is genuine eternity itself, and not some other time which has already roused, and not without reason, a violent reaction against itself.
- Berdyaev

If you would like a private forum for non-polemical topics, comment here.

Offline android

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 161
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #121 on: March 13, 2011, 11:21:38 PM »
I am anti-ecumenist insofar as I think almost everything under the umbrella of "ecumenism" is a bad idea, but I think the cries of "heresy!" tend to be hyperbolic.

As for the canons, it's true, our hierarchs should not be praying with heretics. The canons exist against it because of the possibility that it make the heretics seem almost legitimate. And, if we are honest, we must admit that this happens at many of these ecumenical meetings.

But the canons don't apply themselves, and, while breach of canons is unfortunate, it is not the kind of deal-breaker some make it to be. As has been pointed out already, many canons have been routinely ignored or broken throughout the Church's history.  



I'm anti-betraying Orthodoxy. I don't see "mere membership" in an organization geared towards healing wounds to be a betrayal. We should take a humble and loving spirit with us into the world, without giving in on theological matters.

I'm not 100% happy with the joint statements and would be 100% opposed to a reconciliation, except one where, in effect, the heterodox became orthodox- yet, the hysterics of the "genuine", "traditional" and other splinter groups is beyond the pale.

We are supposed to work with our one holy catholic and apostolic church and provide direction, correction and encouragement in love. Severing oneself such that you are floating adrift, without apostolic succession, in anger, and traveling down a road of pride/ego (we few are the "true" Christians and everyone else is whore of babylon) over 2 concepts/issues (the calendar and ecumenism) of tangential relevance/importance to the primary missions of the church seems patently unadvisable.

Some people look for reasons to fight, enemies, heretics and take great and disturbing pleasure in attempting to be a part of some tradition of opposition to authority that does exist within Orthodoxy. It's a lot more fun/inspiring to be railing, fighting and seeing oneself as beseiged and campaigning than it is sitting in quite contemplation....there have been many justified examples of fighting the man in Orthodoxy but these folks seem like they are forcing it.


I do respect what you are saying.

They Bishops should by all means work in this world in a loving way an for the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

They should feel free to meet with the Pope at anytime.

Meeting and talking is way different than holding Mass with him.  This is against the Holy Apostles Canon.

Thanks.

I went through your links (albeit in a cursory fashion) and didn't see anything other than monks and others making assertions (stating a conclusion) rather than clearly stating their case.

There are tons of threads/writings out there. I'm an attorney by trade, so I'm approaching this from a particular mindset and way of analyzing problems. I think that legal approach is apt when it comes to looking at canons.

Would you be so kind as to (1) cite the specific canons (I saw a reference to Canon 65 above, but I take it there is more than that), (2) cite and document the exact events which constitute a breach of those canons, and (3) cite what the canons say are the consequences of those violations.

I'm looking here for concrete evidence and arguments for your position.

It's not enough to say that "something bad has occurred" or "a canon has been breached, let's start our own church", or "a bishop/patriarch has done something that superficially seems to violate a canon read out of context, the entire church is graceless and a whore of babylon."

Just because a canon has been breached doesn't mean the rest of the church (monastics and "concerned" laity") is empowered to sever themselves, be disobedient or insubordinate or conjure up their own ideas about what that means.

All canons are not given equal standing, and it is my assumption that there are shades of gray in assessing the applicability and consequences of canons.

Also, consider whether there may be "conflicts of laws" principles at play here- what if in a particular circumstance, strict compliance with a canon would require a knowing abdication of the overriding commandments of Christ.  You have to acknowledge that a juridicial fixation on canons resulting in sniping and judgment of those in Christ's service just "smells bad" and the pharisee comparison isn't way off.

Even if a member of the clergy violates a canon, how does that "taint" the entire church to the point where groups would split off (presumably being led by bishops who, by engaging in that conduct, are violating a canon...are they arguing they are given carte blanche by virtue of their bishop's asserted violation? that sounds dubious).

