Author Topic: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox  (Read 4519 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nephi

  • Monster Tamer
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,762
Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« on: February 24, 2013, 09:48:18 AM »
I've seen this more than I'd like to recently on places like news sites and facebook... It seems popular belief that to be Orthodox you must be in communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch, as if he's the Orthodox equivalent of the RC Pope or something.

Why does it seem so common? Is it just Hellenophilia or what?

Offline Justin Kissel

  • Formerly a *, now a ☆
  • Protospatharios
  • ****************
  • Posts: 30,952
  • Faith: Agnosticish
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #1 on: February 24, 2013, 10:22:31 AM »
I don't remember hearing it a ton back in the day. I know the aggreen site had something like that (and maybe still does have that heresy) on their website, but overall it was pretty minimal in exposure. Nonetheless, orthodoxinfo.com did have an article or two on "neo-papal-patriarchalism," and there were also some forum posts about it (including by me), so it's been around. I don't think it's just a Greek thing as I've seen Serbs and others make similar statements... (St. Justin is turning over in his grave).
"Christian America is finally waking up to what fraternities and biker gangs have known for years: hazing works!"

Offline Alpo

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,261
  • My borcht recipe is better than your borcht recipe
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #2 on: February 24, 2013, 11:32:00 AM »
Is it actually argued by theologians and clerics or is it just an idea of misquided laymen?

Offline Punch

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,801
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #3 on: February 24, 2013, 02:45:22 PM »
Was Maximos the Confessor in communion with Constantinople?
I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.

Offline Gunnarr

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,871
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #4 on: February 24, 2013, 02:51:47 PM »
Was Maximos the Confessor in communion with Constantinople?

shhh... you are ruining the Ecumenical Patriarch's fun!
I am a demonic servant! Beware!

Offline mike

  • The Jerk
  • Stratopedarches
  • **************
  • Posts: 21,990
  • Scarecrow is watching you
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Makurian Orthodox
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #5 on: February 24, 2013, 02:56:14 PM »
What's before the 381 when there had not been Ecumenical Patriarchate?

Offline Gunnarr

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,871
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #6 on: February 24, 2013, 03:07:23 PM »
What's before the 381 when there had not been Ecumenical Patriarchate?

The Full Truth had not yet been revealed
I am a demonic servant! Beware!

Online Cyrillic

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,429
  • Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #7 on: February 24, 2013, 03:07:54 PM »
That'd be bad news for Orthodox living in the first millenium. Constantinople was constantly arian/nestorian/miaphysite/monothelite/iconoclast etc.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 03:08:02 PM by Cyrillic »
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me"
-Benjamin Disraeli

Offline Αριστοκλής

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,026
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #8 on: February 24, 2013, 03:17:47 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.
"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides

Offline dzheremi

  • No longer posting here.
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,383
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #9 on: February 24, 2013, 03:44:45 PM »
That'd be bad news for Orthodox living in the first millenium. Constantinople was constantly arian/nestorian/miaphysite/monothelite/iconoclast etc.

I'm surprised and saddened that you of all people have classed us together with all of these heretics. Having a change of heart/becoming unduly influenced by orthodoxinfo.com-style polemics, are we?

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,970
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #10 on: February 24, 2013, 03:49:16 PM »
What's before the 381 when there had not been Ecumenical Patriarchate?

The Full Truth had not yet been revealed

And it will never be.
Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.

Online Cyrillic

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,429
  • Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #11 on: February 24, 2013, 04:02:23 PM »
That'd be bad news for Orthodox living in the first millenium. Constantinople was constantly arian/nestorian/miaphysite/monothelite/iconoclast etc.

I'm surprised and saddened that you of all people have classed us together with all of these heretics. Having a change of heart/becoming unduly influenced by orthodoxinfo.com-style polemics, are we?

No, no, no. I still love you miaphysites and I don't think you're heretics, as my recent posts on the EO-OO private forum illustrate quite well. But I just meant to say that communion with patriarchs like Patr. Anthimus I, who did have another faith than his predecessors and successors, wasn't really the standard of Eastern Orthodoxy. Sorry if I've offended you with my post  :-[
« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 04:03:15 PM by Cyrillic »
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me"
-Benjamin Disraeli

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #12 on: February 24, 2013, 04:02:47 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.
No, it is not: Bp./Abp./Patriarch/EP Macedonius I, Eudoxius, Nestorius, Sergius I, Anastasios...among others proved the contrary, something confirmed by EP Ioachim III-who claimed to cut Antioch off from Orthodox communion because it had the audacity to elect its own patriarch and tell the Phanar to mind its own business, and who excommunicated the Bulgarians for phyletism while attempting to Hellenize anyone the Turks let him and issued the absurd claims over the world in the Tomos of 1908-and Met/Abp/EP/Pope Meletius-elected EP when deposed by the Church of Greece and refused recognition by the Pope of Alexandria and the Patriarch of Jerusalem-and EP Gregory VII-who excommunicated Pat. St. Tikhon to commune with the "Living Church" of the Soviets.
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #13 on: February 24, 2013, 04:03:38 PM »
What's before the 381 when there had not been Ecumenical Patriarchate?

