OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 22, 2014, 11:53:09 PM *
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 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: For Ecumenists  (Read 2818 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,018



« Reply #45 on: June 10, 2013, 07:14:41 PM »

An advocate for some form of union of Christian ecclesial communities into one Church

With that definition no Orthodox can be "ecumenist" since the Orthodox Church is not one of the many "ecclesial communities". Your definition is flawed.

We are not one of many assembled (ecclesial) communities?   Huh

It has been my experience that we, most of us, are too quick to decide how a word should be used. That's seems to be part of human nature.

(I'm reminded of something a protestant friend of mine observed to me many years ago: that a lot of Catholics will correct someone who calls them "Christian". )

For the case in point, I can't see any reason why calling the Orthodox Church one of the "ecclesial communities" should imply that it isn't the one true church.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
podkarpatska
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,015


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #46 on: June 10, 2013, 11:11:28 PM »

"Visions of a United Church" is the topic at next week's Orientale Lumen Conference in Washinton. http://olconference.com/OL_FutCon_OL_XVII.html

This theme is based on the 2010 paper on the subject produced by the North American EO RCC Theological Dialouge.  http://www.scoba.us/articles/towards-a-unified-church.html

Among the Orthodox presenters will be OCA Metropolitan Tikhon (Mollard), Holy Cross Dean, Father Thomas FitzGerald and Protopresbyter James Dutko of ACROD. The Jesuit Greek Catholic scholar, Archimandrite Robert Taft will also present.

AFR will offer podcasts of the sessions.Check their website for times.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2013, 11:21:24 PM by podkarpatska » Logged
KostaC
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Chicago & the Diocese of Washington (Orthodox Church in America)
Posts: 179



« Reply #47 on: June 11, 2013, 01:26:22 AM »

"Visions of a United Church" is the topic at next week's Orientale Lumen Conference in Washinton. http://olconference.com/OL_FutCon_OL_XVII.html

This theme is based on the 2010 paper on the subject produced by the North American EO RCC Theological Dialouge.  http://www.scoba.us/articles/towards-a-unified-church.html

Among the Orthodox presenters will be OCA Metropolitan Tikhon (Mollard), Holy Cross Dean, Father Thomas FitzGerald and Protopresbyter James Dutko of ACROD. The Jesuit Greek Catholic scholar, Archimandrite Robert Taft will also present.

AFR will offer podcasts of the sessions.Check their website for times.

Why is all this happening when I've left D.C. for the summer? I personally think that his Beatitude is the man, and I was lucky enough to witness his enthronement and eat lunch with him on Easter.


As for what I personally would reject, I would probably join the Oriental Orthodox Church if say something like the Council of Florence happened again, which it most likely never will. And if the Oriental Churches joined with us in some sort of strange union that uses selfish reasoning, then God help us.
Logged

«Μὴ μεριμνᾶτε λοιπὸν διὰ τὴν αὔριον, διὀτι ἡ αὐριανὴ ἡμέρα θὰ φροντίσῃ διὰ τὰ δικά της πράγματα. Φθάνει ἡ στεναχώρια τῆς ἡμέρας». Κατά Ματθαίον 6:34
Gunnarr
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,739



« Reply #48 on: June 11, 2013, 04:07:26 AM »

"Visions of a United Church" is the topic at next week's Orientale Lumen Conference in Washinton. http://olconference.com/OL_FutCon_OL_XVII.html

This theme is based on the 2010 paper on the subject produced by the North American EO RCC Theological Dialouge.  http://www.scoba.us/articles/towards-a-unified-church.html

Among the Orthodox presenters will be OCA Metropolitan Tikhon (Mollard), Holy Cross Dean, Father Thomas FitzGerald and Protopresbyter James Dutko of ACROD. The Jesuit Greek Catholic scholar, Archimandrite Robert Taft will also present.

AFR will offer podcasts of the sessions.Check their website for times.

agh!!!

