|
Severian
|
 |
« on: September 25, 2011, 08:23:07 AM » |
|
How do our OO monks view ecumenism? Are they as rigidly anti-ecumenical as some (most?) EO monks? I have visited two Coptic monasteries in the USA, but I didn't really ask the monks what they thought about ecumenism, I just don't think it would be that appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Christ is risen! !المسيح قام Χριστός ἀνέστη! ⲠⲓⲬⲣⲓⲥⲧⲟⲥ ⲁϥⲧⲱⲛϥ! Christus resurrexit! Come and join OCnet's new book club! |
|
|
|
Father Peter
|
|
« Reply #1 on: September 25, 2011, 12:12:35 PM » |
|
Don't forget that most bishops are monks, therefore the ecumenical engagement of our bishops and synods may be taken as reflecting at least one stream of monastic thought in regard to dealing with other communities.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Severian
|
|
« Reply #2 on: September 25, 2011, 05:37:26 PM » |
|
^That is true, of course. However, I would think that Monks who are less exposed to dialogues than our Bishops would be stricter concerning dialogues with other communities.
In any case, I don't think this anti-ecumenist attitude is very widespread in OOxy as it is in EOxy. Many EOs seem to be against any sort of dialogues with other groups. I am certainly against any sort of "ecumenism" which undermines the Orthodox faith, but we should dialogue with others, at the very least, to introduce Orthodoxy to them. Though, I do feel uneasy about joint prayers with Protestants because it seems to fall under the condemnation of the canons of the Church.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 25, 2011, 05:43:00 PM by Severian »
|
Logged
|
Christ is risen! !المسيح قام Χριστός ἀνέστη! ⲠⲓⲬⲣⲓⲥⲧⲟⲥ ⲁϥⲧⲱⲛϥ! Christus resurrexit! Come and join OCnet's new book club! |
|
|
Pikhristos Aftonf
Member
 Offline
Faith: Coptic Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of Melbourne
Posts: 210
|
|
« Reply #3 on: September 25, 2011, 07:03:42 PM » |
|
from my experience, it seems that the OO monks tend to value simplicity above all things, and in fact they are very submissive to their heirarchs. i do not think they would oppose their heirarchs either supporting or opposing ecuminism.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Severian
|
|
« Reply #4 on: October 03, 2011, 09:55:04 PM » |
|
I have spoken with a few Priests (including my own) and some Deacons regarding our dialogue with the Byzanto-Chalcedonians and they seem a bit sceptical towards it. Would our Monastics be even more sceptical towards dialogue then our Clergy? As I have said, most (all?) of the Clergy I have met are apprehensive towards the Byzantines. I know our Monks are typically obedient to our Hierarchs, but, still...
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 03, 2011, 10:00:23 PM by Severian »
|
Logged
|
Christ is risen! !المسيح قام Χριστός ἀνέστη! ⲠⲓⲬⲣⲓⲥⲧⲟⲥ ⲁϥⲧⲱⲛϥ! Christus resurrexit! Come and join OCnet's new book club! |
|
|
|
NicholasMyra
|
|
« Reply #5 on: October 04, 2011, 12:27:22 AM » |
|
Byzanto-Chalcedonians
Should we refer to you fellows as Armeno-Semitic-Deuteroephesians?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Father Peter
|
|
« Reply #6 on: October 04, 2011, 03:09:15 AM » |
|
How aware are the priests you have spoken with about the details of the Christologial controversy, and the extent of the dialogue which has taken place, and the past efforts at reconciliation?
And as I have said, the bishops are monks. And they support the efforts.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Severian
|
|
« Reply #7 on: October 04, 2011, 04:45:14 PM » |
|
Byzanto-Chalcedonians
Should we refer to you fellows as Armeno-Semitic-Deuteroephesians? I did not designate you guys as "Byzanto-Chalcedonians" to be rude, I did so as to distinguish you guys from the Catholics. "EO" is probably just a simpler term, so I'll just use that. But I really like the epithet "Deutero-Ephesian". You know what... *goes to change his jurisdiction status* @ Fr. Peter It is not so much that the Priests, Deacons, and other servers I have spoken don't want a unity per se. I think they would say that the EO are substantially Orthodox in faith, however I think they are just sceptical whether unity will ever happen in reality and I don't think they are comfortable with inter-communion until we officially reunite. So perhaps "conservative" would be a better designation rather than "apprehensive". |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 04, 2011, 05:18:50 PM by Severian »
|
Logged
|
Christ is risen! !المسيح قام Χριστός ἀνέστη! ⲠⲓⲬⲣⲓⲥⲧⲟⲥ ⲁϥⲧⲱⲛϥ! Christus resurrexit! Come and join OCnet's new book club! |
|
|
|
Father Peter
|
|
« Reply #8 on: October 04, 2011, 05:30:13 PM » |
|
I don't think that such a view is very conservative though.