The Full Truth had not yet been revealed
Christ had not yet come?
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

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,970
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #14 on: February 24, 2013, 04:07:47 PM »
What's before the 381 when there had not been Ecumenical Patriarchate?

The Full Truth had not yet been revealed
Christ had not yet come?

Is Christ fully revealed?
Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #15 on: February 24, 2013, 04:07:59 PM »
I've seen this more than I'd like to recently on places like news sites and facebook... It seems popular belief that to be Orthodox you must be in communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch, as if he's the Orthodox equivalent of the RC Pope or something.

Why does it seem so common? Is it just Hellenophilia or what?
It's pushed by the Vatican because it is a convenient way to bolster its claims, and pushed by the Phanar in order to bolster its claims and the interests of "homogeneia."

It is popular only among some Greeks, and perhaps some Ukrainians (for their own reasons-i.e. counterpoint to the Patriarch of Moscow).
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #16 on: February 24, 2013, 04:08:24 PM »
What's before the 381 when there had not been Ecumenical Patriarchate?

The Full Truth had not yet been revealed
Christ had not yet come?

Is Christ fully revealed?
Revealed enough.
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #17 on: February 24, 2013, 04:14:45 PM »
Is it actually argued by theologians and clerics or is it just an idea of misquided laymen?
How about misguided clerics?  Do a search on what Metropolitan Elpidophoros of Bursa has to say.
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

Offline mike

  • The Jerk
  • Stratopedarches
  • **************
  • Posts: 21,990
  • Scarecrow is watching you
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Makurian Orthodox
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #18 on: February 24, 2013, 04:17:21 PM »
I have a feeling that when I get up in the morning (in about 8-9 hours) it will have had over 100 replies and at least 3 reported posts. <sigh>

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,970
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #19 on: February 24, 2013, 04:20:49 PM »
What's before the 381 when there had not been Ecumenical Patriarchate?

The Full Truth had not yet been revealed
Christ had not yet come?

Is Christ fully revealed?
Revealed enough.

So the "Full Truth" hasn't been revealed. You agree.

Great.

Now the question becomes if truth can be fully revealed. I say no (sorta since the structure of truth is revelation). But some Protestants say otherwise.
Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #20 on: February 24, 2013, 04:32:06 PM »
What's before the 381 when there had not been Ecumenical Patriarchate?

The Full Truth had not yet been revealed
Christ had not yet come?

Is Christ fully revealed?
Revealed enough.

So the "Full Truth" hasn't been revealed. You agree.

Great.

Now the question becomes if truth can be fully revealed. I say no (sorta since the structure of truth is revelation). But some Protestants say otherwise.
Protestants are wrong, including said Protestants.
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

Offline JamesR

  • Virginal Chicano Blood
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,302
  • St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #21 on: February 24, 2013, 04:48:52 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Correct me if I'm wrong, but during the time of Florence and the fall of Constantinople, didn't Russia independently elect its own Patriarch in like AD 1448? Technically through doing so, they weren't in communion with the EP because they had violated the previous policy--which was for delegates from Constantinople to oversee the process of appointing new Metropolitans/Patriarchs.
Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #22 on: February 24, 2013, 05:44:21 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Correct me if I'm wrong, but during the time of Florence and the fall of Constantinople, didn't Russia independently elect its own Patriarch in like AD 1448? Technically through doing so, they weren't in communion with the EP because they had violated the previous policy--which was for delegates from Constantinople to oversee the process of appointing new Metropolitans/Patriarchs.
Right you are!  In fact, Constantinople-in the interest of submitting to the Vatican-had violated the canons on the Metropolitan of Kiev: the rules at the time gave the nomination to Vladimir (the capital city of the Grand Duchy at the time).  Met. St. Jonah had been elected, but arrived too late in Constantinople for consecration-Met. Isidore had been consecrated instead.  With the deposition of Isidore for apostacy, after waiting awhile for Constantinople to return to Orthodoxy, the Holy Synod at Moscow canonically elevated Met. St. Jonah as its autocephalous primate.
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

Online Cyrillic

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,429
  • Cyrillico est imperare orbi universo
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #23 on: February 24, 2013, 05:47:40 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.