Finally, do you consider your discussion of these issues on an open forum among various types of Orthodox to mean that you yourself are an "ecumenist" as it relates to your particular station as a lay person? Wouldn't a strict viewing of ecumenism mean that you are tainting yourself and your Orthodoxy by engaging in meaningful intellectual dialogue with others who disagree w/ you?

I intend these comments as a sincere inquiry for clarification and further food for thought.

Offline android

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 161
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #122 on: March 13, 2011, 11:59:49 PM »
Just to follow up my post above- I'm aware four canons that forbid 'prayer with heretics and schismatics' (Apostolic Canons, canons; XLV, LXIV; Council of Laodicea, canons; IX, XXXIII). Those who do pray with schismatics and heretics would probably answer that heretics and schismatics in the sense that these canons spoke of, no longer exist today (cults and sects are not considered, who, in my opinion usually do fit the bill of heresy/schismatic) and that they are applied anachronistically; and therefore wrongly.

Just wanted to include that clarification and throw out one possible answer so you can address that in your response.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #123 on: March 14, 2011, 11:04:28 AM »
Just to follow up my post above- I'm aware four canons that forbid 'prayer with heretics and schismatics' (Apostolic Canons, canons; XLV, LXIV; Council of Laodicea, canons; IX, XXXIII). Those who do pray with schismatics and heretics would probably answer that heretics and schismatics in the sense that these canons spoke of, no longer exist today (cults and sects are not considered, who, in my opinion usually do fit the bill of heresy/schismatic) and that they are applied anachronistically; and therefore wrongly.

Just wanted to include that clarification and throw out one possible answer so you can address that in your response.

If you look at the first posts of this thread, I've already done this.  I've cited Canons and posted both photographic and video evidence of Canon 65 being broken.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #124 on: March 14, 2011, 11:11:03 AM »
People have shown you several examples of canons that are routinely ignored or broken throughout the history of the church. Not that we should be ignoring or breaking canons, but breach of canon in itself does not warrant such an extreme reaction as forming a schismatic group.

Actually I have not been shown examples of where the Canons of the Holy Apostles has been violated.  One person posted one example without source.  Did you check the source of the "Jewish Doctor" canon?  Show me where it exists in the Canon of the Holy Apostles.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline android

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 161
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #125 on: March 14, 2011, 11:16:34 AM »
Just to follow up my post above- I'm aware four canons that forbid 'prayer with heretics and schismatics' (Apostolic Canons, canons; XLV, LXIV; Council of Laodicea, canons; IX, XXXIII). Those who do pray with schismatics and heretics would probably answer that heretics and schismatics in the sense that these canons spoke of, no longer exist today (cults and sects are not considered, who, in my opinion usually do fit the bill of heresy/schismatic) and that they are applied anachronistically; and therefore wrongly.

Just wanted to include that clarification and throw out one possible answer so you can address that in your response.

If you look at the first posts of this thread, I've already done this.  I've cited Canons and posted both photographic and video evidence of Canon 65 being broken.

I'm sorry but this isn't adequate analysis. You are concluding certain acts, by certain people, at certain times, in certain places constitute a breach of a canon....and taking it a step further and saying "ergo, "World Orthodoxy is, institutionally, tained and "True/Genuine Orthodox are spritually obligated to leave".

You are applying a specific methodology to the canonical analysis, whether you realize it or not (many untrained lay people do this because they confuse their own intial impressions, readings and version of common sense as being conclusive on the matter).

I also don't see where the conclusion I've bolded has been supported by canons or any other guiding principles.

As a matter of precedent, I think we can agree that in the foggy mists of time, some Patriarch or other has broken a canon, yet that hasn't resulted in institutional tainting of Orthodoxy...ultimately that person has been "brought to justice" and the matter sorted.

