OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 02, 2014, 11:01:57 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What makes a council and ecumenical one?  (Read 994 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
john_mo
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 762



« on: June 28, 2014, 04:57:20 AM »

Note: I am almost certain this topic has been heavily discussed, but I searched and can't find anything.  Feel free to point me to a previous thread dealing with this.  I am writing from the perspective of an Antiochian Orthodox.

Met. Kallistos Ware says the following in his book The Orthodox Church:

"To the question how one can know whether a council is ecumenical, Khomiakov and his school gave an answer which at first site appears clear and straightforward: a council cannot be considered ecumenical unless its decrees are accepted by the whole Church. Florence, Hieria, and the rest, while ecumenical in outward appearance, are not truly so, precisely because they failed to secure this acceptance by the Church at large."

If a council is only deemed ecumenical once the whole Church has accepted it, how does this work with Chalcedon? The OO, who were at the time still in communion with the EO, did not accepted this council, yet it is considered ecumenical by the EO, myself included.

The only way I could think of is if the OO decided to leave the Church over this, rather than merely not accepting it.

Logged

Love is not blind; that is the last thing that it is. Love is bound; and the more it is bound the less it is blind.

—G.K. Chesterton
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,415


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2014, 12:13:18 PM »

Note: I am almost certain this topic has been heavily discussed, but I searched and can't find anything.  Feel free to point me to a previous thread dealing with this.  I am writing from the perspective of an Antiochian Orthodox.

Met. Kallistos Ware says the following in his book The Orthodox Church:

"To the question how one can know whether a council is ecumenical, Khomiakov and his school gave an answer which at first site appears clear and straightforward: a council cannot be considered ecumenical unless its decrees are accepted by the whole Church. Florence, Hieria, and the rest, while ecumenical in outward appearance, are not truly so, precisely because they failed to secure this acceptance by the Church at large."

If a council is only deemed ecumenical once the whole Church has accepted it, how does this work with Chalcedon? The OO, who were at the time still in communion with the EO, did not accepted this council, yet it is considered ecumenical by the EO, myself included.

The only way I could think of is if the OO decided to leave the Church over this, rather than merely not accepting it.



Or the EO decided to leave the Church in favour of Chalcedon.
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,679


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #2 on: June 28, 2014, 12:17:26 PM »

The only way I could think of is if the OO decided to leave the Church over this, rather than merely not accepting it.
Is that really the ONLY way you could think?  Is it perhaps you're thinking a bit too out loud and not being knowledgeable enough?  Perhaps, the "other" way you could think is you're not thinking enough?

Here's something to help you "think":  What makes the patriarch of Constantinople ecumenical?  What makes the imperial guard ecumenical?
« Last Edit: June 28, 2014, 12:20:03 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Antonis
"The Most Honourable The Morquess of Something"
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco Outside of San Francisco
Posts: 1,593


You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.


« Reply #3 on: June 28, 2014, 12:28:56 PM »

The only way I could think of is if the OO decided to leave the Church over this, rather than merely not accepting it.
Is that really the ONLY way you could think?  Is it perhaps you're thinking a bit too out loud and not being knowledgeable enough?  Perhaps, the "other" way you could think is you're not thinking enough?

Here's something to help you "think":  What makes the patriarch of Constantinople ecumenical?  What makes the imperial guard ecumenical?
This is precisely why I think the OO view is preferable. It is both historical and logical. Unfortunately, only a minority of vocal Orthodox prelates (such as HE Hilarion Alfeyev) and practically no laity have this understanding.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2014, 12:29:08 PM by Antonis » Logged

As I dissipate, Christ precipitates.
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #4 on: June 28, 2014, 12:36:38 PM »

The only way I could think of is if the OO decided to leave the Church over this, rather than merely not accepting it.
Is that really the ONLY way you could think?  Is it perhaps you're thinking a bit too out loud and not being knowledgeable enough?  Perhaps, the "other" way you could think is you're not thinking enough?