Ah, the font of sacerdotal unity. Where have I heard that before?
"My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me"
-Benjamin Disraeli

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #24 on: February 24, 2013, 06:08:38 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.

Ah, the font of sacerdotal unity. Where have I heard that before?
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

Offline Αριστοκλής

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,026
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #25 on: February 24, 2013, 08:38:24 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.
No, it is not: Bp./Abp./Patriarch/EP Macedonius I, Eudoxius, Nestorius, Sergius I, Anastasios...among others proved the contrary, something confirmed by EP Ioachim III-who claimed to cut Antioch off from Orthodox communion because it had the audacity to elect its own patriarch and tell the Phanar to mind its own business, and who excommunicated the Bulgarians for phyletism while attempting to Hellenize anyone the Turks let him and issued the absurd claims over the world in the Tomos of 1908-and Met/Abp/EP/Pope Meletius-elected EP when deposed by the Church of Greece and refused recognition by the Pope of Alexandria and the Patriarch of Jerusalem-and EP Gregory VII-who excommunicated Pat. St. Tikhon to commune with the "Living Church" of the Soviets.

You missed the key point entirely in your usual knee-jerk anti-"Phanar" manner.

Your exceptions are just that, exceptions.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 08:46:17 PM by Αριστοκλής »
"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides

Offline dcommini

  • Tha mi sgulan na Trianaid
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,208
  • Beannachd Dia dhuit
    • Life of an Orthodox Soldier
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #26 on: February 24, 2013, 09:11:50 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.
No, it is not: Bp./Abp./Patriarch/EP Macedonius I, Eudoxius, Nestorius, Sergius I, Anastasios...among others proved the contrary, something confirmed by EP Ioachim III-who claimed to cut Antioch off from Orthodox communion because it had the audacity to elect its own patriarch and tell the Phanar to mind its own business, and who excommunicated the Bulgarians for phyletism while attempting to Hellenize anyone the Turks let him and issued the absurd claims over the world in the Tomos of 1908-and Met/Abp/EP/Pope Meletius-elected EP when deposed by the Church of Greece and refused recognition by the Pope of Alexandria and the Patriarch of Jerusalem-and EP Gregory VII-who excommunicated Pat. St. Tikhon to commune with the "Living Church" of the Soviets.

You missed the key point entirely in your usual knee-jerk anti-"Phanar" manner.

Your exceptions are just that, exceptions.

Except that there seem to be so many exceptions. I would say that the sure way to define canonical Orthodoxy is by the practice and belief of that particular church. After that you may look to see who they are in communion with for any red flags (such as heretical groups or schismatics), but I would never say and have never heard it seriously said that one must be in communion with the EP to be Orthodox.

And what if an "exception" happened again? What if Constantinople fell into heresy again? Would those who broke communion then not be Orthodox? Of course not! Now quit being ridiculous.
N/OblSB

Gun cuireadh do chupa thairis le slàinte agus sona - May your cup overflow with health and happiness
Check out my blog...

Offline Αριστοκλής

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,026
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #27 on: February 24, 2013, 10:13:15 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.
No, it is not: Bp./Abp./Patriarch/EP Macedonius I, Eudoxius, Nestorius, Sergius I, Anastasios...among others proved the contrary, something confirmed by EP Ioachim III-who claimed to cut Antioch off from Orthodox communion because it had the audacity to elect its own patriarch and tell the Phanar to mind its own business, and who excommunicated the Bulgarians for phyletism while attempting to Hellenize anyone the Turks let him and issued the absurd claims over the world in the Tomos of 1908-and Met/Abp/EP/Pope Meletius-elected EP when deposed by the Church of Greece and refused recognition by the Pope of Alexandria and the Patriarch of Jerusalem-and EP Gregory VII-who excommunicated Pat. St. Tikhon to commune with the "Living Church" of the Soviets.

You missed the key point entirely in your usual knee-jerk anti-"Phanar" manner.

Your exceptions are just that, exceptions.

Except that there seem to be so many exceptions. I would say that the sure way to define canonical Orthodoxy is by the practice and belief of that particular church. After that you may look to see who they are in communion with for any red flags (such as heretical groups or schismatics), but I would never say and have never heard it seriously said that one must be in communion with the EP to be Orthodox.