What is AFR!!!

NEVERMIND

Ancient Faith Radio! Tongue

butr I read this:

"ut will NOT include the Q&A sessions or panel discussions among the speakers."

awwwww but that is the exciting part...
« Last Edit: June 11, 2013, 04:34:03 AM by Gunnarr » Logged

I am a demonic servant! Beware!
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,181


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #49 on: June 11, 2013, 01:07:16 PM »

As for what I personally would reject, I would probably join the Oriental Orthodox Church if say something like the Council of Florence happened again, which it most likely never will. And if the Oriental Churches joined with us in some sort of strange union that uses selfish reasoning, then God help us.

What on earth does this mean?
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
KostaC
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Chicago & the Diocese of Washington (Orthodox Church in America)
Posts: 179



« Reply #50 on: June 11, 2013, 02:04:08 PM »

What on earth does this mean?

Gospodi pomiłuj, that was poorly written!

Sorry, what I meant to say was...

I would personally reject some sort of Council of Florence: Part II where the Eastern Orthodox Church completely gave into Papal claims because it needed something from Rome. While this is never going to happen ever, if it did. I'd ask to be received into the Oriental Orthodox Church, where I think I'd be happy. However, if the Oriental Orthodox Church did likewise in this hypothetical union and completely gave into Papal claims, them I wouldn't know where I'd turn.
Logged

«Μὴ μεριμνᾶτε λοιπὸν διὰ τὴν αὔριον, διὀτι ἡ αὐριανὴ ἡμέρα θὰ φροντίσῃ διὰ τὰ δικά της πράγματα. Φθάνει ἡ στεναχώρια τῆς ἡμέρας». Κατά Ματθαίον 6:34
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,706


« Reply #51 on: June 11, 2013, 02:17:39 PM »

. While this is never going to happen ever, if it did. I'd ask to be received into the Oriental Orthodox Church, where I think I'd be happy.

That's curious.
Logged

On a temporary/semi-permanent/permanent vacation from OC.net.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,181


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #52 on: June 11, 2013, 08:39:10 PM »

I would personally reject some sort of Council of Florence: Part II where the Eastern Orthodox Church completely gave into Papal claims because it needed something from Rome. While this is never going to happen ever, if it did. I'd ask to be received into the Oriental Orthodox Church, where I think I'd be happy. However, if the Oriental Orthodox Church did likewise in this hypothetical union and completely gave into Papal claims, them I wouldn't know where I'd turn.

We've been rejecting Papal claims since 451, I think we'll be OK.  Tongue
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
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,018



« Reply #53 on: June 11, 2013, 08:53:05 PM »

I would personally reject some sort of Council of Florence: Part II where the Eastern Orthodox Church completely gave into Papal claims because it needed something from Rome.

To me, Florence Part II is just what we need ... or rather, Florence Part III, if you count Florence as Florence Part II and Lyons II as Florence Part I. Smiley

Granted, if you know in advance what Florence Part III will be like ("... where the Eastern Orthodox Church completely gave into Papal claims because it needed something from Rome") then I can understand your desire to reject it in advance.  Cool
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
KostaC
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Chicago & the Diocese of Washington (Orthodox Church in America)
Posts: 179



« Reply #54 on: June 11, 2013, 09:09:57 PM »

I would personally reject some sort of Council of Florence: Part II where the Eastern Orthodox Church completely gave into Papal claims because it needed something from Rome.

