Author Topic: For a new Ecumenical Path  (Read 8371 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
For a new Ecumenical Path
« on: September 01, 2014, 05:06:46 PM »
As some of you may have noticed, ecumenical issues are important to me. I am against much of what has been called "unionist ecumenism", the one that thinks that union is a necessary and desirable goal.

But if not that, are we condemned to mutual hate and misunderstandings? How to set areas and points of conflict among different Christian churches?

Here are some thoughts on that:

1 - Right to coexistence - No Christian group should persecute another or incite others to do it, not even by subreptitious means like fomenting secular leaders to create laws that, although not explicitily against a group, end up harming only that group. Heresy is no excuse for persecution, it must be dealt with through debates, apologetics, but only that.

2 - Right to conversion - There should not be concepts such "this is my region, don't missionize here". If entire groups decide to convert to any church , if it is not by coercion, it is their *right* to do so. Trying to artificially keep "religious" borders prevents people from confessing their true faith honestly and opens up cracks for the enemies of Christendom. It's better to have an honest heterodox than a hypocrite or no Christian at all.

3 - Right to Truth - There is a lot of historical slander that is thrown around among the Churches. Apologetics must never resort to lies.

4 - Right to free-expression of own narrative - Each Christian church has its own narrative of the facts of Christian history and theology. It's because we disagree about these that we have different churches. This means that these are disputed facts, not lies or slander. They must be treated the same way scientist treat different hypothesis for the same fact, having different groups who believe in different explanations and who do their "experiments" - their models of what a Christian life should be like - at their own choosing.

5 - Right to Tradition - There are some theological and moral issues that any unbiased examiner would identify as typically Christian in any church. Christendom has the right to not accept as its representative fringe groups with agendas to form cults, sects, ideological or political movements, much less groups that abuse the name of Christianity to take financial advantage from people;

What these 5 rights imply is a duty to mutual Tolerance, Dialogue for better understanding of each other and protection of what makes Christianity Christianity. It also has *Christendom*, and not "unity", as its highest organizational ideal, the civilizational set of cultures and churches that created and/or formed from Christianity. This ideal is particularly expressed in the "Right to Conversion" where we admit that although we would like that a certain group would stay in our church, it is better that they become sincere faithful of another church than to have no Christianity at all or hypocrites.

« Last Edit: September 01, 2014, 05:12:09 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #1 on: September 01, 2014, 05:18:40 PM »
Just thought of a 6th right:

6 - Right to Christian Cooperation and Freedom from Pressure Groups - The churches of Christendom should always seek mutual help and cooperation, specially in order to become autonomous from private and state pressure groups and lobbies. Christianity has its own identity and cannot be used by any group, sector of society, ideology, lobby, State or administration. Such help must never be made in a way that puts the helped group in submission, but always striving to improve its own autonomy from non-church groups and from the helper itself.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2014, 05:19:44 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #2 on: September 01, 2014, 05:18:47 PM »
As some of you may have noticed, ecumenical issues are important to me. I am against much of what has been called "unionist ecumenism", the one that thinks that union is a necessary and desirable goal.

Why should not the Church be one on earth as she is in heaven? This deserves more than dismissal.

Quote
But if not that, are we condemned to mutual hate and misunderstandings? How to set areas and points of conflict among different Christian churches?

I don't think the relationship among denominations, except perhaps for some renegade ones, is one of hatred. Christians get along fine. (Most of them even worship and commune together, not that that's a matter of hatred either.)

Quote
... Right to Truth - There is a lot of historical slander that is thrown around among the Churches. Apologetics must never resort to lies.

Well this will be a funny "right" to try to enforce. Not to mention that, if it weren't for colorful tellings of history and loose descriptions of others' beliefs, we'd probably not see many denominational divisions maintained.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #3 on: September 01, 2014, 05:25:51 PM »
Why should not the Church be one on earth as she is in heaven? This deserves more than dismissal.

Because it is part of our belief that She is already one. She was born as one church in the Pentecosts and has never been divided. "I believe in *one* church, I believe in *one* baptism". The parallelism in the Creed is clear.

All the other "churches/baptisms" are fallen leaves separated from her and dead, at least for ecclesiastical grace. Every movement that seeks to make the Church "one again" is simply denying Christ's power to keep His promise, or, in the very act, adopting "invisble Church" theology and becoming de facto Protestant.

Because many churches believe that, the simple fact is that only one is right and everybody else is wrong. An individual *can* solve this problem, but  to have a global consensus on it is impossible. It would necessarily just create one more church out of the "unionist" groups of each church, while their traditional believers would go on their ways, now persecuted for being the new "heretics".

I believe it's the Orthodox Church, a Roman that it's the RC, non-Chalcedoneans that it's theirs. I acknowledge and respect the right of people to believe I'm wrong and more, the right to believe that there are people in the world who are wrong as long as, my "being right" is not taken as a license to commit abuses or violence.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2014, 05:32:40 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,940
  • Tenzin and Desmond
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #4 on: September 01, 2014, 05:32:08 PM »
But if not that, are we condemned to mutual hate and misunderstandings? How to set areas and points of conflict among different Christian churches?
Who's in, and who's out, in the list of Christian churches?
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #5 on: September 01, 2014, 05:36:40 PM »
But if not that, are we condemned to mutual hate and misunderstandings? How to set areas and points of conflict among different Christian churches?
Who's in, and who's out, in the list of Christian churches?

*That* is something that no individual should have the right to determine. That is a question that should be discussed in those interreligious meetings and other such fora. I suppose that the main representatives of the four main branches of Christendom would be leading that (Orthodoxy, Rome, Reformed and Non-Chalcedoneans).

Obviously, only the Reformed would have problems with defining their own representatives.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2014, 05:37:30 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #6 on: September 01, 2014, 05:36:56 PM »
Why should not the Church be one on earth as she is in heaven? This deserves more than dismissal.

Because it is part of our belief that She is already one. She was born as one church in the Pentecosts and has never been divided. "I believe in *one* church, I believe in *one* baptism". The parallelism in the Creed is clear.

All the other "churches/baptisms" are fallen leaves separated from her and dead, at least for ecclesiastical grace. Every movement that seeks to make the Church "one again" is simply denying Christ's power to keep His promise, or, in the very act, adopting "invisble Church" theology and becoming de facto Protestant.

Because many churches believe that, the simple fact is that only one is right and everybody else is wrong. An individual *can* solve this problem, but  to have a global consensus on it is impossible. It would necessarily just create one more church out of the "unionist" groups of each church, while their traditional believers would go on their ways, now persecuted for being the new "heretics".

I believe it's the Orthodox Church, a Roman that it's the RC, non-Chalcedoneans that it's theirs. I acknowledge and respect the right of people to believe I'm wrong and more, the right to believe that there are people in the world that are wrong as long as, my "being right" is not taken as a license to commit abuses or violence.

Thanks for discussing it. I think your extrapolation from what the Orthodox church is is simplistic. For one thing, people cannot be held responsible through perpetual generations for some heresy or schism centuries ago. And is not the Holy Spirit's work in men effectual and continual?
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #7 on: September 01, 2014, 05:51:54 PM »
Why should not the Church be one on earth as she is in heaven? This deserves more than dismissal.

Because it is part of our belief that She is already one. She was born as one church in the Pentecosts and has never been divided. "I believe in *one* church, I believe in *one* baptism". The parallelism in the Creed is clear.

All the other "churches/baptisms" are fallen leaves separated from her and dead, at least for ecclesiastical grace. Every movement that seeks to make the Church "one again" is simply denying Christ's power to keep His promise, or, in the very act, adopting "invisble Church" theology and becoming de facto Protestant.

Because many churches believe that, the simple fact is that only one is right and everybody else is wrong. An individual *can* solve this problem, but  to have a global consensus on it is impossible. It would necessarily just create one more church out of the "unionist" groups of each church, while their traditional believers would go on their ways, now persecuted for being the new "heretics".

I believe it's the Orthodox Church, a Roman that it's the RC, non-Chalcedoneans that it's theirs. I acknowledge and respect the right of people to believe I'm wrong and more, the right to believe that there are people in the world that are wrong as long as, my "being right" is not taken as a license to commit abuses or violence.

