Could you post a link to where he says this? I'm interested to see it.
Where'd you read this?
I find it fascinating that, twice, have the Orthodox bishops signed union with the Catholic Church, reneged on that union.
Not for the first time I have the honour to clear up this misunderstanding.
The much vaunted Roman Catholic propaganda that a reunion was achieved at Florence and ratified by the Orthodox but then repudiated by the "perfidious Greeks" is so much balderdash, a Western propaganda item which should be laid to rest...!
The acceptance of Florence was conditional upon its acceptance by an Eastern Council.
" However, after Patriarch Joseph II of Constantinople died only two days later [at Florence], the Greeks insisted that ratification by the Eastern Church could be achieved only by the agreement of an Eastern synod.
"Upon their return, the Eastern bishops found their agreement with the West broadly rejected by the populace and by civil authorities (with the notable exception of the Emperors of the East who remained committed to union until the fall of the Byzantine Empire two decades later). The union signed at Florence, even down to the present, has never been accepted by the Eastern churches."
Which reminds me of those good lay Orthodox... you were braggin on yesterday... in OZ carrying stones to stone their bishop...right or wrong!!...
Yea...some solid foundations for the faith there...youbetcha!!
Father Ambrose mentioned it as a display of the strong points of Orthodox laity and their defense of the faith...even when wrong...
I said it sounded just like the aftermath of the Council of Florence.
He just wrote about it yesterday...Maybe even in this thread.
Re: Something rotten in the state of ecumenism?
« Reply #67 on: July 07, 2011, 10:27:26 PM »
Quote from: Peter J on July 07, 2011, 10:16:47 PM
Quote from: Irish Hermit on July 07, 2011, 10:04:55 PM
Mary, I wonder if your attitude stems from a belief that people such as Metropolitan Zizioulas represents the mind of the Church.
He doesn't. You will find that Saint Justin Popovic was our best theologian of the last century and Saint Justin dismisses out of hand both papal primacy and papal infallibility. You will find that the belief of the Church is faithfully expressed through Saint Justin and it is with him that the faithful will close ranks, not with Metropolitan Zizioulas.
Alright, since you've settled that, which represented the mind of the Church, St. Cyril of Alexandria or St. Celestine of Rome? Or was it St. John of Antioch?
It is not I who will settle it. It will be the Church and I'll bet dollars to bootstraps that the Church will back Saint Justin and not the well groomed and deodorised delegates at Theological Commissions.
Seriously..... while you can pretty much count on your Catholic faithful accepting what is decided by the Vatican, you certainly cannot count on that with our people.An example....... when the Greek Archbishop Stylianos of Sydney was quite active in ecumenical affairs and headed a delegation to Rome his flock came to believe that he had betrayed Orthodoxy in some way (I can't remember details.)
The first Sunday he was back in Sydney his people actually stoned him on the steps of his cathedral! You see the power of the people, the power of grassroots Orthodoxy.
In point of fact they were quite mistaken and the poor Archbishop had not betrayed Orthodoxy at all!