Many of our Fathers were willing to make great efforts to try to bring about a reconciliation between the two parties. At the time of St Severus he was very concerned that a separate hierarchy not be established because he considered that the Christological controversy was taking place WITHIN the Church of the Oecumene.
The very fact that from the beginning, and even in the face of severe persecution, the Church insisted that Chalcedonians should not be baptised or chrismated shows that there was always an understanding that the Chalcedonians were not separate from the Church even while in error.
I think that the anti-ecumenical view is rather modern and does not reflect the history of the anti-Chalcedonians as a whole, or even of our own Coptic Orthodox tradition.
The Holy Synod has already agreed that some members of the the Greek Church in Egypt and the Coptic Church may have unrestricted intercommunion. Therefore the principle has already been established. The Syrian and Antiochian Churches already Synodically allow intercommunion. Therefore the principle has already been established.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Pikhristos Aftonf
Member
Offline
Faith: Coptic Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of Melbourne
Posts: 210
|
|
« Reply #9 on: October 06, 2011, 10:41:24 PM » |
|
Byzanto-Chalcedonians
Should we refer to you fellows as Armeno-Semitic-Deuteroephesians? sounds ubercool, but you forgot the egyptians and africans  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
William
|
|
« Reply #10 on: October 06, 2011, 10:42:17 PM » |
|
Byzanto-Chalcedonians
Should we refer to you fellows as Armeno-Semitic-Deuteroephesians? sounds ubercool, but you forgot the egyptians and africans I think that they're covered under "Deuteroephesians." |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
A beard covers many chins. - Tallitot
|
|
|
|
Severian
|
|
« Reply #11 on: October 06, 2011, 10:49:00 PM » |
|
As I have pointed out before, the Armenians do not recognize Ephesus II (not formally, anyway).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Christ is risen! !المسيح قام Χριστός ἀνέστη! ⲠⲓⲬⲣⲓⲥⲧⲟⲥ ⲁϥⲧⲱⲛϥ! Christus resurrexit! Come and join OCnet's new book club! |
|
|
Pikhristos Aftonf
Member
Offline
Faith: Coptic Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of Melbourne
Posts: 210
|
|
« Reply #12 on: October 07, 2011, 12:27:41 AM » |
|
Byzanto-Chalcedonians
Should we refer to you fellows as Armeno-Semitic-Deuteroephesians? sounds ubercool, but you forgot the egyptians and africans I think that they're covered under "Deuteroephesians." NO FAIR!! the syrians and the armenians get their names listed and we don't  , i think it should be the armeno-semitic-hamitic- deutereoephesians.... anyways back to the point being made: do the armenians not recognize Ephesus II due to the same reasons we don't hold it as ecumenical, or because they weren't involved ? honest question God bless |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Salpy
Moderator
Stratopedarches
Offline
Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 10,327
|
|
« Reply #13 on: October 07, 2011, 01:01:21 AM » |
|
I think it is because we were not involved.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
St. Hripsimeh pray for us!
|
|
|
|
Father Peter
|
|
« Reply #14 on: October 07, 2011, 05:10:58 AM » |
|
I think that the non-Chalcedonians have a slightly different view of councils generally, so it is not a matter of not recognising it. I don't think I recognise it either. It is just part of the historical narrative of the Church. It has a certain value and authority, but the Faith is always paramount. I'd not make someone consider Ephesus II ecumenical, even though that is how it was called and considered. But I would want them to confess the substance of the Faith of Ephesus II.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Malina
Jr. Member
Offline
Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Russian Patriarchate
Posts: 44
|
|
« Reply #15 on: October 09, 2011, 12:13:33 PM » |
|
Ecumenism was created by protestants and it proclaim gathering all Christians by protestant`s rules.
We have to be careful regarding such gathering because we can lose our real root of Orthodoxy.
Protestants were become in 1600 after Martin Luther and I always ask them. What did they do until 1600? Where were they been?
Ecumenism may be accepted if all Christians will be build association upon real historical root of Christian history.
I don`t mean customs and traditions of Christianity, I mean root of historical life of Orthodox saints and martyrs. Church may be value by it`s saints.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Father Peter
|
|
« Reply #16 on: October 09, 2011, 12:28:55 PM » |
|
That's not the sort of ecumenism being talked about here.
On this thread we are talking about the possibility of the Eastern Orthodox being reunited with the Oriental Orthodox. This is a process that has been taking place since the 5th century and has nothing to do with Protestantism.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