Thanks for discussing it. I think your extrapolation from what the Orthodox church is is simplistic. For one thing, people cannot be held responsible through perpetual generations for some heresy or schism centuries ago. And is not the Holy Spirit's work in men effectual and continual?

It's not about responsibility I think. If a boy is taught that atoms are small balls of matter where smallers balls go round the nucleous in circular orbit, he is not responsible for holding this wrong theory. But the theory is wrong nevertheless.

Each Church has different theories about God, Jesus, salvation, love, asceticism even despite some external similarities among them in rites, music, culture and architecture. Between some churches these differences are so arcanely subtle and obscure that it frustates a lot of people that they are divided "just" because of that. But it's the difference between saying that E=mc2 or E=m2c or E2=mc. It's not "just" the position of the number two while all the rest is correct, the elements that should be in relation to each other, their positions in the formula, the operations that they make; there is much more that is in play there and the mathematics behind each one, the correct formula and the wrong ones. It seems to me that the concept that "all formulas are right from a certain angle, it's all a big misunderstanding" can only mean that we are giving up mathematics and physics themselves. In the case of the Church, it's giving up God.

It's better, in my opinion, that we simply acknowledge the right to be wrong and not be persecuted by this, and that it is better to have people around who at least care about physics than to have anti-science groups putting everything down.

The actions of the Holy Spirit are *conditional*. There are lots of "if" and "when" in the New Testament to express that. The grace of being "church" belongs exclusively to those who are baptized by the direct successors of the Apostles who, besides that, hold an orthodox faith. It is not related to honesty, it is not related to belief, it is not related to character. A lot of bad people are in the Church, a lot of good people are outside. This will be corrected only on the Last Judgment. Today, both wheat and tare grow in the fields of the Lord and in fields that do not belong to him. It is not enough to call His name and to want it very badly to be of His Church.

There is a strictly physical, material even, restriction to it , the one of being accepted by the orthodox successors of the Apostles. Even in the exceptional cases of people who were baptized "in their blood", or who died before baptism, it is their walking to the *orthodox faith* together with an Orthodox bishop that opened the fountains of mercy for that person. People who were *physically* baptized by rightfully ordained bishops or priests but who held heterodox faiths against the common prohibition of Synods, were accounted as heretics, even though they might have been completely sincere about believing what that man said was the Orthodox faith. The point is, it is very probable that on judgment day the person is forgiven and called into the true Church. But, while the person was alive, she was not in the Church.

Because we disagree about what orthodoxy is, which successors are orthodox and even about what being a successor means, we have different churches. And I think it is more important to tolerate each other than to create yet one more division.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2014, 06:20:56 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Luke

  • Formerly Gamliel
  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 5,431
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Metropolis of San Francisco
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #8 on: September 01, 2014, 06:16:05 PM »
I do not believe in forced unions, but I do believe in dialog.

Offline Godspell

  • Arch-layman
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 238
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #9 on: September 02, 2014, 06:52:39 PM »
As some of you may have noticed, ecumenical issues are important to me. I am against much of what has been called "unionist ecumenism", the one that thinks that union is a necessary and desirable goal.

But if not that, are we condemned to mutual hate and misunderstandings? How to set areas and points of conflict among different Christian churches?

Here are some thoughts on that:

1 - Right to coexistence - No Christian group should persecute another or incite others to do it, not even by subreptitious means like fomenting secular leaders to create laws that, although not explicitily against a group, end up harming only that group. Heresy is no excuse for persecution, it must be dealt with through debates, apologetics, but only that.

2 - Right to conversion - There should not be concepts such "this is my region, don't missionize here". If entire groups decide to convert to any church , if it is not by coercion, it is their *right* to do so. Trying to artificially keep "religious" borders prevents people from confessing their true faith honestly and opens up cracks for the enemies of Christendom. It's better to have an honest heterodox than a hypocrite or no Christian at all.

3 - Right to Truth - There is a lot of historical slander that is thrown around among the Churches. Apologetics must never resort to lies.

4 - Right to free-expression of own narrative - Each Christian church has its own narrative of the facts of Christian history and theology. It's because we disagree about these that we have different churches. This means that these are disputed facts, not lies or slander. They must be treated the same way scientist treat different hypothesis for the same fact, having different groups who believe in different explanations and who do their "experiments" - their models of what a Christian life should be like - at their own choosing.

5 - Right to Tradition - There are some theological and moral issues that any unbiased examiner would identify as typically Christian in any church. Christendom has the right to not accept as its representative fringe groups with agendas to form cults, sects, ideological or political movements, much less groups that abuse the name of Christianity to take financial advantage from people;

What these 5 rights imply is a duty to mutual Tolerance, Dialogue for better understanding of each other and protection of what makes Christianity Christianity. It also has *Christendom*, and not "unity", as its highest organizational ideal, the civilizational set of cultures and churches that created and/or formed from Christianity. This ideal is particularly expressed in the "Right to Conversion" where we admit that although we would like that a certain group would stay in our church, it is better that they become sincere faithful of another church than to have no Christianity at all or hypocrites.



I agree with this much. I myself am starting to swing more in the direction of ecumenical Christianity. For me, the apostolic faith is the key to heaven, church polity is secondary, and while other churches have at times removed what I think are critical points of the faith, for instance the Eucharist or 'optional' baptism, I do believe that anyone professing the trinity and living by their conscience will be saved in the end.

I think your list is good though.

Perhaps another good one is to add we are Christians first and (insert denomination) second. I think all would agree to follow Christ our Lord before pope, patriarch or pastor.
Just as the thought of fire does not warm the body, so faith without love does not actualize the light of spiritual knowledge in the soul.

Just as the light of the sun attracts a healthy eye, so through love knowledge of God naturally draws to itself the pure intellect.

– St Maximos

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #10 on: September 02, 2014, 06:59:00 PM »
I do believe that anyone professing the trinity and living by their conscience will be saved in the end.


Quote
Matthew 7
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
God bless!

Offline Godspell

  • Arch-layman
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 238
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #11 on: September 02, 2014, 07:01:00 PM »
I do believe that anyone professing the trinity and living by their conscience will be saved in the end.


Quote
Matthew 7
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Just as the thought of fire does not warm the body, so faith without love does not actualize the light of spiritual knowledge in the soul.

Just as the light of the sun attracts a healthy eye, so through love knowledge of God naturally draws to itself the pure intellect.

– St Maximos

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #12 on: September 02, 2014, 09:58:29 PM »
Consciences are notoriously fickle things.
God bless!

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #13 on: September 02, 2014, 10:15:39 PM »
As some of you may have noticed, ecumenical issues are important to me. I am against much of what has been called "unionist ecumenism", the one that thinks that union is a necessary and desirable goal.

Why should not the Church be one on earth as she is in heaven? This deserves more than dismissal.

Quote
But if not that, are we condemned to mutual hate and misunderstandings? How to set areas and points of conflict among different Christian churches?

I don't think the relationship among denominations, except perhaps for some renegade ones, is one of hatred. Christians get along fine. (Most of them even worship and commune together, not that that's a matter of hatred either.)

Quote
... Right to Truth - There is a lot of historical slander that is thrown around among the Churches. Apologetics must never resort to lies.

Well this will be a funny "right" to try to enforce. Not to mention that, if it weren't for colorful tellings of history and loose descriptions of others' beliefs, we'd probably not see many denominational divisions maintained.

You should come back to some of our old countries . . . or just read some of the posts on here.  Churches telling each other that they don't "belong" on certain territory or that they usurped parishes or dioceses half a millennium ago (or more), and therefore they shouldn't exist, is sadly a regular occurrence in some parts of the world.  And this, of course, leads to physical violence in some cases.  I think some of this is what Fabio wants to prevent while not supporting a "We're all right" approach to things.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #14 on: September 02, 2014, 10:17:10 PM »
Yeah I was thinking of the sad situation in Macedonian Republic just a moment ago.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Godspell

  • Arch-layman
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 238
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #15 on: September 02, 2014, 11:06:12 PM »
Consciences are notoriously fickle things.