It seems to me that regardless of whether the naked statement "a canon has been broken" is on some level true, the conclusion these "True Orthodox" have drawn seem more reactinoary and grave than anything praying in the presence of the Pope.

Basically, it is clear that the bishops who have led these rebellions are also in breach of canons-- they just argue it's a justifiable breach in some way--- funny they avail themselves of the notion of justifiable breach when it suits them, yet impose a strict, inflexible reading when assessing the applications of specific canons of questionable relevance to others in the episcopate.

I'm trying to be open-minded here and engage you on the terms you have requested from other (no personal attacks, etc.)

I'm not seeing the cold, dispassionate, even-handed analysis that effectively condemns World Orthodoxy, much less supports the actions taken by True/Genuine Orthodox in response.

To be clear- I'm happy to have the discussion and learn something from you on this.

Offline yeshuaisiam

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,695
  • A pulling horse cannot kick.
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #126 on: March 14, 2011, 12:48:17 PM »
Just to follow up my post above- I'm aware four canons that forbid 'prayer with heretics and schismatics' (Apostolic Canons, canons; XLV, LXIV; Council of Laodicea, canons; IX, XXXIII). Those who do pray with schismatics and heretics would probably answer that heretics and schismatics in the sense that these canons spoke of, no longer exist today (cults and sects are not considered, who, in my opinion usually do fit the bill of heresy/schismatic) and that they are applied anachronistically; and therefore wrongly.

Just wanted to include that clarification and throw out one possible answer so you can address that in your response.

If you look at the first posts of this thread, I've already done this.  I've cited Canons and posted both photographic and video evidence of Canon 65 being broken.

I'm sorry but this isn't adequate analysis. You are concluding certain acts, by certain people, at certain times, in certain places constitute a breach of a canon....and taking it a step further and saying "ergo, "World Orthodoxy is, institutionally, tained and "True/Genuine Orthodox are spritually obligated to leave".

You are applying a specific methodology to the canonical analysis, whether you realize it or not (many untrained lay people do this because they confuse their own intial impressions, readings and version of common sense as being conclusive on the matter).

I also don't see where the conclusion I've bolded has been supported by canons or any other guiding principles.

As a matter of precedent, I think we can agree that in the foggy mists of time, some Patriarch or other has broken a canon, yet that hasn't resulted in institutional tainting of Orthodoxy...ultimately that person has been "brought to justice" and the matter sorted.

It seems to me that regardless of whether the naked statement "a canon has been broken" is on some level true, the conclusion these "True Orthodox" have drawn seem more reactinoary and grave than anything praying in the presence of the Pope.

Basically, it is clear that the bishops who have led these rebellions are also in breach of canons-- they just argue it's a justifiable breach in some way--- funny they avail themselves of the notion of justifiable breach when it suits them, yet impose a strict, inflexible reading when assessing the applications of specific canons of questionable relevance to others in the episcopate.

I'm trying to be open-minded here and engage you on the terms you have requested from other (no personal attacks, etc.)

I'm not seeing the cold, dispassionate, even-handed analysis that effectively condemns World Orthodoxy, much less supports the actions taken by True/Genuine Orthodox in response.

To be clear- I'm happy to have the discussion and learn something from you on this.

So you do not see a member of the clergy worshiping and holding service with the non-Orthodox?

The Bishops who are in rebellion are not breaching the Canon, because they see the Bishops who violated the Canon as deposed & excommunicated.   If a judge violates his oath of office (perjury of oath) does he still have authority in a court?  Of course he does, because the bailiffs still listen to him and they have the muscle.  Is it right? No.  That's what I'm talking about.  If a Bishop violates the Canon, he is to be deposed & excommunicated.   When those under the Bishop sometimes knowingly, sometimes unknowingly still support the Bishop, the "weak" who stand up to the Bishop gets the Bishop's wrath.  Such as the monks in Esphigmenou.

The interesting thing about Canon is that it's clearly written, and its very obvious the intent. 