Here's something to help you "think":  What makes the patriarch of Constantinople ecumenical?  What makes the imperial guard ecumenical?

This is more how I feel. The first three are truly ecumenical as in universal, but the latter four (or more) are ecumenical as in imperial. As such they are more than a mere local council, but not the same as a universal council. As such, they needn't be binding on others.

However, even that doesn't take into account St. Cyril's treaty with... John of Antioch? I can't remember the name, but he didn't even require him to officially ascribe to a universal council (Ephesus).
Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,679


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 28, 2014, 01:05:44 PM »

Even then, I would say the first 3 councils are imperial councils accepted universally by all Christians (with perhaps the minor exception of Ephesus).  But yes, with John of Antioch, he was content with the faith and the condemnation of Nestorius.  He was flexible in regard to the Antiochian tradition.  He even went so far as to not require condemnation of Theodore and Diodore.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #6 on: June 28, 2014, 01:27:25 PM »

Even then, I would say the first 3 councils are imperial councils accepted universally by all Christians (with perhaps the minor exception of Ephesus).

You're right, my bad, I should have phrased it more clearly since I also strongly affirm reception-based authority rather than an inherent authority, like Met. Kallistos in the OP or Met. Hilarion in his paper on the subject. So they're universal in that they're accepted as such, not because they were universal by nature.

Ephesus is a tricky one for the Assyrians...

Quote
But yes, with John of Antioch, he was content with the faith and the condemnation of Nestorius.  He was flexible in regard to the Antiochian tradition.  He even went so far as to not require condemnation of Theodore and Diodore.

That's right, I couldn't fully remember.,
Logged
Antonis
"The Most Honourable The Morquess of Something"
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco Outside of San Francisco
Posts: 1,593


You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.


« Reply #7 on: June 28, 2014, 02:10:43 PM »

Inherent authority breeds an unorthodox ecclesiology, I think. It denies that the Catholic Church is essentially local.
Logged

As I dissipate, Christ precipitates.
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #8 on: June 28, 2014, 02:39:10 PM »

Inherent authority breeds an unorthodox ecclesiology, I think. It denies that the Catholic Church is essentially local.

Agreed.

It's also worth mentioning that a council can be universal without having had universal participation, since ecumenicity is reception-dependent. Likewise, all of this helps safeguard against robber synods claiming ecumenical status.

While not directly relevant, Rome shows the issues of having "ecumenical-by-nature councils" that we as Orthodox, especially those EO that insist on the councils in an unhealthy way, need to try to avoid. Too often we hear EO specifically speak of having "all the Churches come together in an ecumenical council to solve all of our problems," which could be a problematic view of councils to say the least. Councils can be helpful and binding without being "ecumenical," which is something we EO tend to forget. "Is that dogma from an ecumenical council?" "Has an ecumenical council said anything about this?" Etc.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2014, 02:41:17 PM by Nephi » Logged
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 8,369



« Reply #9 on: June 28, 2014, 02:46:28 PM »

Note: I am almost certain this topic has been heavily discussed, but I searched and can't find anything.  Feel free to point me to a previous thread dealing with this.  I am writing from the perspective of an Antiochian Orthodox.

Met. Kallistos Ware says the following in his book The Orthodox Church:

"To the question how one can know whether a council is ecumenical, Khomiakov and his school gave an answer which at first site appears clear and straightforward: a council cannot be considered ecumenical unless its decrees are accepted by the whole Church. Florence, Hieria, and the rest, while ecumenical in outward appearance, are not truly so, precisely because they failed to secure this acceptance by the Church at large."

If a council is only deemed ecumenical once the whole Church has accepted it, how does this work with Chalcedon? The OO, who were at the time still in communion with the EO, did not accepted this council, yet it is considered ecumenical by the EO, myself included.

The only way I could think of is if the OO decided to leave the Church over this, rather than merely not accepting it.