Fair, but my point was exactly that it requires a belief in Christ and also good works. It's not just that belief that Christ is Lord, nor is it just performing good deeds, but both in conjunction. Good deeds for Christ's sake. Though, as St. Paul notes, those who do good without the law are better than those who don't do good with the law.

I'm not of the opinion that it matters a great deal what jurisdiction one is under, be it Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant.

Though I do believe the Eucharist is a key element that Protestants have wrongfully excluded to the detriment of the faith.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2014, 11:08:54 PM by Godspell »
Just as the thought of fire does not warm the body, so faith without love does not actualize the light of spiritual knowledge in the soul.

Just as the light of the sun attracts a healthy eye, so through love knowledge of God naturally draws to itself the pure intellect.

– St Maximos

Offline Justin Kolodziej

  • Goths and rivetheads are entering the Kingdom of God before me
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,075
  • Screwing up the Church since 2017
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Metropolis of Atlanta
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #16 on: September 03, 2014, 12:10:52 AM »
Does the word "anathema", as in the phrase "If anyone believes X let him be anathema", used over and over by the saintly Fathers of whatever Ecumenical Councils there are, mean anything to anyone anymore beyond "discouraged from describing himself as OrthodoxTM/CatholicTM"?
Too many theologists, not enough theologians.

Offline Cavaradossi

  • 法網恢恢,疏而不漏
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,991
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #17 on: September 03, 2014, 01:27:36 AM »
I think the ecumenical path of the past is good enough to me, namely that those who are outside of the Catholic Church renounce the falsehoods to which they adhere and join themselves to the Body of Christ.
Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.

Offline Godspell

  • Arch-layman
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 238
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #18 on: September 03, 2014, 01:48:35 AM »
Does the word "anathema", as in the phrase "If anyone believes X let him be anathema", used over and over by the saintly Fathers of whatever Ecumenical Councils there are, mean anything to anyone anymore beyond "discouraged from describing himself as OrthodoxTM/CatholicTM"?

The question is whether or not those who inherit heresy are liable or even if those who with good intention cause schism should be ignored.

Having studied the great schism from an orthodox and catholic bias I can't say either side was without blame and certainly the reformation had good cause.

For me personally I see the schism come as a result of man's sin. I don't believe God lead the Church into schism.
Just as the thought of fire does not warm the body, so faith without love does not actualize the light of spiritual knowledge in the soul.

Just as the light of the sun attracts a healthy eye, so through love knowledge of God naturally draws to itself the pure intellect.

– St Maximos

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #19 on: September 03, 2014, 01:45:45 PM »
Does the word "anathema", as in the phrase "If anyone believes X let him be anathema", used over and over by the saintly Fathers of whatever Ecumenical Councils there are, mean anything to anyone anymore beyond "discouraged from describing himself as OrthodoxTM/CatholicTM"?

It can mean anything from just a vague platonic notion of "we are just not quite the same but what evil can be in communing together?" to "burn the heretic!"

I believe the best is in the middle:  no communion, no official prayers or Church services together, no recognition of sacraments, but be friendly and fraternal (or even friends!), work together to help those in need, fight together against common enemies, cultural and martial, keep dialogue to avoid stereotypes, always respect and learn about the other churches, don't persecute, don't lie, don't slander, don't give false witness about other churches, remember that Jesus is everywhere two or three are gathered in His name and that the Spirit blows wherever He wants but that this does not make a church.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2014, 01:47:37 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #20 on: September 03, 2014, 01:52:14 PM »
Does the word "anathema", as in the phrase "If anyone believes X let him be anathema", used over and over by the saintly Fathers of whatever Ecumenical Councils there are, mean anything to anyone anymore beyond "discouraged from describing himself as OrthodoxTM/CatholicTM"?

If it actively means "consign him to the Evil One, for torment in the flesh" (e.g. I Tim 1:20) anymore, then it doesn't seem to be working, as millions fall under one anathema or other and seem to be fine. Perhaps the devil has found it all too much work.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #21 on: September 03, 2014, 02:13:11 PM »
As some of you may have noticed, ecumenical issues are important to me. I am against much of what has been called "unionist ecumenism", the one that thinks that union is a necessary and desirable goal.

Why should not the Church be one on earth as she is in heaven? This deserves more than dismissal.

Quote
But if not that, are we condemned to mutual hate and misunderstandings? How to set areas and points of conflict among different Christian churches?

I don't think the relationship among denominations, except perhaps for some renegade ones, is one of hatred. Christians get along fine. (Most of them even worship and commune together, not that that's a matter of hatred either.)

Quote
... Right to Truth - There is a lot of historical slander that is thrown around among the Churches. Apologetics must never resort to lies.

Well this will be a funny "right" to try to enforce. Not to mention that, if it weren't for colorful tellings of history and loose descriptions of others' beliefs, we'd probably not see many denominational divisions maintained.

You should come back to some of our old countries . . . or just read some of the posts on here.  Churches telling each other that they don't "belong" on certain territory or that they usurped parishes or dioceses half a millennium ago (or more), and therefore they shouldn't exist, is sadly a regular occurrence in some parts of the world.  And this, of course, leads to physical violence in some cases.  I think some of this is what Fabio wants to prevent while not supporting a "We're all right" approach to things.

Exactly. Violence starts when one group finds the other group's identity offensive and seeks to destroy it subjectively or objectively. "We're all right" just does the same towards *all* the stakeholders in the hopes of creating one new identity that no one had so far, hoping that in uniting under this new identity conflicts will stop.

That seems misguided to me, because what causes violence is the concept that "if not my group/belief/idea than it is ok to destroy them" and both "unionist ecumenism" and the "we agreed all along, it was just a misunderstanding" folks do not address that. In fact, at times it seems they subscribe to the notion that it would be fair to attack heretics, it's only that we should acknowledge we are not heretics toward each other after all.

Only when we can say and feel "Yes, I think that you are wrong *AND* you have the right of being wrong and still be treated as a human being, live as you choose, have a family and be happy" we can say that we have dealt a death blow towards the initiation of violence.

Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #22 on: September 03, 2014, 02:18:12 PM »
As some of you may have noticed, ecumenical issues are important to me. I am against much of what has been called "unionist ecumenism", the one that thinks that union is a necessary and desirable goal.

Why should not the Church be one on earth as she is in heaven? This deserves more than dismissal.

Quote
But if not that, are we condemned to mutual hate and misunderstandings? How to set areas and points of conflict among different Christian churches?

I don't think the relationship among denominations, except perhaps for some renegade ones, is one of hatred. Christians get along fine. (Most of them even worship and commune together, not that that's a matter of hatred either.)

Quote
... Right to Truth - There is a lot of historical slander that is thrown around among the Churches. Apologetics must never resort to lies.

Well this will be a funny "right" to try to enforce. Not to mention that, if it weren't for colorful tellings of history and loose descriptions of others' beliefs, we'd probably not see many denominational divisions maintained.

You should come back to some of our old countries . . . or just read some of the posts on here.  Churches telling each other that they don't "belong" on certain territory or that they usurped parishes or dioceses half a millennium ago (or more), and therefore they shouldn't exist, is sadly a regular occurrence in some parts of the world.  And this, of course, leads to physical violence in some cases.  I think some of this is what Fabio wants to prevent while not supporting a "We're all right" approach to things.

Exactly. Violence starts when one group finds the other group's identity offensive and seeks to destroy it subjectively or objectively. "We're all right" just does the same towards *all* the stakeholders in the hopes of creating one new identity that no one had so far, hoping that in uniting under this new identity conflicts will stop.

That seems misguided to me, because what causes violence is the concept that "if not my group/belief/idea than it is ok to destroy them" and both "unionist ecumenism" and the "we agreed all along, it was just a misunderstanding" folks do not address that. In fact, at times it seems they subscribe to the notion that it would be fair to attack heretics, it's only that we should acknowledge we are not heretics toward each other after all.

Only when we can say and feel "Yes, I think that you are wrong *AND* you have the right of being wrong and still be treated as a human being, live as you choose, have a family and be happy" we can say that we have dealt a death blow towards the initiation of violence.