And what if an "exception" happened again? What if Constantinople fell into heresy again? Would those who broke communion then not be Orthodox? Of course not! Now quit being ridiculous.

And YOU miss the point as well. The aspect applies to all the hierarchs, including the EP.

Plus, he lists 6 individually by name "and others". "So many" in how many years?
"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides

Offline dcommini

  • Tha mi sgulan na Trianaid
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,208
  • Beannachd Dia dhuit
    • Life of an Orthodox Soldier
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #28 on: February 24, 2013, 10:23:30 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.
No, it is not: Bp./Abp./Patriarch/EP Macedonius I, Eudoxius, Nestorius, Sergius I, Anastasios...among others proved the contrary, something confirmed by EP Ioachim III-who claimed to cut Antioch off from Orthodox communion because it had the audacity to elect its own patriarch and tell the Phanar to mind its own business, and who excommunicated the Bulgarians for phyletism while attempting to Hellenize anyone the Turks let him and issued the absurd claims over the world in the Tomos of 1908-and Met/Abp/EP/Pope Meletius-elected EP when deposed by the Church of Greece and refused recognition by the Pope of Alexandria and the Patriarch of Jerusalem-and EP Gregory VII-who excommunicated Pat. St. Tikhon to commune with the "Living Church" of the Soviets.

You missed the key point entirely in your usual knee-jerk anti-"Phanar" manner.

Your exceptions are just that, exceptions.

Except that there seem to be so many exceptions. I would say that the sure way to define canonical Orthodoxy is by the practice and belief of that particular church. After that you may look to see who they are in communion with for any red flags (such as heretical groups or schismatics), but I would never say and have never heard it seriously said that one must be in communion with the EP to be Orthodox.

And what if an "exception" happened again? What if Constantinople fell into heresy again? Would those who broke communion then not be Orthodox? Of course not! Now quit being ridiculous.

And YOU miss the point as well. The aspect applies to all the hierarchs, including the EP.

Plus, he lists 6 individually by name "and others". "So many" in how many years?

One is too many, and enough to prove you wrong.

Perhaps I should clarify what I meant earlier. Take a look at my jurisdiction, Antioch. If for whatever reason they broke communion with the EP (such as the EP falling into heresy), but the Patriarchate of Antioch still retained the beliefs and practices of Orthodoxy and resisted heresy, and still communed with Jerusalem and Moscow, then would Antioch cease to be Orthodox? No, the EP would have ceased to be Orthodox since he is the one in heresy.

On the converse; if my jurisdiction was headed by a bishop out of Colorado and he communed no one else and anathematized everybody else except those that accepted his authority would he and his church still be Orthodox? Probably not.
N/OblSB

Gun cuireadh do chupa thairis le slàinte agus sona - May your cup overflow with health and happiness
Check out my blog...

Offline WPM

  • Revolutionary Writer
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,821
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #29 on: February 24, 2013, 10:24:03 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.

Ah, the font of sacerdotal unity. Where have I heard that before?


What follows after that? ...
« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 10:24:33 PM by WPM »

Offline Nephi

  • Monster Tamer
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,762
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #30 on: February 24, 2013, 10:27:00 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.

If I understood your point, then I agree that anyone in communion with the EP is Orthodox - as it's an Orthodox church. No different than if a church were to be in communion with Moscow, Jerusalem, etc.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #31 on: February 24, 2013, 10:37:32 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.
No, it is not: Bp./Abp./Patriarch/EP Macedonius I, Eudoxius, Nestorius, Sergius I, Anastasios...among others proved the contrary, something confirmed by EP Ioachim III-who claimed to cut Antioch off from Orthodox communion because it had the audacity to elect its own patriarch and tell the Phanar to mind its own business, and who excommunicated the Bulgarians for phyletism while attempting to Hellenize anyone the Turks let him and issued the absurd claims over the world in the Tomos of 1908-and Met/Abp/EP/Pope Meletius-elected EP when deposed by the Church of Greece and refused recognition by the Pope of Alexandria and the Patriarch of Jerusalem-and EP Gregory VII-who excommunicated Pat. St. Tikhon to commune with the "Living Church" of the Soviets.

You missed the key point entirely in your usual knee-jerk anti-"Phanar" manner.

Your exceptions are just that, exceptions.
These aren't exceptions that make a rule.

If, for instance, if the Phanar decides to insist on its canon 28 mythology-something distinctly possible if Met. Elpidophoros becomes EP Elpidophoros-and walks down the same path that Old Rome beat down, it won't be taking Orthodox communion with it.