Or the EO decided to leave the Church in favour of Chalcedon.
Your like the OO version of Isa.  laugh
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,415


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #10 on: June 28, 2014, 03:00:19 PM »

Note: I am almost certain this topic has been heavily discussed, but I searched and can't find anything.  Feel free to point me to a previous thread dealing with this.  I am writing from the perspective of an Antiochian Orthodox.

Met. Kallistos Ware says the following in his book The Orthodox Church:

"To the question how one can know whether a council is ecumenical, Khomiakov and his school gave an answer which at first site appears clear and straightforward: a council cannot be considered ecumenical unless its decrees are accepted by the whole Church. Florence, Hieria, and the rest, while ecumenical in outward appearance, are not truly so, precisely because they failed to secure this acceptance by the Church at large."

If a council is only deemed ecumenical once the whole Church has accepted it, how does this work with Chalcedon? The OO, who were at the time still in communion with the EO, did not accepted this council, yet it is considered ecumenical by the EO, myself included.

The only way I could think of is if the OO decided to leave the Church over this, rather than merely not accepting it.



Or the EO decided to leave the Church in favour of Chalcedon.
Your like the OO version of Isa.  laugh

You pay me a great compliment of which I am unworthy.

Anyway, if I'm the OO version of Isa, what does that make john_mo? 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Salpy
Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,657


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #11 on: June 28, 2014, 03:05:19 PM »

Where's the maps?
Logged

Antonis
"The Most Honourable The Morquess of Something"
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco Outside of San Francisco
Posts: 1,593


You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.


« Reply #12 on: June 28, 2014, 03:12:42 PM »

Inherent authority breeds an unorthodox ecclesiology, I think. It denies that the Catholic Church is essentially local.

Agreed.

It's also worth mentioning that a council can be universal without having had universal participation, since ecumenicity is reception-dependent. Likewise, all of this helps safeguard against robber synods claiming ecumenical status.

While not directly relevant, Rome shows the issues of having "ecumenical-by-nature councils" that we as Orthodox, especially those EO that insist on the councils in an unhealthy way, need to try to avoid. Too often we hear EO specifically speak of having "all the Churches come together in an ecumenical council to solve all of our problems," which could be a problematic view of councils to say the least. Councils can be helpful and binding without being "ecumenical," which is something we EO tend to forget. "Is that dogma from an ecumenical council?" "Has an ecumenical council said anything about this?" Etc.
In my experience, this unhealthy outlook is universal among EO laity who essentially view the Ecumenical Councils as "our pope." What's difficult is that this outlook is pretty much reinforced in the limited catechesis people have experienced and for many it's a much easier and more straightforward concept to grasp than a reception-based view.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2014, 03:13:18 PM by Antonis » Logged

As I dissipate, Christ precipitates.
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #13 on: June 28, 2014, 03:19:56 PM »

In my experience, this unhealthy outlook is universal among EO laity who essentially view the Ecumenical Councils as "our pope." What's difficult is that this outlook is pretty much reinforced in the limited catechesis people have experienced and for many it's a much easier and more straightforward concept to grasp than a reception-based view.

That does seem unfortunately true. I think there's a tendency, especially among converts, to just want an "easy answer," and the councils do make for an easy, even if over-simplified, answer.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,981


black metal cat


« Reply #14 on: June 28, 2014, 03:31:09 PM »

In my experience, this unhealthy outlook is universal among EO laity who essentially view the Ecumenical Councils as "our pope." What's difficult is that this outlook is pretty much reinforced in the limited catechesis people have experienced and for many it's a much easier and more straightforward concept to grasp than a reception-based view.

That does seem unfortunately true. I think there's a tendency, especially among converts, to just want an "easy answer," and the councils do make for an easy, even if over-simplified, answer.

But now it is you who are over-simplifying Wink For example, it is usually the traditionist cradles who get worked up about it to the point of creating splinter groups over ecclesiology and such, because they cannot countenance anything other than a simple, black and white POV.