I will respond by saying that I hope for the *legitimate* union of all Christians, one which recognizes that there are misunderstandings that are not differences, but one which also owns up to (and corrects, if necessary) any such differences.  But apart from that I support exactly what you are saying.  Your last sentence, I think, goes to the essence of what it means to recognize our neighbor as our neighbor, one made in the image of God, and to treat him as God Himself would treat him.  I was challenged to come to this conclusion for myself after reading His All Holiness's book, Encountering the Mystery, when he speaks about his approach to the relationship between Christians and Muslims in Turkey.  One might say that he is sometimes too ameliorative on the "Yes, I think you are wrong," part, but I read him differently, finding that he seeks to first emphasize the commonalities to get the discussion to a point where the "Yes, I think you are wrong" can be said and received in the spirit in which you, Fabio, want it to be received.  Given the history of that part of the world, that conversation will also be a long time in coming.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #23 on: September 03, 2014, 03:12:36 PM »
I will respond by saying that I hope for the *legitimate* union of all Christians, one which recognizes that there are misunderstandings that are not differences, but one which also owns up to (and corrects, if necessary) any such differences.  

There's a name for that: conversion. Which would be covered  in the "Right to convert" item.

Now if we *truly* believe that:

1) we are all one community and we have always had the same belief expressed in different terms, *then* we are immediatelly excluding from this new church all our spiritual ancestors who thought otherwise and who defined so. We would be basically saying they might have been sincere and holy, but they let themselves be taken by petty mistakes a 1st grader could see in a 101 Greek/Latin/Syrian class. We are painting them as small men so we can be great and magnanimous, excluding them so we can be together, destroying dyachronic union for the sake of synchronic union. Besides we are being anti-historic. The opinions of secondary sources (us!) who are dettached 1500, 100, 500 from the original facts, when in contradition with known opinions of the first source must be put away; The divisions are real, substantial and serious. It's not just a misunderstanding. This theory reflects more the ethos of our globalized world than the theological discussions themselves. At least worst it's a way to make non-Chalcedoneans convert without loosing face. But wait 50-100 years from now and their descedents will see what happened and reality will kick in;

2) that we all have gone wrong in at least on important aspect, then we are outright doubting Christ's promise;

3) Some of us are right, some are wrong; it's just a limited version of 1, probably choosing the ones who are "right" from the most politically influential churches and putting the smaller less influential ones in the "bad side".

I think the problem is one of scale. I believe in local, limited solutions. Some groups may go through a process of acknowledging misunderstandings, correct what they understand to be mistake and thus join a certain church in a legitimate way. But a universal solution for that is impossible this side of the eschaton. Unionist ecumenism screams to me as new form of the Apostles plea: there are wheats and tares in the field, Lord, should we solve the problem? And we know the answer. Diversity implies the inclusion and tolerance of what is wrong. And there are several wrong christianities, wrong churches, despite the good character of their faithful and even ther examplary piety.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2014, 03:13:50 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #24 on: September 03, 2014, 03:24:42 PM »
I will respond by saying that I hope for the *legitimate* union of all Christians, one which recognizes that there are misunderstandings that are not differences, but one which also owns up to (and corrects, if necessary) any such differences.  

There's a name for that: conversion. Which would be covered  in the "Right to convert" item.

Now if we *truly* believe that:

1) we are all one community and we have always had the same belief expressed in different terms, *then* we are immediatelly excluding from this new church all our spiritual ancestors who thought otherwise and who defined so. We would be basically saying they might have been sincere and holy, but they let themselves be taken by petty mistakes a 1st grader could see in a 101 Greek/Latin/Syrian class. We are painting them as small men so we can be great and magnanimous, excluding them so we can be together, destroying dyachronic union for the sake of synchronic union.

Propagandistic nonsense.  We don't cut off our spiritual ancestors when we take them at their word that they committed sins.  If they are a part of us in spite of that, then why not this? 

While you would no doubt claim allegiance to truth, it's allegiance to a narrative.  Nothing more. 

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #25 on: September 04, 2014, 04:05:57 PM »
I will respond by saying that I hope for the *legitimate* union of all Christians, one which recognizes that there are misunderstandings that are not differences, but one which also owns up to (and corrects, if necessary) any such differences.  

There's a name for that: conversion. Which would be covered  in the "Right to convert" item.

Now if we *truly* believe that:

1) we are all one community and we have always had the same belief expressed in different terms, *then* we are immediatelly excluding from this new church all our spiritual ancestors who thought otherwise and who defined so. We would be basically saying they might have been sincere and holy, but they let themselves be taken by petty mistakes a 1st grader could see in a 101 Greek/Latin/Syrian class. We are painting them as small men so we can be great and magnanimous, excluding them so we can be together, destroying dyachronic union for the sake of synchronic union.

Propagandistic nonsense.  We don't cut off our spiritual ancestors when we take them at their word that they committed sins.  If they are a part of us in spite of that, then why not this?  

While you would no doubt claim allegiance to truth, it's allegiance to a narrative.  Nothing more.  

Unless they've been dropping by to chat, their own narrative about themselves is all contact any us have with them. To substitute theirs for a narrative that would make us look much cooler and global to the world is to effectively silence them and exclude them from the ongoing conversation, which is a horrible thing in my opinion.

Plus, that sounds pretty much like the age old excuse of "This is not what you think, let me explain", universally used by all those that know very well that it *is* exactly what everybody is thinking.

We have different theologies and one of us (or both of us!) is not in the Church. At the same time we know that if we live a life to our best understanding of what being a Christian is, eventually, on Judgement Day, God will put us inside the real church even if we are not in it right now. That's not only enough for me, it seems as far as one can go without creating further division, it prevents uncalled for compromise, it allows us to still be tolerant of each other and at the same time "honor our forefathers".
« Last Edit: September 04, 2014, 04:07:25 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #26 on: September 04, 2014, 04:34:34 PM »
While I agree with much of what you say, and much of your concern, I'd much rather be a historian rather than an antiquarian, that is, to evaluate these writings within the context of their times, rather than to laud them because they are old (and thus unchangeable).  

We know that the Fathers are not infallible.  But they may not always be saying what we think they are saying, or, they may be saying something that is true in and of itself, but based on limited or imperfect knowledge of facts, and therefore improperly applied.  I don't think that we should wall ourselves off from these possibilities as we seek Truth.  Nor do I think that they, in their humility, would want us to do so.
« Last Edit: September 04, 2014, 04:35:24 PM by Yurysprudentsiya »

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #27 on: September 04, 2014, 04:38:56 PM »
The context of their writings is that they created a schism and anathematized each other.

It is in their actions that we have to seek the meaning of their words, not in what would be more easily digested by our modern mores.

When in doubt about ambiguous discussions of subtle theology, double-check with what they actually did. That's what they meant.
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #28 on: September 04, 2014, 04:40:22 PM »
The context of their writings is that they created a schism and anathematized each other.

It is in their actions that we have to seek the meaning of their words, not in what would be more easily digested by our modern mores.

When in doubt about ambiguous discussions of subtle theology, double-check with what they actually did. That's what they meant.

I know what they did.  But you are not addressing the idea that they acted based upon imperfect factual information.  And that politics, invasion, and dare I say pride, may have reinforced and solidified that which could have been easily amended before too much time had passed.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #29 on: September 05, 2014, 05:32:51 PM »
I will respond by saying that I hope for the *legitimate* union of all Christians, one which recognizes that there are misunderstandings that are not differences, but one which also owns up to (and corrects, if necessary) any such differences.  

There's a name for that: conversion. Which would be covered  in the "Right to convert" item.

Now if we *truly* believe that:

1) we are all one community and we have always had the same belief expressed in different terms, *then* we are immediatelly excluding from this new church all our spiritual ancestors who thought otherwise and who defined so. We would be basically saying they might have been sincere and holy, but they let themselves be taken by petty mistakes a 1st grader could see in a 101 Greek/Latin/Syrian class. We are painting them as small men so we can be great and magnanimous, excluding them so we can be together, destroying dyachronic union for the sake of synchronic union.

Propagandistic nonsense.  We don't cut off our spiritual ancestors when we take them at their word that they committed sins.  If they are a part of us in spite of that, then why not this?  

While you would no doubt claim allegiance to truth, it's allegiance to a narrative.  Nothing more.  