(Clergy can not hold worship with heretics or they are to be deposed & excommunicated.)

So simple.  The Bishop agrees to this in his third confession of faith.

I appreciate you trying to hold open dialog without personal attacks.

The bottom line is I've presented photographic and video evidence that is NOT MY OWN, but assembled by other Clergy.   The accusation that I have is not of my own, but I agree with the accusation. We should hear & listen to the arguments presented by the monks on Mt. Athos as the Canon obviously back them.  Canon is there for a reason, and  there to preserve Orthodoxy.  It is not my interpretation as a layperson, but my admiration of the deep thought and lifelong dedication of the monks on Athos.
I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com

Offline android

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 161
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #127 on: March 14, 2011, 01:01:54 PM »
Just to follow up my post above- I'm aware four canons that forbid 'prayer with heretics and schismatics' (Apostolic Canons, canons; XLV, LXIV; Council of Laodicea, canons; IX, XXXIII). Those who do pray with schismatics and heretics would probably answer that heretics and schismatics in the sense that these canons spoke of, no longer exist today (cults and sects are not considered, who, in my opinion usually do fit the bill of heresy/schismatic) and that they are applied anachronistically; and therefore wrongly.

Just wanted to include that clarification and throw out one possible answer so you can address that in your response.

If you look at the first posts of this thread, I've already done this.  I've cited Canons and posted both photographic and video evidence of Canon 65 being broken.

I'm sorry but this isn't adequate analysis. You are concluding certain acts, by certain people, at certain times, in certain places constitute a breach of a canon....and taking it a step further and saying "ergo, "World Orthodoxy is, institutionally, tained and "True/Genuine Orthodox are spritually obligated to leave".

You are applying a specific methodology to the canonical analysis, whether you realize it or not (many untrained lay people do this because they confuse their own intial impressions, readings and version of common sense as being conclusive on the matter).

I also don't see where the conclusion I've bolded has been supported by canons or any other guiding principles.

As a matter of precedent, I think we can agree that in the foggy mists of time, some Patriarch or other has broken a canon, yet that hasn't resulted in institutional tainting of Orthodoxy...ultimately that person has been "brought to justice" and the matter sorted.

It seems to me that regardless of whether the naked statement "a canon has been broken" is on some level true, the conclusion these "True Orthodox" have drawn seem more reactinoary and grave than anything praying in the presence of the Pope.

Basically, it is clear that the bishops who have led these rebellions are also in breach of canons-- they just argue it's a justifiable breach in some way--- funny they avail themselves of the notion of justifiable breach when it suits them, yet impose a strict, inflexible reading when assessing the applications of specific canons of questionable relevance to others in the episcopate.

I'm trying to be open-minded here and engage you on the terms you have requested from other (no personal attacks, etc.)

I'm not seeing the cold, dispassionate, even-handed analysis that effectively condemns World Orthodoxy, much less supports the actions taken by True/Genuine Orthodox in response.

To be clear- I'm happy to have the discussion and learn something from you on this.

So you do not see a member of the clergy worshiping and holding service with the non-Orthodox?

The Bishops who are in rebellion are not breaching the Canon, because they see the Bishops who violated the Canon as deposed & excommunicated.   If a judge violates his oath of office (perjury of oath) does he still have authority in a court?  Of course he does, because the bailiffs still listen to him and they have the muscle.  Is it right? No.  That's what I'm talking about.  If a Bishop violates the Canon, he is to be deposed & excommunicated.   When those under the Bishop sometimes knowingly, sometimes unknowingly still support the Bishop, the "weak" who stand up to the Bishop gets the Bishop's wrath.  Such as the monks in Esphigmenou.

The interesting thing about Canon is that it's clearly written, and its very obvious the intent.  

(Clergy can not hold worship with heretics or they are to be deposed & excommunicated.)

So simple.  The Bishop agrees to this in his third confession of faith.

I appreciate you trying to hold open dialog without personal attacks.