And now I am oversimplifying.
Logged

"But science is an inferential exercise, not a catalog of facts. Numbers, by themselves, specify nothing. All depends upon what you do with them" - Stephen Jay Gould
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,679


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #15 on: June 28, 2014, 03:33:47 PM »

I think it's okay now that there are laity that learn about ecumenical councils in such a fashion. It's a form of piety more than anything.  God knows we Copts have our fair share if pious infallibility in the Coptic pope.  This seems to be slowly improving today.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #16 on: June 28, 2014, 03:40:18 PM »

I think it's okay now that there are laity that learn about ecumenical councils in such a fashion. It's a form of piety more than anything.  God knows we Copts have our fair share if pious infallibility in the Coptic pope.  This seems to be slowly improving today.

You're right, it's not necesarily bad just as more literal understandings of the Bible by undercatechized cradles is not going to immediately turn them into Protestants or anything. It has its place and use, but in regards to the EO-OO divide it sadly creates problems even on the level of average individual laity.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2014, 03:47:59 PM by Nephi » Logged
Antonis
"The Most Honourable The Morquess of Something"
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco Outside of San Francisco
Posts: 1,593


You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.


« Reply #17 on: June 28, 2014, 03:42:07 PM »

To the OP's question:
Sorry to continue my monologue ( Tongue), and I know I'm preaching to the choir, but another impediment are the titles of our Hierarchs. For instance, the "Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia" is certainly not the bishop of Russia, nor a "bishop of bishops." The subtext of such titles would be something like "Patriarch of Moscow and primate of all Russia," but that is not obvious to a casual observer. Although this does not directly apply to Ecumenical Councils, it is a significant part of misunderstandings about ecclesiology that relate to them and the Church as a whole. To understand the nature of councils we must understand the very nature of the church itself.

An excellent resource for the OP would be Fr. Thomas Hopko's podcast series on bishops, which can be found here on Ancient Faith radio:

http://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/series/bishops_a_series_on_the_structure_and_leadership_of_the_church

The name of the series doesn't do it justice, it is much more encompassing than just bishops and well worth the listen. He covers the entire history of church origins and structure. You will be hooked!
Logged

As I dissipate, Christ precipitates.
Antonis
"The Most Honourable The Morquess of Something"
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco Outside of San Francisco
Posts: 1,593


You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.


« Reply #18 on: June 28, 2014, 03:45:05 PM »

I think it's okay now that there are laity that learn about ecumenical councils in such a fashion. It's a form of piety more than anything.  God knows we Copts have our fair share if pious infallibility in the Coptic pope.  This seems to be slowly improving today.
It can become an issue as well, though. For instance, I was once asked by an Orthodox girl where I could find an ecumenical canon that said homosexuality was not an acceptable practice. She would not accept any other source, as she believed only the E. Councils were a source of absolute Church belief. This is of course incredibly ridiculous.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2014, 03:49:40 PM by Antonis » Logged

As I dissipate, Christ precipitates.
john_mo
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 762



« Reply #19 on: June 28, 2014, 03:58:16 PM »

Yikes!  I seem to have given the impression that I meant my post to be a challenge to the OO Church.  This was not my intention.  On the contrary, I was gently challenging my fellow EO to explain how the schism after Chalcedon fits in with our view of ecumenism.  So I'm also challenging my own understanding.  This is what I was trying to make clear when I said that I was writing from the EO (or Antiochian) perspective, which does view the OO as having schismed.

This has been something that has been perturbing me for several months now, so I appreciate the input.

I'm still mulling over the responses. Who is "Isa"?
Logged

Love is not blind; that is the last thing that it is. Love is bound; and the more it is bound the less it is blind.

—G.K. Chesterton
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Chalcedonian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,474



« Reply #20 on: June 28, 2014, 04:03:17 PM »

I was writing from the EO (or Antiochian) perspective, which does view the OO as having schismed. 