Unless they've been dropping by to chat, their own narrative about themselves is all contact any us have with them. To substitute theirs for a narrative that would make us look much cooler and global to the world is to effectively silence them and exclude them from the ongoing conversation, which is a horrible thing in my opinion.

Plus, that sounds pretty much like the age old excuse of "This is not what you think, let me explain", universally used by all those that know very well that it *is* exactly what everybody is thinking.

We have different theologies and one of us (or both of us!) is not in the Church. At the same time we know that if we live a life to our best understanding of what being a Christian is, eventually, on Judgement Day, God will put us inside the real church even if we are not in it right now. That's not only enough for me, it seems as far as one can go without creating further division, it prevents uncalled for compromise, it allows us to still be tolerant of each other and at the same time "honor our forefathers".

Speaking of Judgment Day, we have a duty to ensue truth, and our words and actions to that end most certainly will be part of how we are judged in that Day.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline MarianCatholic

  • Obedience to Rome is fundamental
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 210
  • Papist
  • Faith: Catholic
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #30 on: September 08, 2014, 07:28:35 PM »
I will respond by saying that I hope for the *legitimate* union of all Christians, one which recognizes that there are misunderstandings that are not differences, but one which also owns up to (and corrects, if necessary) any such differences.  

There's a name for that: conversion. Which would be covered  in the "Right to convert" item.

Now if we *truly* believe that:

1) we are all one community and we have always had the same belief expressed in different terms, *then* we are immediatelly excluding from this new church all our spiritual ancestors who thought otherwise and who defined so. We would be basically saying they might have been sincere and holy, but they let themselves be taken by petty mistakes a 1st grader could see in a 101 Greek/Latin/Syrian class. We are painting them as small men so we can be great and magnanimous, excluding them so we can be together, destroying dyachronic union for the sake of synchronic union.

Propagandistic nonsense.  We don't cut off our spiritual ancestors when we take them at their word that they committed sins.  If they are a part of us in spite of that, then why not this?  

While you would no doubt claim allegiance to truth, it's allegiance to a narrative.  Nothing more.  

Unless they've been dropping by to chat, their own narrative about themselves is all contact any us have with them. To substitute theirs for a narrative that would make us look much cooler and global to the world is to effectively silence them and exclude them from the ongoing conversation, which is a horrible thing in my opinion.

Plus, that sounds pretty much like the age old excuse of "This is not what you think, let me explain", universally used by all those that know very well that it *is* exactly what everybody is thinking.

We have different theologies and one of us (or both of us!) is not in the Church. At the same time we know that if we live a life to our best understanding of what being a Christian is, eventually, on Judgement Day, God will put us inside the real church even if we are not in it right now. That's not only enough for me, it seems as far as one can go without creating further division, it prevents uncalled for compromise, it allows us to still be tolerant of each other and at the same time "honor our forefathers".

Speaking of Judgment Day, we have a duty to ensue truth, and our words and actions to that end most certainly will be part of how we are judged in that Day.

If we are to follow that logic, no one would ever obtain eternal joy.
I trust in the mercy of Christ rather than my own words and actions at judgement day.



Yours in Jesus and Mary
- MarianCatholic


Christ is Risen, Alleluia!

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,135
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #31 on: September 08, 2014, 08:32:42 PM »
I will respond by saying that I hope for the *legitimate* union of all Christians, one which recognizes that there are misunderstandings that are not differences, but one which also owns up to (and corrects, if necessary) any such differences.  

There's a name for that: conversion. Which would be covered  in the "Right to convert" item.

Now if we *truly* believe that:

1) we are all one community and we have always had the same belief expressed in different terms, *then* we are immediatelly excluding from this new church all our spiritual ancestors who thought otherwise and who defined so. We would be basically saying they might have been sincere and holy, but they let themselves be taken by petty mistakes a 1st grader could see in a 101 Greek/Latin/Syrian class. We are painting them as small men so we can be great and magnanimous, excluding them so we can be together, destroying dyachronic union for the sake of synchronic union.

Propagandistic nonsense.  We don't cut off our spiritual ancestors when we take them at their word that they committed sins.  If they are a part of us in spite of that, then why not this?  

While you would no doubt claim allegiance to truth, it's allegiance to a narrative.  Nothing more.  

Unless they've been dropping by to chat, their own narrative about themselves is all contact any us have with them. To substitute theirs for a narrative that would make us look much cooler and global to the world is to effectively silence them and exclude them from the ongoing conversation, which is a horrible thing in my opinion.

Plus, that sounds pretty much like the age old excuse of "This is not what you think, let me explain", universally used by all those that know very well that it *is* exactly what everybody is thinking.

We have different theologies and one of us (or both of us!) is not in the Church. At the same time we know that if we live a life to our best understanding of what being a Christian is, eventually, on Judgement Day, God will put us inside the real church even if we are not in it right now. That's not only enough for me, it seems as far as one can go without creating further division, it prevents uncalled for compromise, it allows us to still be tolerant of each other and at the same time "honor our forefathers".

Speaking of Judgment Day, we have a duty to ensue truth, and our words and actions to that end most certainly will be part of how we are judged in that Day.

If we are to follow that logic, no one would ever obtain eternal joy.
I trust in the mercy of Christ rather than my own words and actions at judgement day.



Yours in Jesus and Mary
- MarianCatholic

"For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned."
"But I say unto you that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment."
"For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works."

But more appropriately to what I was really talking about:

"Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs and sorcerers and whoremongers and murderers and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie."
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #32 on: September 09, 2014, 09:38:11 AM »
that which could have been easily amended before too much time had passed.

That is a point I agree with. *Maybe* it could have been solved back then, before they became entirely different communities.

Today it is not solvable. Any "union" would immediatelly create yet a new division, for the unionists in churches A and B would be together in united church C while huge chunks of A and B would simply state that C is heretic and the name calling would start all over again, maybe worse for C would have legitimacy before the institutions of the world to persecute through juridical means and social marginalization the "traditionalists" of A and B.

The only thing that is possible is that people convert from A to B and B to A and that both A and B learn to coexist in a fraternal way, also with the understanding that there is something that already unites us, Christendom, which is a civilizational, cultural reality and not the same as the Church, but a pearl of great price nevertheless.

In fact, in an indirect way, unionist ecumenism is partially responsible for the lack of interest for Christians in the Middle East. If Christendom depends on the impossible union of churches, why help people who are not "in the Church"? You see, unionist ecumenism is *radically* intolerant of the existence of people outside the Church - it *does* start with a concern for their salvation but once that sentiment nests in the heart, that it is not acceptable that there are different churches, indiference for those who do not want to unite with you is the natural emotional fruit. But if we convert our hearts and respect their right to think they are in the Church and we are not, and to try to make their best to live according to their understanding, and that they are worthy and valuable *despite* being wrong from our own perspective, that being members of Christendom is more than enough for us to have feel a relation of spiritual kinship with them without any need of even more church centralization and divisions, how much better wouldn't it be?
« Last Edit: September 09, 2014, 09:48:08 AM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #33 on: September 09, 2014, 09:46:19 AM »
that which could have been easily amended before too much time had passed.

That is a point I agree with. *Maybe* it could have been solved back then, before they became entirely different communities.

Today it is not solvable. Any "union" would immediatelly create yet a new division, for the unionists in churches A and B would be together in united church C while huge chunks of A and B would simply state that C is heretic and the name calling would start all over again, maybe worse for C would have legitimacy before the institutions of the world to persecute through juridical means and social marginalization the "traditionalists" of A and B.

The only thing that is possible is that people convert from A to B and B to A and that both A and B learn to coexist in a fraternal way, also with the understanding that there is something that already unites us, Christendom, which is a civilizational, cultural reality and not the same as the Church, but a pearl of great price nevertheless.

I disagree.  With God, all things are possible. 

If what you say comes to pass, where those from A and B refuse to join C (I doubt that they would be a huge number, particularly if the leading Patriarchates of A & B supported such a move), would not the remnants of A and B be analogous in the eyes of C to the Donatists and Old Believers?  So from C's perspective I don't really see a problem or much of a difference from what we have now.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #34 on: September 09, 2014, 10:00:55 AM »
that which could have been easily amended before too much time had passed.

That is a point I agree with. *Maybe* it could have been solved back then, before they became entirely different communities.