There is no canon, much less any dogma, that defines Orthodox communion as "communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate."  The circumstances surrounding the autocephaly of Russia shows that.
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

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #32 on: February 24, 2013, 10:49:16 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.

If I understood your point, then I agree that anyone in communion with the EP is Orthodox - as it's an Orthodox church. No different than if a church were to be in communion with Moscow, Jerusalem, etc.
It is Orthodox now.  There is no guarantee of that at all times-its history proves otherwise.  Commune with it at those times, and you commune with heretics.

Btw, the apologists for the Vatican often challenge us with examples of the first millenium of the Pope of Old Rome making Ultramontanist claims, and pointing out that we were still in communion.  And so we were-until the Vatican reorganized its dogma to orbit around such claims.  So too communion with New Rome today.  The Phanar makes a lot of outlandish claims as of late, and has engaged in un-Orthodox, if not heterodox, activities.  But not yet past the breaking point.  If it ever does, as Old Rome did, we will look at New Rome like Old Rome.  And we don't worry about their supreme pontiff not being in our diptychs any more.
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

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,978
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #33 on: February 24, 2013, 10:49:51 PM »
They were first called Christians in Antioch. If you're not in communion with Antioch, you aren't Christian.  :angel:
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Nephi

  • Monster Tamer
  • Section Moderator
  • Protokentarchos
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,762
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #34 on: February 24, 2013, 11:05:46 PM »
It is Orthodox now.  There is no guarantee of that at all times-its history proves otherwise.  Commune with it at those times, and you commune with heretics.
That's what I had in mind.

Quote
Btw, the apologists for the Vatican often challenge us with examples of the first millenium of the Pope of Old Rome making Ultramontanist claims, and pointing out that we were still in communion.  And so we were-until the Vatican reorganized its dogma to orbit around such claims.  So too communion with New Rome today.  The Phanar makes a lot of outlandish claims as of late, and has engaged in un-Orthodox, if not heterodox, activities.  But not yet past the breaking point.  If it ever does, as Old Rome did, we will look at New Rome like Old Rome.  And we don't worry about their supreme pontiff not being in our diptychs any more.
Then we can just have a Newer Rome.

Offline Αριστοκλής

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,026
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #35 on: February 24, 2013, 11:16:26 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.

If I understood your point, then I agree that anyone in communion with the EP is Orthodox - as it's an Orthodox church. No different than if a church were to be in communion with Moscow, Jerusalem, etc.

You understand me correctly. The rest here can play the usual confusion games.
"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #36 on: February 24, 2013, 11:31:01 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.

If I understood your point, then I agree that anyone in communion with the EP is Orthodox - as it's an Orthodox church. No different than if a church were to be in communion with Moscow, Jerusalem, etc.

You understand me correctly. The rest here can play the usual confusion games.
The EP keeps on threatening us with this "Great and Holy Council" (wasn't it supposed to be this year?).  The scenario of Constantinople going one way and the Orthodox going another is quite plausible.  "Who's in communion with the EP" will not be dispositive.

Given that the robber council of Ravenna defined in error Orthodox communion as communion with the EP, we need to make quite sure that is understood, by all parties, so there is no confusion.  Met. Elpidophoros can claim all he wants that "the diptychs of the Great Church" are the Book of Life, but t'ain't so.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2013, 11:31:34 PM by ialmisry »
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

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,152
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #37 on: February 24, 2013, 11:31:24 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.
No, it is not: Bp./Abp./Patriarch/EP Macedonius I, Eudoxius, Nestorius, Sergius I, Anastasios...among others proved the contrary, something confirmed by EP Ioachim III-who claimed to cut Antioch off from Orthodox communion because it had the audacity to elect its own patriarch and tell the Phanar to mind its own business, and who excommunicated the Bulgarians for phyletism while attempting to Hellenize anyone the Turks let him and issued the absurd claims over the world in the Tomos of 1908-and Met/Abp/EP/Pope Meletius-elected EP when deposed by the Church of Greece and refused recognition by the Pope of Alexandria and the Patriarch of Jerusalem-and EP Gregory VII-who excommunicated Pat. St. Tikhon to commune with the "Living Church" of the Soviets.

Pardon, but I think the context Αριστοκλής  was referencing is the present day - not historically.

I don't support organized religion.       I'm Orthodox. ..(apologies to Will Rogers....)