I don't believe our Patriarchate of Antioch holds to such a notion in black-and-white terms anymore, and rightly so, although the N.A. Archdiocese certainly seems to at times. I believe our Patriarchate paves the way in this regard, seeming to view the OO as always having been Orthodox, which is why it has treated the situation with the Syriac Church of Antioch as more of an "internal affairs" issue within the Church of Antioch itself (encompassing both Greek and Syriac Patriarchates).
Logged
john_mo
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 762



« Reply #21 on: June 28, 2014, 04:06:42 PM »

I was writing from the EO (or Antiochian) perspective, which does view the OO as having schismed. 

I don't believe our Patriarchate of Antioch holds to such a notion in black-and-white terms anymore, and rightly so, although the N.A. Archdiocese certainly seems to at times. I believe our Patriarchate paves the way in this regard, seeming to view the OO as always having been Orthodox, which is why it has treated the situation with the Syriac Church of Antioch as more of an "internal affairs" issue within the Church of Antioch itself (encompassing both Greek and Syriac Patriarchates).

...which could explain why I have always felt that the OO were part of the same Church and have treated them accordingly.  Thanks for the info.
Logged

Love is not blind; that is the last thing that it is. Love is bound; and the more it is bound the less it is blind.

—G.K. Chesterton
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,415


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #22 on: June 28, 2014, 05:09:38 PM »

Who is "Isa"?

A god and not a man.
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
john_mo
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 762



« Reply #23 on: July 09, 2014, 03:30:31 PM »

So my follow up question would be how the OO sees the EO.  Does the OO view the EO in the same way as the EO view them?  Or perhaps they make distinctions between EO patriarchates.
Logged

Love is not blind; that is the last thing that it is. Love is bound; and the more it is bound the less it is blind.

—G.K. Chesterton
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,415


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #24 on: July 09, 2014, 03:32:26 PM »

So my follow up question would be how the OO sees the EO.  Does the OO view the EO in the same way as the EO view them?  Or perhaps they make distinctions between EO patriarchates.

LOL, how do the EO view the OO? 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 8,369



« Reply #25 on: July 09, 2014, 03:38:18 PM »

So my follow up question would be how the OO sees the EO.  Does the OO view the EO in the same way as the EO view them?  Or perhaps they make distinctions between EO patriarchates.

LOL, how do the EO view the OO? 
In my particular parish and actually in the OCA parish in our area that I have attended, when I have asked people about Oriental Orthodoxy, most of them gave me blank stares and said they're Orthodox and we are just waiting on another counsel to make it official. Most people I know IRL just assume at the upcoming Great Counsel, it will be made official. When I first came on here and saw that there actually were strong responses between OO and EO, I was rather suprised.

I'm sure you will find that response quite humorous and perhaps similar to the RC view of reunification with EO.
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
john_mo
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 762



« Reply #26 on: July 09, 2014, 03:38:34 PM »

So my follow up question would be how the OO sees the EO.  Does the OO view the EO in the same way as the EO view them?  Or perhaps they make distinctions between EO patriarchates.

LOL, how do the EO view the OO? 

Um...some believe them to be monophosite.  There were some anathemas given, were there not?  
Logged

Love is not blind; that is the last thing that it is. Love is bound; and the more it is bound the less it is blind.

—G.K. Chesterton
john_mo
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 762



« Reply #27 on: July 09, 2014, 03:41:12 PM »

So my follow up question would be how the OO sees the EO.  Does the OO view the EO in the same way as the EO view them?  Or perhaps they make distinctions between EO patriarchates.

LOL, how do the EO view the OO? 
In my particular parish and actually in the OCA parish in our area that I have attended, when I have asked people about Oriental Orthodoxy, most of them gave me blank stares and said they're Orthodox and we are just waiting on another counsel to make it official. Most people I know IRL just assume at the upcoming Great Counsel, it will be made official. When I first came on here and saw that there actually were strong responses between OO and EO, I was rather suprised.