To me, Florence Part II is just what we need ... or rather, Florence Part III, if you count Florence as Florence Part II and Lyons II as Florence Part I. Smiley

Granted, if you know in advance what Florence Part III will be like ("... where the Eastern Orthodox Church completely gave into Papal claims because it needed something from Rome") then I can understand your desire to reject it in advance.  Cool

What would you say that the Council of Florence was about, then, if not a humiliated Emperor coercing his Empire's bishops into signing a decree that may or may not have guaranteed Papal aid against the Ottoman Empire?
Logged

«Μὴ μεριμνᾶτε λοιπὸν διὰ τὴν αὔριον, διὀτι ἡ αὐριανὴ ἡμέρα θὰ φροντίσῃ διὰ τὰ δικά της πράγματα. Φθάνει ἡ στεναχώρια τῆς ἡμέρας». Κατά Ματθαίον 6:34
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,522



« Reply #55 on: June 11, 2013, 09:14:47 PM »

Which kinds and terms of union you would *not* accept as legitimate? Which ones, if accepted by hierarchy, would lead you to not follow them into a false union?

While I trust the words of Christ that the gates of hell will not prevail...

I would reject any union that declares our accepted councils to not be Orthodox, denies the sainthood of our saints, requires us to accept councils in which we did not take part in or accept as being universally binding, requires universal submission to a single bishop having ordinary jurisdictional authority over every local diocese, acknowledges any single bishop to be unable to make a mistake when speaking/writing in an official capacity by virtue of his office, and the adoption of a form of  the creed that has been historically rejected by us.

I think that just about covers all the non-Protestant traditions. As far as Protestants, they would have to accept our councils (all and whole), accept all of our teachings, adopt the sacraments as we believe them to be, adopt (if they don't already have one) a calendar including all the major feasts, a lectionary, and liturgical worship to include a divine liturgy and hours of prayer. This would probably be easier for some groups like Anglicans and Lutherans than for more non-liturgical groups like Pentecostals.

Just some thoughts.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,018



« Reply #56 on: June 11, 2013, 10:08:27 PM »

I would personally reject some sort of Council of Florence: Part II where the Eastern Orthodox Church completely gave into Papal claims because it needed something from Rome.

To me, Florence Part II is just what we need ... or rather, Florence Part III, if you count Florence as Florence Part II and Lyons II as Florence Part I. Smiley

Granted, if you know in advance what Florence Part III will be like ("... where the Eastern Orthodox Church completely gave into Papal claims because it needed something from Rome") then I can understand your desire to reject it in advance.  Cool

What would you say that the Council of Florence was about, then, if not a humiliated Emperor coercing his Empire's bishops into signing a decree that may or may not have guaranteed Papal aid against the Ottoman Empire?

Well, I wasn't going to get that much into the nitty-gritty. The big difference between Lyons II and Florence was the finality of Florence. The conversation at Lyons II went a bit sour, but at least it was able to resume less than 200 years later. But after Florence it was more like That's it, end of discussion.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,018



« Reply #57 on: June 14, 2013, 06:43:40 AM »

I think that just about covers all the non-Protestant traditions. As far as Protestants, they would have to accept our councils (all and whole),
...

Like Chalcedon?
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,706


« Reply #58 on: June 14, 2013, 06:48:29 AM »

I would personally reject some sort of Council of Florence: Part II where the Eastern Orthodox Church completely gave into Papal claims because it needed something from Rome. While this is never going to happen ever, if it did. I'd ask to be received into the Oriental Orthodox Church, where I think I'd be happy. However, if the Oriental Orthodox Church did likewise in this hypothetical union and completely gave into Papal claims, them I wouldn't know where I'd turn.

We've been rejecting Papal claims since 451, I think we'll be OK.  Tongue

You accepted them before 451?  Shocked
Logged

On a temporary/semi-permanent/permanent vacation from OC.net.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,181


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #59 on: June 14, 2013, 10:53:55 AM »

You accepted them before 451?  Shocked

You're not serious, right?
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
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,706


« Reply #60 on: June 14, 2013, 11:11:51 AM »

You accepted them before 451? 

You're not serious, right?