The bottom line is I've presented photographic and video evidence that is NOT MY OWN, but assembled by other Clergy.   The accusation that I have is not of my own, but I agree with the accusation. We should hear & listen to the arguments presented by the monks on Mt. Athos as the Canon obviously back them.  Canon is there for a reason, and  there to preserve Orthodoxy.  It is not my interpretation as a layperson, but my admiration of the deep thought and lifelong dedication of the monks on Athos.

I would love to unpack all of the various issues, but I think the critical point is that, ASSUMING there has been a breach of a canon, (1) why does that render the institution of so-called World Orthodoxy tainted (as opposed to there being a personal case against the offending bishop(s)), and (2) relatedly, I don't see the justification for the underlined bit in your post above.

So, on the one hand I don't see the sweeping indictment of Orthodoxy as an institution based on the rogue acts of a member of the clergy, and I also am not seeing how the reactions of the True/Genuine Orthodox can be justified as anything other than resulting in their own (self-imposed) excommunication and deposition.

It doesn't follow logically at all. If their view is that "Bishop A has deposed themselves from institution A" then I can see them instituting or pushing a movement through Institution A to address that grievance. How can an excommunication within Institution A have any meaning if your whole POV is that Institution A is graceless anyways. It doesn't follow. If Bishop has is deemed excommunicated and deposed, then the "problematic issue" is no longer a part of the body of Institution A.

If Institution A is corrupted, then the argument would be "Bishop A is not excommunicated/deposed from serving in Institution A, but it's moot because Institution A is non-canonical anyways.

By analogy, the True/Genuine folks would have to acknowledge that the Pope is currently in communion with the RC Church. They disagree with the RC institutionally, but there is no question he IS Pope and in good standing with his own institution (maybe a bad example given the facts but you should be able to see where I'm going here).

The True/Genuine folks are talking out of both sides of their mouth.

Is it that the bishop(s) are in violation of a canon, but the institution is not tainted?

Or is it that World Orthodoxy is on the same footing as the RC, or baptist, or any other heterodox church?

Again, if you are basing your conclusions on the acts of a few men, it stands to reason that your grievance is with the status of those men vis a vis the church, and staring a whole other version of Orthodoxy is a grave misstep.

Consider what men like St. John Chrysostom and others had to go through...dealing with being deposed and replaced by heretics...the situation ultimately sorted itself out-- the misdeeds or canonical violations of individuals is NEVER sufficient to damn and entire institution-- that, to me, is the fundamental issue with what the True/Genuine Orthodox folks are doing. Excommunicating yourself from the apostolic faith over this seems like cutting your salvation off to spite your soul.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2011, 01:03:33 PM by android »

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: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #128 on: March 14, 2011, 01:43:20 PM »
I am anti-ecumenist insofar as I think almost everything under the umbrella of "ecumenism" is a bad idea, but I think the cries of "heresy!" tend to be hyperbolic.

As for the canons, it's true, our hierarchs should not be praying with heretics. The canons exist against it because of the possibility that it make the heretics seem almost legitimate. And, if we are honest, we must admit that this happens at many of these ecumenical meetings.

But the canons don't apply themselves, and, while breach of canons is unfortunate, it is not the kind of deal-breaker some make it to be. As has been pointed out already, many canons have been routinely ignored or broken throughout the Church's history. 

This is where I disagree some.  The Canons of the Holy Apostles is the reason we have Orthodoxy.  Without the Canon of the church, the Orthodox can basically "do anything" including become Protestant (which some argue ecumenism is) or allow tribal pagans to do rituals right through the royal doors.
The Pharisees followed the canons, but did that save them?

The Pharisees followed (and continue to follow in the Talmud) the 'traditions of men' which make the commandments of God of no effect.
Yes, you get my point. I fear that yeshuaisiam may be doing the same by following his own traditions which make the commandments of God of no effect.