Today it is not solvable. Any "union" would immediatelly create yet a new division, for the unionists in churches A and B would be together in united church C while huge chunks of A and B would simply state that C is heretic and the name calling would start all over again, maybe worse for C would have legitimacy before the institutions of the world to persecute through juridical means and social marginalization the "traditionalists" of A and B.

The only thing that is possible is that people convert from A to B and B to A and that both A and B learn to coexist in a fraternal way, also with the understanding that there is something that already unites us, Christendom, which is a civilizational, cultural reality and not the same as the Church, but a pearl of great price nevertheless.

I disagree.  With God, all things are possible.  

If what you say comes to pass, where those from A and B refuse to join C (I doubt that they would be a huge number, particularly if the leading Patriarchates of A & B supported such a move), would not the remnants of A and B be analogous in the eyes of C to the Donatists and Old Believers?  So from C's perspective I don't really see a problem or much of a difference from what we have now.

As you just wrote, even if they were small in numbers, how would anyone know that C is right and A and B wrong? Truth does not depend on numbers. Arians and Iconoclasts have been the majority while Orthodox Catholicism was the minority - see Athanasius Contra Mundum.

But what you say shows precisely what I believe to be the key problem with unionist ecumenism; what really causes discomfort to unionists seems to be that they are not a hegemonic majority in Christendom. For all the talk about "mercy", "tolerance", what they really seem to fell to be lacking in Christianity is a group with the worldly legitimacy to say that everybody else is wrong, and that preferably this group should consist of a majority or at least the largest minority.

If patriarchs and popes boarded on that boat all the global instititutions would support it and then marginalization and exclusion of the new minorities could ensue. Frankly, sometimes I think that deep down, maybe even in a subsconscious way *that* is what unionists want.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2014, 10:02:17 AM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #35 on: September 09, 2014, 10:04:33 AM »
And by the way, no, not all things are possible to God. That is *not* the meaning of omnipotence. :)
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #36 on: September 09, 2014, 10:07:16 AM »
that which could have been easily amended before too much time had passed.

That is a point I agree with. *Maybe* it could have been solved back then, before they became entirely different communities.

Today it is not solvable. Any "union" would immediatelly create yet a new division, for the unionists in churches A and B would be together in united church C while huge chunks of A and B would simply state that C is heretic and the name calling would start all over again, maybe worse for C would have legitimacy before the institutions of the world to persecute through juridical means and social marginalization the "traditionalists" of A and B.

The only thing that is possible is that people convert from A to B and B to A and that both A and B learn to coexist in a fraternal way, also with the understanding that there is something that already unites us, Christendom, which is a civilizational, cultural reality and not the same as the Church, but a pearl of great price nevertheless.

I disagree.  With God, all things are possible.  

If what you say comes to pass, where those from A and B refuse to join C (I doubt that they would be a huge number, particularly if the leading Patriarchates of A & B supported such a move), would not the remnants of A and B be analogous in the eyes of C to the Donatists and Old Believers?  So from C's perspective I don't really see a problem or much of a difference from what we have now.

As you just wrote, even if they were small in numbers, how would anyone know that C is right and A and B wrong? Truth does not depend on numbers. Arians and Iconoclasts have been the majority while Orthodox Catholicism was the minority - see Athanasius Contra Mundum.

But what you say shows precisely what I believe to be the key problem with unionist ecumenism; what really causes discomfort to unionists seems to be that they are not a hegemonic majority in Christendom. For all the talk about "mercy", "tolerance", what they really seem to fell to be lacking in Christianity is a group with the worldly legitimacy to say that everybody else is wrong, and that preferably this group should consist of a majority or at least the largest minority.

If patriarchs and popes boarded on that boat all the global instititutions would support it and then marginalization and exclusion of the new minorities could ensue. Frankly, sometimes I think that deep down, maybe even in a subsconscious way *that* is what unionists want.

All I want is to see whether the various Christian communions can be brought back together, in integrity and truth, while stripping away the layers of polemic and prejudice and making whatever amendments to doctrine and praxis as are strictly necessary -- however minor or major those might be.  And I don't believe that we are always presently in a position to know just how much is right and/or wrong about the other Communion, or which variations in praxis are harmonious with our teaching.  We've made enormous strides in that regard with the Oriental Orthodox, but we're still not quite there.  Some communions, such as Evangelical Protestants, would require enormous overhauls, but there may still be some things there which are salvageable.

Obviously, I'm not interested in persecuting anyone.  If a given group doesn't want to approach us, I'd just as soon ignore them and let them go their merry way.  But if they do want to talk and can show me how some of what they do actually comports with what we do in a way that we didn't heretofore understand, I personally am interested to see if we can make it work without compromising the true meaning of our faith.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #37 on: September 09, 2014, 10:08:59 AM »
And by the way, no, not all things are possible to God. That is *not* the meaning of omnipotence. :)

Umm . . . I'll take Our Lord's words over yours on that point.

Quote
“With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” 

- Matthew 19:26

Don't fall into the trap of Dostoyevsky's Grand Inquisitor, where you know better than God what is good for His Church.  That is the major turn-off I get from the "Traditionalist" types.  A failure to keep an open mind.  One need not always embrace every item that comes to mind, but one should be willing to give studied consideration to anything.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #38 on: September 09, 2014, 10:25:56 AM »
If a given group doesn't want to approach us, I'd just as soon ignore them and let them go their merry way.  

You see, unionist ecumenism is *radically* intolerant of the existence of people outside the Church - it *does* start with a concern for their salvation but once that sentiment nests in the heart, that it is not acceptable that there are different churches, indiference for those who do not want to unite with you is the natural emotional fruit.

All I want is to see whether the various Christian communions can be brought back together, in integrity and truth, while stripping away the layers of polemic and prejudice and making whatever amendments to doctrine and praxis as are strictly necessary -- however minor or major those might be.

Right, that requires a brief discussion on what "respect for another's opinion" can mean.

1) It means that the "respecter" doesn't know anything about the subject over which the opinions are talking about or that, at leat, they all seem equally convincing to him; in that case, the "respecter" does not have an opinion of his own, maybe, at most, a certain inclination or sympathy for one or a couple of them; The right attitude in that case is to give them all a chance.

2) the respecter holds that all opinions, or at least a sub-set of the whole, are imcoplete aspects or descriptions of the same thing, thus having either the same value of truth or different degrees of truth, but none is the "whole" truth; The right attitude in that case is to let them all enter into dialogue so that from the dialetical analysis, the hidden unity behind them all can be expressed;

3) the respecter thinks that one of the opinions is the whole truth and that the others are either incomplete or outright wrong. He respects, though, people's right of being wrong and/or of having incomplete knowledge; the right attitude in that case, is to dialogue with the others trying to show them how they can come closer to the right opinion which is clearly stated.

Unionist ecumenism is more often than not based on 1 and 2. Your own approach seems to be 2. Much of what I see from articles from proeminent unionists is that they claim to believe the premise in 3 and that they seek its aim, but for that aim they recommend the attitude in 2. Either they are being politically cunning and really believe 2 and want 2 results but speak 3 language to prevent oppositionists reactions, or they are fated to be smashed by unwanted outcomes.









« Last Edit: September 09, 2014, 10:27:10 AM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #39 on: September 09, 2014, 10:29:58 AM »
I posit a modified third, which I would call a fourth.

4) the respecter thinks that one of the opinions is the whole truth and of the others he has no absolute opinion as to their truth or falsity. While he respects people's right of being wrong and/or of having incomplete knowledge; the right attitude in that case, is to dialogue with the others trying to learn whether they are expressing opinions which, although semantically different, are congruent with the truth which the respecter holds, or whether they need to be modified to come into conformity with that truth.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #40 on: September 09, 2014, 10:31:16 AM »
In short, we do not need to change anything.  But, on the other hand, I don't absolutely know how much (if anything) the others need to change as well; although I have my opinions and suspicions on this, I'm willing to hear reasonable argument to attempt to persuade me otherwise on the various points.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2014, 10:32:03 AM by Yurysprudentsiya »

Offline Santagranddad

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,198
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #41 on: September 09, 2014, 11:02:43 AM »
Is it really about 'inheriting guilt' or 'not inheriting guilt? Or is it about Truth, one, unchanged and undivided?