I'm sure you will find that response quite humorous and perhaps similar to the RC view of reunification with EO.

I would say that this is my understanding, i.e. that it they are pretty much just a temporarily estranged member of the family.  I suppose one could say it's more of a feeling than an understanding.
Logged

Love is not blind; that is the last thing that it is. Love is bound; and the more it is bound the less it is blind.

—G.K. Chesterton
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,415


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #28 on: July 09, 2014, 03:56:18 PM »

So my follow up question would be how the OO sees the EO.  Does the OO view the EO in the same way as the EO view them?  Or perhaps they make distinctions between EO patriarchates.

LOL, how do the EO view the OO? 
In my particular parish and actually in the OCA parish in our area that I have attended, when I have asked people about Oriental Orthodoxy, most of them gave me blank stares and said they're Orthodox and we are just waiting on another counsel to make it official. Most people I know IRL just assume at the upcoming Great Counsel, it will be made official. When I first came on here and saw that there actually were strong responses between OO and EO, I was rather suprised.

I'm sure you will find that response quite humorous and perhaps similar to the RC view of reunification with EO.

Not necessarily.  I think the RC's are rather unrealistic when it comes to reunification with the EO.  Your Antiochian parish might simply reflect the attitude of its mother Church.  I see that as two different things. 

But I guess it highlights my issue with john_mo's question.  I'm not sure you can say the OO view of EO is comparable to the EO view of OO because there's no one view held by everyone in Eastern Orthodoxy (unless you restrict yourself to what you find in canonical and liturgical sources).  For instance, your parishioners feel a certain way about the issue, but they will sing liturgical texts this Sunday that expressly proclaim the opposite.  I suspect it's not because they are stupid, I believe (along with others on both sides of the divide) that there is a way to reconcile these, but there it is: two different views.  Different EO Churches have different views, both officially and unofficially.  There really isn't a "how EO view OO" that is consistent unless you stick to certain "documents" and ignore a lot of other things. 

I suspect that the OO view EO, overall, in a more consistent way across the board than the other way around.  But this, too, is not without issues.     
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
john_mo
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 762



« Reply #29 on: July 09, 2014, 04:01:40 PM »

So my follow up question would be how the OO sees the EO.  Does the OO view the EO in the same way as the EO view them?  Or perhaps they make distinctions between EO patriarchates.

LOL, how do the EO view the OO? 
In my particular parish and actually in the OCA parish in our area that I have attended, when I have asked people about Oriental Orthodoxy, most of them gave me blank stares and said they're Orthodox and we are just waiting on another counsel to make it official. Most people I know IRL just assume at the upcoming Great Counsel, it will be made official. When I first came on here and saw that there actually were strong responses between OO and EO, I was rather suprised.

I'm sure you will find that response quite humorous and perhaps similar to the RC view of reunification with EO.

Not necessarily.  I think the RC's are rather unrealistic when it comes to reunification with the EO.  Your Antiochian parish might simply reflect the attitude of its mother Church.  I see that as two different things. 

But I guess it highlights my issue with john_mo's question.  I'm not sure you can say the OO view of EO is comparable to the EO view of OO because there's no one view held by everyone in Eastern Orthodoxy (unless you restrict yourself to what you find in canonical and liturgical sources).  For instance, your parishioners feel a certain way about the issue, but they will sing liturgical texts this Sunday that expressly proclaim the opposite.  I suspect it's not because they are stupid, I believe (along with others on both sides of the divide) that there is a way to reconcile these, but there it is: two different views.  Different EO Churches have different views, both officially and unofficially.  There really isn't a "how EO view OO" that is consistent unless you stick to certain "documents" and ignore a lot of other things. 

I suspect that the OO view EO, overall, in a more consistent way across the board than the other way around.  But this, too, is not without issues.     

Fair enough point; there are varying views in the EO (not a shocker I suppose).  In my Antiochian parish we invited the local Copts and their clergy over for a friendly discussion.  To our embarrassment a couple of the Greeks who attended our parish were very judgmental of them, wanting almost nothing to do with them because they were "heretics".  So I get your point.