Following MY own traditions?  What??? How can you possibly say that?
Simple. I'm calling it as I see it. You're setting yourself up to be jury, judge, and executioner based on your interpretation of the canons and on your interpretation of how the behavior of some bishops squares up or doesn't square up with those canons.

Here, these are NOT my words, but words from MANY monks on Mt. Athos from different monasteries.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilMbERpn9wk
And why should I deem them authoritative?

This is a personal attack accusing me of "following my own traditions" when obviously the traditions in the sacred Canon of the Holy Apostles is being violated.
In the light of android's very cogent defense, how is the violation so obvious?

I'm merely bringing up the Canon which arguably IS THE TRADITION of the Church and NOT "my own".
And yet you're trying to interpret the Canon for us.

Remember when our savior Jesus Christ asked in:
John 18:23  23 “If I said something wrong,” Jesus replied, “testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?”
But I didn't strike you. Besides, many here have already pointed out what's wrong with your reasoning.

I presented the Canon of the Holy Apostles, photos & videos of the Canon being broken, and an Ordination excerpt where a Bishop directly agrees to follow the Canon, and now the letter from many monks on Mt. Athos. 

Are these facts wrong?  Why am I being accused of making up tradition?  Why are the facts I'm merely just presenting being contorted?
Regarding photographic and video evidence: You do realize that without any understanding of context, photographs and videos need to be interpreted for anyone to "understand" what was captured in them? They don't stand on their own as proper evidence.

I don't know where I have gone wrong but I could be as I am no where near perfect as our Savior was perfect.  Perhaps I deserve the attacks.  If I am wrong, please show me how.
We have shown you how you're wrong.
Not all who wander are lost.

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: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #129 on: March 14, 2011, 02:17:24 PM »
Regarding photographic and video evidence: You do realize that without any understanding of context, photographs and videos need to be interpreted for anyone to "understand" what was captured in them? They don't stand on their own as proper evidence.
One word just came to mind regarding the admissibility of photographs and videos as "evidence" in the informal courtroom of the Internet: Photoshop. I'm not asserting that any of the photos and videos you present as evidence have been altered, since such an assertion would place on me the burden of proof to substantiate my claim. I'm merely saying that with today's photo and video editing software programs, it's very easy for someone to doctor a photo or video and make it say whatever nasty things he wants it to say about someone. I therefore don't find photos and videos posted online very convincing evidence of any wrongdoing without any background knowledge of their context.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2011, 02:46:03 PM by PeterTheAleut »
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Saint Iaint

  • This Poster Has Ignored Multiple Requests to Behave Better
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 624
  • The Truth Shall Be Reviled
    • Christ Conquers
Re: List on the Orthodox churches involved in ecumensim
« Reply #130 on: March 15, 2011, 03:27:18 AM »
Regarding photographic and video evidence: You do realize that without any understanding of context, photographs and videos need to be interpreted for anyone to "understand" what was captured in them? They don't stand on their own as proper evidence.
One word just came to mind regarding the admissibility of photographs and videos as "evidence" in the informal courtroom of the Internet: Photoshop. I'm not asserting that any of the photos and videos you present as evidence have been altered, since such an assertion would place on me the burden of proof to substantiate my claim. I'm merely saying that with today's photo and video editing software programs, it's very easy for someone to doctor a photo or video and make it say whatever nasty things he wants it to say about someone. I therefore don't find photos and videos posted online very convincing evidence of any wrongdoing without any background knowledge of their context.

Agreed. Photoshop alone can do ridiculously amazing things when combined with a frame by frame video editor.

Remember the Wikileaks video showing the slaughter of two journalists and a van full of kids?

The video shows (conveniently) some guy peeking around the corner at the Apache with an RPG launcher in his hands.

I think that was added to that video, and I think that's why it was 'leaked'.

Watch the video. Without that one guy peeking around the corner there would have been no justification whatsoever for the ensuing carnage.

†IC XC†
†NI KA†
Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute...

Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.