To me the ecumenical statements of bodies like the World Council of Churches are at best a fudge, or at worst a denial of Christ's promise. The pattern adopted by the WCC, and like minded bodies, is one of worldly diplomacy or the UN - something far removed from following Him.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #42 on: September 10, 2014, 09:41:09 AM »
I posit a modified third, which I would call a fourth.

4) the respecter thinks that one of the opinions is the whole truth and of the others he has no absolute opinion as to their truth or falsity. While he respects people's right of being wrong and/or of having incomplete knowledge; the right attitude in that case, is to dialogue with the others trying to learn whether they are expressing opinions which, although semantically different, are congruent with the truth which the respecter holds, or whether they need to be modified to come into conformity with that truth.



That is just "I know where the church is but I don't know where it is not",  a case of (1), not having any opinion or knowledge at all.

If you say that you are very sure that this is a dog:



But you can't be sure which of these are dogs:



then the plain fact is that you either don't believe there is such a thing as a dog as a defined species or that you still don't know what a dog is. Unionists keep saying that "you all thought those were cats, but they are actually a breed of toy dogs" and they don't find it strange or even arrogant that they are the only group in history, and a minority even in our own age that seems unable to even accept there are significant differences between the toy dog and the cats "it's all a matter of words, meowing and barking are just different words for "making sound" aren't they? It's all the same, they all make sounds, they all look alike, it's the same animal, in a mysterious way!"


To know what something is, or where it is, implies, necessarily to know what it is not and where it is not. These are just two ways of saying the same thing, one affirmative and the other negative. To use them in the same sentence is a contradiction like "I know what blue is, I just can't say that any color is not blue somehow".

So 4, which *is* the very basis of most of unionist discourse denounces again, that in their heart of hearts unionists don't *believe* in Christ's promises due to shock and frustration towards the world as they see it and even thought they may *feel* good feelings towards a generic concept of "church" that is not specific enough to mean anything.

Just like in the example above, if "dog" is *felt* and "loved" as an animal we like in too generic terms, we may be able to say that monkeys and elephants are not dogs, but when it takes analysis of "what those similar animals have in common", their common details (size, fur, legs, tails, proximity to humans, habits) may create a paradoxical complex and inclusive "unity in diversity" of "dogs". Analysis of common details, by being the reduction of a being that is a complete whole in itself into chosen reduced analized parts is precisely what *necessarily* will take us into mistakes in this case.


That's why I think that the "great misunderstanding" theory is wishful thinking and a historical mistake at best, and social engineering at worst. In essence, unionism is just about giving up trying to know the Church to accept everything there is in hope that God will have mercy of our state of confusion if only we formalize this confusion.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2014, 10:09:51 AM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #43 on: September 10, 2014, 10:24:39 AM »
"I know where the church is, but I don't know where it is not."

Yes, this is essentially what I believe, although instead of "church" I might also say "components thereof," with nuance.  And I'm not ashamed of it.

Your logic fails.  You say:

"I know what blue is, I just can't say that any color is not blue somehow."

No.  I know that this forum background is blue.  There are also other shades of blue, darker and lighter, which I can recognize.  But could some non-visual  photon array, or even something which manifests in a newly-discovered measurable dimension but not visually, somehow have the same components of what we describe as "blue?"  Absolutely.  I cannot say that it definitely does not.  If someone expert in such aspects of photon arrays could show me how that photon array is, in fact, blue, I would consider what they say and, if they are correct, I would agree and accept that photon array or other manifestation of matter as also a manifestation of blue.

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #44 on: September 10, 2014, 10:31:39 AM »
"I know where the church is, but I don't know where it is not."

Yes, this is essentially what I believe, although instead of "church" I might also say "components thereof," with nuance.  And I'm not ashamed of it.

Your logic fails.  You say:

"I know what blue is, I just can't say that any color is not blue somehow."

No.  I know that this forum background is blue. 

To this I would only add that yes, the Forum's background is blue. But during the Great Fast it is a shade of purple. That does not make it not the Forum.

It displays differently on tablets or smart phones, but it is still the forum.

The old charge of 'unionism' and similarly related charges really tell me that the person making such an assumption has digested little of the any of the Orthodox positions on the subject - whether the postitions are posited by official participants on the various Dialouge groups or by those more sceptical.

But we've gone round and round and round on this for years here and we aren't going to come to any consensus. And neither are those engaged in dialouge, so there really is nothing to debate other than abstractions. There is nothing new here from my point of view.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #45 on: September 10, 2014, 10:35:57 AM »
"I know where the church is, but I don't know where it is not."

Yes, this is essentially what I believe, although instead of "church" I might also say "components thereof," with nuance.  And I'm not ashamed of it.

Your logic fails.  You say:

"I know what blue is, I just can't say that any color is not blue somehow."

No.  I know that this forum background is blue.  There are also other shades of blue, darker and lighter, which I can recognize.  But could some non-visual  photon array, or even something which manifests in a newly-discovered measurable dimension but not visually, somehow have the same components of what we describe as "blue?"  Absolutely.  I cannot say that it definitely does not.  If someone expert in such aspects of photon arrays could show me how that photon array is, in fact, blue, I would consider what they say and, if they are correct, I would agree and accept that photon array or other manifestation of matter as also a manifestation of blue.

If it's not visual it's not any shade of blue. Right there, right there, it shows the inversion of discourse over reality. No photon is blue. Not a single one. Color blind people have their wires mixed showing that they see color A when everybody else estimulated by that same array sees color B.

An invisible photon ray can share several traits with the visible one that triggers "blue" in our brain, and yet for the mere fact that 1) photons are not colors; 2) even if there was a color that shared every characteristic with blue except being visible (whatever that could mean) would not be blue, but transparent or invisible.

What you're basically saying is that some specialist with social authority for that told you that a Corgi is in fact a rabbit you would accept it, a side-effect of modern technocracy. That explains much of "let the theologians" decide in the unionist scene and that's something that had not occurred to me as a significant part of that distortion. I'll give it sometime to integrate into the picture of it all.
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #46 on: September 10, 2014, 10:39:08 AM »
What I'm saying is that it is impossible to always have absolute knowledge of a negative, which is a basic scientific precept, and simply applying that to ecclesiology.

I am not a scientist.  What I gave was simply an example.  But it was a demonstrative example that there may be additional manifestations of reality, as yet possibly unmeasurable to us, where something exists that contains the essential qualities of "blueness," whatever that is.  One could also argue that the conception of blue itself is subjective as there is no way really to tell that the color I identify as blue is seen in that way by any other set of optical receptors; simply that we see in the same proportions and can thus relate to each other, even if what we see is not exactly the same.  But that's another discussion.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #47 on: September 10, 2014, 10:43:32 AM »
An invisible photon ray can share several traits with the visible one that triggers "blue" in our brain, and yet for the mere fact that 1) photons are not colors; 2) even if there was a color that shared every characteristic with blue except being visible (whatever that could mean) would not be blue, but transparent or invisible.

That only applies if you add the element of visibility to blue.  But blue can mean much more than that, it denotes a perception, often a sense of coolness, or sadness, etc.  Blue need not be visual.  Arguably, through proper neurostimulation, a blind person could experience the essence of blue without ever having seen it.  That is what I'm getting at.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #48 on: September 10, 2014, 03:34:51 PM »
An invisible photon ray can share several traits with the visible one that triggers "blue" in our brain, and yet for the mere fact that 1) photons are not colors; 2) even if there was a color that shared every characteristic with blue except being visible (whatever that could mean) would not be blue, but transparent or invisible.

That only applies if you add the element of visibility to blue.  But blue can mean much more than that, it denotes a perception, often a sense of coolness, or sadness, etc.  Blue need not be visual.  Arguably, through proper neurostimulation, a blind person could experience the essence of blue without ever having seen it.  That is what I'm getting at.

Visibility is *the* intrinsic trait of blue. In fact, blue itself is a trait possessed by other things that manifests visually as "blue" . All the others are accident. If you deny a color its own visual actualization you are denying the color itself.