No, I am not. I thought it curious that you said that the Syriacs didn't accept the papal claims since 451.
Logged

On a temporary/semi-permanent/permanent vacation from OC.net.
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,018



« Reply #61 on: June 14, 2013, 11:15:11 AM »

Actually he said "We've been rejecting Papal claims since 451."
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Deep Roots
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Catholic
Posts: 370


« Reply #62 on: June 14, 2013, 12:09:47 PM »

I think I'd be cool with just a handshake.
Logged

Peace.
William
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Posts: 4,306


« Reply #63 on: June 14, 2013, 01:11:54 PM »

You accepted them before 451? 

You're not serious, right?

No, I am not. I thought it curious that you said that the Syriacs didn't accept the papal claims since 451.

He might be using the line that Pope St. Leo was a papal supremacist. IDK.
Logged

Apart from moral conduct, all that man thinks himself able to do in order to become acceptable to God is mere superstition and religious folly. - Immanuel Kant

Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. - Matt. 5:24
Peter J
Formerly PJ
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Melkite
Posts: 6,018



« Reply #64 on: June 14, 2013, 01:33:55 PM »

I think I'd be cool with just a handshake.

Okay, as long as it's a secret handshake that only we know.
Logged

- Peter Jericho (a CAF poster)
Deep Roots
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Catholic
Posts: 370


« Reply #65 on: June 14, 2013, 01:59:30 PM »

I think I'd be cool with just a handshake.

Okay, as long as it's a secret handshake that only we know.
naturally.  maybe after our handshake, the East and the West can be reunited secretly.

Logged

Peace.
Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15,181


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #66 on: June 14, 2013, 02:01:35 PM »

He might be using the line that Pope St. Leo was a papal supremacist. IDK.

More or less, yes, I had Pope Leo I in mind when I joked about rejecting papal claims.
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
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,522



« Reply #67 on: June 14, 2013, 08:07:06 PM »

I think that just about covers all the non-Protestant traditions. As far as Protestants, they would have to accept our councils (all and whole),
...
Like Chalcedon?

Yes, I would expect Protestants to accept Chalcedon as a whole, even though I would expect most Protestants to not have any issues with the decrees of that particular council, unless I'm, overlooking something. The decree defending Mary's role as Theotokos was given earlier, the decree defending her ever-virginity was given later, and I would expect the seventh to the most problematic out of all of them.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 6,908



« Reply #68 on: June 14, 2013, 08:25:53 PM »

There are as many varieties of Protestants as there are of favors of ice cream, probably more.

The Protestants I grew up with disagreed with most of counsels and certainly did not find any of them to be binding.  I don't think they had a strongly enough developed Christology to know if they believed in Chalcedon or not.

They were vehemently opposed to calling Mary the "Mother of God" and were fiercely iconoclastic.

I didn't know until I encountered Orthodoxy that I was a follower of the arch-heretic Nestorius.  eek!  Shocked
« Last Edit: June 14, 2013, 08:27:11 PM by TheTrisagion » Logged

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

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,522



« Reply #69 on: June 14, 2013, 08:55:30 PM »

The Protestants I grew up with disagreed with most of counsels and certainly did not find any of them to be binding.

Most Protestants agree with the majority of what was proclaimed in at least the first five councils, most Protestants that reject councils in general reject the authority or necessity of a council regardless of and sometimes not knowing what it proclaims. For example, a good Baptist will reject the very concept of a council while defending the Trinity, the divinity and personhood of all three Persons, and that Christ was truly human, even if they reject the expressions of these beliefs.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Nephi
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Auntie Oak
Posts: 4,024



« Reply #70 on: June 14, 2013, 09:24:43 PM »

The Reformed I've spoken with tend to accept the first four councils, and tentative at best towards later ones with outright rejection of the seventh.

It seems that the Reformed I've been into contact with (with their views on the real presence, etc.) lean towards a Nestorian-esque Christology. Interestingly they tend to make no reference to Chalcedon, or any council for that matter. It seems their acceptance of the first four councils is more lipservice when it comes to their actual theological formulations resting on more recent authorities, IME.
Logged

Liberalochian: Unionist-Ecumenism Lite™
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   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 0.096 seconds with 52 queries.