What I'm trying to get at is, do the similar variations of attitude exist in the OO toward the EO?
Logged

Love is not blind; that is the last thing that it is. Love is bound; and the more it is bound the less it is blind.

—G.K. Chesterton
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 8,369



« Reply #30 on: July 09, 2014, 04:06:53 PM »

So my follow up question would be how the OO sees the EO.  Does the OO view the EO in the same way as the EO view them?  Or perhaps they make distinctions between EO patriarchates.

LOL, how do the EO view the OO? 
In my particular parish and actually in the OCA parish in our area that I have attended, when I have asked people about Oriental Orthodoxy, most of them gave me blank stares and said they're Orthodox and we are just waiting on another counsel to make it official. Most people I know IRL just assume at the upcoming Great Counsel, it will be made official. When I first came on here and saw that there actually were strong responses between OO and EO, I was rather suprised.

I'm sure you will find that response quite humorous and perhaps similar to the RC view of reunification with EO.

Not necessarily.  I think the RC's are rather unrealistic when it comes to reunification with the EO.  Your Antiochian parish might simply reflect the attitude of its mother Church.  I see that as two different things. 

Possibly. Our priest prays for "our bishops", Metropolitans Mar Gregorios Yohanna Ibrahim and Boulous Yazigi in the Liturgy, making no distinction that one is Oriental and one is Eastern Orthodox. I just always assumed that all Orthodox juridictions viewed it in the same manner, but apparently not, unfortunately.
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,868



« Reply #31 on: July 09, 2014, 04:19:13 PM »

Note: I am almost certain this topic has been heavily discussed, but I searched and can't find anything.  Feel free to point me to a previous thread dealing with this.  I am writing from the perspective of an Antiochian Orthodox.

Met. Kallistos Ware says the following in his book The Orthodox Church:

"To the question how one can know whether a council is ecumenical, Khomiakov and his school gave an answer which at first site appears clear and straightforward: a council cannot be considered ecumenical unless its decrees are accepted by the whole Church. Florence, Hieria, and the rest, while ecumenical in outward appearance, are not truly so, precisely because they failed to secure this acceptance by the Church at large."

If a council is only deemed ecumenical once the whole Church has accepted it, how does this work with Chalcedon? The OO, who were at the time still in communion with the EO, did not accepted this council, yet it is considered ecumenical by the EO, myself included.

The only way I could think of is if the OO decided to leave the Church over this, rather than merely not accepting it.


Khomiakov is right.

On Chalcedon, the reconciliation will be on the order of Pope St. Cyril and Arbp./EP St. John Chrysostom, who in life were violently opposed to each other, but the Church (both EO and OO) canonized both.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,868



« Reply #32 on: July 09, 2014, 04:20:21 PM »

Note: I am almost certain this topic has been heavily discussed, but I searched and can't find anything.  Feel free to point me to a previous thread dealing with this.  I am writing from the perspective of an Antiochian Orthodox.

Met. Kallistos Ware says the following in his book The Orthodox Church:

"To the question how one can know whether a council is ecumenical, Khomiakov and his school gave an answer which at first site appears clear and straightforward: a council cannot be considered ecumenical unless its decrees are accepted by the whole Church. Florence, Hieria, and the rest, while ecumenical in outward appearance, are not truly so, precisely because they failed to secure this acceptance by the Church at large."

If a council is only deemed ecumenical once the whole Church has accepted it, how does this work with Chalcedon? The OO, who were at the time still in communion with the EO, did not accepted this council, yet it is considered ecumenical by the EO, myself included.

The only way I could think of is if the OO decided to leave the Church over this, rather than merely not accepting it.