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #38 on: February 24, 2013, 11:34:10 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.
No, it is not: Bp./Abp./Patriarch/EP Macedonius I, Eudoxius, Nestorius, Sergius I, Anastasios...among others proved the contrary, something confirmed by EP Ioachim III-who claimed to cut Antioch off from Orthodox communion because it had the audacity to elect its own patriarch and tell the Phanar to mind its own business, and who excommunicated the Bulgarians for phyletism while attempting to Hellenize anyone the Turks let him and issued the absurd claims over the world in the Tomos of 1908-and Met/Abp/EP/Pope Meletius-elected EP when deposed by the Church of Greece and refused recognition by the Pope of Alexandria and the Patriarch of Jerusalem-and EP Gregory VII-who excommunicated Pat. St. Tikhon to commune with the "Living Church" of the Soviets.

Pardon, but I think the context Αριστοκλής  was referencing is the present day - not historically.
Those who will not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.  Not all examples were ancient history.
I don't support organized religion.       I'm Orthodox. ..(apologies to Will Rogers....)
Orthodoxy is the right religion. It's just been given to the wrong people. (to quote Frs. Schmemann or Meyendorff, I forget which.  Or was it Hopko?).

MK was here
« Last Edit: March 01, 2013, 01:53:15 PM by Michał Kalina »
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

Offline Αριστοκλής

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,026
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #39 on: February 24, 2013, 11:39:34 PM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.
No, it is not: Bp./Abp./Patriarch/EP Macedonius I, Eudoxius, Nestorius, Sergius I, Anastasios...among others proved the contrary, something confirmed by EP Ioachim III-who claimed to cut Antioch off from Orthodox communion because it had the audacity to elect its own patriarch and tell the Phanar to mind its own business, and who excommunicated the Bulgarians for phyletism while attempting to Hellenize anyone the Turks let him and issued the absurd claims over the world in the Tomos of 1908-and Met/Abp/EP/Pope Meletius-elected EP when deposed by the Church of Greece and refused recognition by the Pope of Alexandria and the Patriarch of Jerusalem-and EP Gregory VII-who excommunicated Pat. St. Tikhon to commune with the "Living Church" of the Soviets.

Pardon, but I think the context Αριστοκλής  was referencing is the present day - not historically.

I don't support organized religion.       I'm Orthodox. ..(apologies to Will Rogers....)

You are correct that I read the OP's question in today's context, rather than a pretext for Isa's usual EP bashing which is as boring as it is predictable.

"Historically" is too nebulous a term.
"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides

Offline serb1389

  • Lord, remember me when you come into your Kingdom!
  • Global Moderator
  • Merarches
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,527
  • Michał Kalina's biggest fan
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #40 on: February 24, 2013, 11:48:59 PM »
I don't remember hearing it a ton back in the day. I know the aggreen site had something like that (and maybe still does have that heresy) on their website, but overall it was pretty minimal in exposure. Nonetheless, orthodoxinfo.com did have an article or two on "neo-papal-patriarchalism," and there were also some forum posts about it (including by me), so it's been around. I don't think it's just a Greek thing as I've seen Serbs and others make similar statements... (St. Justin is turning over in his grave).

Darn right my friend. 
I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that

Offline Punch

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,801
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #41 on: February 25, 2013, 12:00:58 AM »
Yes, communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch is the sure way to define canonical "Orthodox(y)", but it is an indication, not as much as a legal requirement, that all in communion with him are also are in communion with each other.

Ah, the font of sacerdotal unity. Where have I heard that before?


What follows after that? ...

The Antichrist and the False Prophet?
I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.

Offline Opus118

  • Site Supporter
  • OC.net guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,821
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #42 on: February 25, 2013, 12:04:19 AM »
There is no canon, much less any dogma, that defines Orthodox communion as "communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate." 

Fine, why are there 31 posts in this thread?


Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,391
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #43 on: February 25, 2013, 12:09:36 AM »
There is no canon, much less any dogma, that defines Orthodox communion as "communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate." 

Fine, why are there 31 posts in this thread?


42, including yours. Because you are not the only one mistaken.

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

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,152
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: Communion with Ecumenical Patriarch = Orthodox
« Reply #44 on: February 25, 2013, 12:12:14 AM »
There are plenty of places for folks to go which self-identify themselves as Orthodox who are not in communion with the EP. I would urge those posters who seem to fume angrily and obsessively about Constantinople to seek them out. The last I knew the Serbs of New Gracanica and the Antiochians and Alexandrians  were in communion with the EP and we with them.