Or the EO decided to leave the Church in favour of Chalcedon.
Your like the OO version of Isa.  laugh

You pay me a great compliment of which I am unworthy.
I'm blushing from the honor I have not earned laugh
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,415


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #33 on: July 09, 2014, 04:26:16 PM »

What I'm trying to get at is, do the similar variations of attitude exist in the OO toward the EO?

I think they exist, but percentage-wise we probably are less affected by it than the EO.  Put another way, more of us are on board with one way of looking at things than on the EO side. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,415


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #34 on: July 09, 2014, 04:27:45 PM »

Our priest prays for "our bishops", Metropolitans Mar Gregorios Yohanna Ibrahim and Boulous Yazigi in the Liturgy, making no distinction that one is Oriental and one is Eastern Orthodox. I just always assumed that all Orthodox juridictions viewed it in the same manner, but apparently not, unfortunately.

It's interesting to see the juxtaposition of that petition in the litany with misrepresentations of and anathemas against two of our saints in the hymnography for this weekend's Vespers as outlined on the Antiochian Archdiocese website.  Wink
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 8,369



« Reply #35 on: July 09, 2014, 04:40:48 PM »

Our priest prays for "our bishops", Metropolitans Mar Gregorios Yohanna Ibrahim and Boulous Yazigi in the Liturgy, making no distinction that one is Oriental and one is Eastern Orthodox. I just always assumed that all Orthodox juridictions viewed it in the same manner, but apparently not, unfortunately.

It's interesting to see the juxtaposition of that petition in the litany with misrepresentations of and anathemas against two of our saints in the hymnography for this weekend's Vespers as outlined on the Antiochian Archdiocese website.  Wink
Hey, if there is going to be reunification, you have to bring some bargaining chips to the table.  Perhaps we can bring heretic trading cards to the Great Counsel and see who you can get unanathemized.

Let's see. I'll trade you a Severus anathema revokation for a statement from Pope Theodoros II saying that Chalcedon wasn't all bad...
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,415


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #36 on: July 09, 2014, 04:44:58 PM »

Our priest prays for "our bishops", Metropolitans Mar Gregorios Yohanna Ibrahim and Boulous Yazigi in the Liturgy, making no distinction that one is Oriental and one is Eastern Orthodox. I just always assumed that all Orthodox juridictions viewed it in the same manner, but apparently not, unfortunately.

It's interesting to see the juxtaposition of that petition in the litany with misrepresentations of and anathemas against two of our saints in the hymnography for this weekend's Vespers as outlined on the Antiochian Archdiocese website.  Wink
Hey, if there is going to be reunification, you have to bring some bargaining chips to the table.  Perhaps we can bring heretic trading cards to the Great Counsel and see who you can get unanathemized.

Let's see. I'll trade you a Severus anathema revokation for a statement from Pope Theodoros II saying that Chalcedon wasn't all bad...

This is what happened after Mario left the RCC for the Coptic Church:

Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,868



« Reply #37 on: July 09, 2014, 05:59:55 PM »

Our priest prays for "our bishops", Metropolitans Mar Gregorios Yohanna Ibrahim and Boulous Yazigi in the Liturgy, making no distinction that one is Oriental and one is Eastern Orthodox. I just always assumed that all Orthodox juridictions viewed it in the same manner, but apparently not, unfortunately.

It's interesting to see the juxtaposition of that petition in the litany with misrepresentations of and anathemas against two of our saints in the hymnography for this weekend's Vespers as outlined on the Antiochian Archdiocese website.  Wink
Hey, if there is going to be reunification, you have to bring some bargaining chips to the table.  Perhaps we can bring heretic trading cards to the Great Counsel and see who you can get unanathemized.

Let's see. I'll trade you a Severus anathema revokation for a statement from Pope Theodoros II saying that Chalcedon wasn't all bad...
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 17,415


The Pope Emeritus reading OCNet


WWW
« Reply #38 on: July 09, 2014, 06:14:44 PM »

I like him.  I don't know much about him, but I was impressed with his fluency in Russian. 
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Tags: ecumenical councils 
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.149 seconds with 67 queries.