And that is precisely what unionism does against the Church. You could take a whole Orthodox country which for no other reason than wanting to go rogue, broke communion with the Orthodox global community based on even the slightiest theological arcane subtlety, than if the people followed the hierarch in their arrogance, that country would out of the Church, no longer the same community.

I can empathize with unionists in their frustration. It *sounds* abhorent that millions of people should stay separated because of an obscure theological subject that no one can prove and most can't even understand while external piety is so similar to the point of being identical in some cases. It is frustrating, it is shocking.

The baby that unionists throw out with the water though is related to language and it's capacity to define spirit and mind regardless of what we think it means. That is even more essential for our human capacity to participate to the act of belonging to the Church than understanding how to better define the union of humanity and divinity, or how the Persons of the Trinity relate to each other. Be it filioque or no filioque, one or two natures, language imposes a form onto the heart that is independent from what we believe the words to mean. Like icons - and words are but icons in form of sound - it doesn't matter that one believes that it is irrelevant to depict Jesus in Byzantine tradition or in cubist style because "it's all Jesus".

"Unity in Diversity"

Truth is: form matters. When the ancients from each group anathematized each other, it was not because due to temporal or cultural limitations they did not have the capacity to understand that at least some members in the other group believed the same as they did with other words.

When they went beyond anathematizing specific people to whole groups or teachings it was because they knew that, regardless of what they believed about the teaching, the form of the teaching would act to separate them from the Church. It is not enough to have faith. That is intrinsic in the theology of icons and how form impresses the heart.

Basically unionists reject with all sincerity, with all their hearts, that "form defines spirit". With all the talk about vivifying spirits and killing letters, they believe in a kind of "linguistic and cultural" avatarism, where different forms can be "incarnations" of the same spirit, without differentiating variation from divergence.

That is easy to double-check. In all ecumenical dialogues, in all ecumenical conferences and meetings, in all articles and books, which ones deals with the real possibility that the differences between the churches as we see then today are *not* misunderstandings but actual discordances, real deviations? Which one deals with that scenario? To my knowledge none. They are not interested in making the best of what we have. They are hard heartened in revolutionizing the world.

That alone shows that "ecumenical dialogue" is no real dialogue, because there are not "two logos" but only one, that of future union not being under question, it is a decision already taken, the real question how to make it look legitimate so that those who disagree can be legitimately marginalized.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2014, 03:38:21 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #49 on: September 10, 2014, 03:47:43 PM »
Which one of these is non-Chalcedonian?



"Unity in Diversity"

 
« Last Edit: September 10, 2014, 03:47:57 PM by TheTrisagion »
God bless!

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #50 on: September 10, 2014, 03:51:55 PM »
Which one of these is non-Chalcedonian?



"Unity in Diversity"

 




The second is an icon of the Really True Post-Modernist Orthodox Paleo-Cubist Church of the Latter-Day Painters. Do you have a minute to hear about Agios Picasso, the Cubinographer?
« Last Edit: September 10, 2014, 03:52:11 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #51 on: September 10, 2014, 03:57:12 PM »
Do you think you are smarter than the prelates involved into this phenomena? What begs the question is weather the motifs are pure or not.

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #52 on: September 10, 2014, 03:58:00 PM »
Which one of these is non-Chalcedonian?



"Unity in Diversity"

 




The second is an icon of the Really True Post-Modernist Orthodox Paleo-Cubist Church of the Latter-Day Painters. Do you have a minute to hear about Agios Picasso, the Cubinographer?

Stop with this nonsense.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #53 on: September 10, 2014, 04:03:15 PM »
Do you think you are smarter than the prelates involved into this phenomena? What begs the question is weather the motifs are pure or not.

We don't have to be smarter to see what they don't see. Merely not being in the eye of the tornado and not being under the terrible pressures they are is enough to give perspective they can't have.
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #54 on: September 10, 2014, 04:05:52 PM »
Do you think you are smarter than the prelates involved into this phenomena? What begs the question is weather the motifs are pure or not.

We don't have to be smarter to see what they don't see. Merely not being in the eye of the tornado and not being under the terrible pressures they are is enough to give perspective they can't have.

A 12 y.o sees that for crying out loud.

If they are not pupets they have a lot of perspective.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #55 on: September 10, 2014, 04:11:02 PM »
Which one of these is non-Chalcedonian?



"Unity in Diversity"

 




The second is an icon of the Really True Post-Modernist Orthodox Paleo-Cubist Church of the Latter-Day Painters. Do you have a minute to hear about Agios Picasso, the Cubinographer?

Stop with this nonsense.

Ok. What about this nonsense instead?

Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #56 on: September 10, 2014, 04:13:36 PM »
Do you think you are smarter than the prelates involved into this phenomena? What begs the question is weather the motifs are pure or not.

We don't have to be smarter to see what they don't see. Merely not being in the eye of the tornado and not being under the terrible pressures they are is enough to give perspective they can't have.

A 12 y.o sees that for crying out loud.

If they are not pupets they have a lot of perspective.

Of course not. You don't have to be anyone's puppet to be immersed in a global cultural trend. And we are all more or less immersed in the same global cultural trends, so yes, anyone can criticize these trends and if anyone jumps in, from the humblest janitor to the Patriarchs, the criticism - which is not a bad thing or an attack - will apply to them as well.

Every single time anthropocentric global warming is challenged that hits Patriarch Bartholomew, not because people are irreverent, but because he chose to defend that cause. The same applies for those who defend "Holy Putinist Russia", radical multiculturalism, global meta-capitalists, dialoguing with "peaceful" Islam etc etc.

Do you believe that authority conveys infallibility? ;)
« Last Edit: September 10, 2014, 04:23:35 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #57 on: September 10, 2014, 04:23:47 PM »
Do you think you are smarter than the prelates involved into this phenomena? What begs the question is weather the motifs are pure or not.

We don't have to be smarter to see what they don't see. Merely not being in the eye of the tornado and not being under the terrible pressures they are is enough to give perspective they can't have.

A 12 y.o sees that for crying out loud.

If they are not pupets they have a lot of perspective.

Of course not. You don't have to be anyone's puppet to be immersed in a global cultural trend. And we are all more or less immersed in the same global cultural trends, so yes, anyone can criticize these trends and if anyone jumps in, from the humblest janitor to the Patriarchs, the criticism - which is not a bad thing or an attack - will apply to them as well.

Every single time anthropocentric global warming is challenged that hits Patriarch Bartholomew, not because people are irreverent, but because he chose to defend a wrong cause.

Do you believe that authority conveys infallibility? ;)

Theoretically the Church sends the Church's finest into this movement. And as Orthodox we believe in the Holy Spirit enlightening the prelates in their decisions as long as their motives are pure, or whatever... Supossingly they don't go alone, but with the Holy Spirit with them, who is present, who enlights, protects, and saves the truth in the end.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #58 on: September 10, 2014, 04:25:47 PM »
Theoretically.
God bless!

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #59 on: September 10, 2014, 04:28:56 PM »
Theoretically.

You are either Orthodox or you aren't.

That is what the Church professes.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #60 on: September 10, 2014, 04:31:07 PM »
Theoretically.

You are either Orthodox or you aren't.

That is what the Church professes.
I'm referencing your theoretical that the Church sends its finest into the position of Bishop.
God bless!

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #61 on: September 10, 2014, 04:34:12 PM »
Theoretically.

You are either Orthodox or you aren't.

That is what the Church professes.
I'm referencing your theoretical that the Church sends its finest into the position of Bishop.

Isn't it obvious?

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #62 on: September 10, 2014, 04:35:09 PM »
Theoretically.

You are either Orthodox or you aren't.

That is what the Church professes.
I'm referencing your theoretical that the Church sends its finest into the position of Bishop.

Isn't it obvious?
No
God bless!

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #63 on: September 10, 2014, 04:36:23 PM »
Do you think you are smarter than the prelates involved into this phenomena? What begs the question is weather the motifs are pure or not.

We don't have to be smarter to see what they don't see. Merely not being in the eye of the tornado and not being under the terrible pressures they are is enough to give perspective they can't have.

A 12 y.o sees that for crying out loud.

If they are not pupets they have a lot of perspective.

Of course not. You don't have to be anyone's puppet to be immersed in a global cultural trend. And we are all more or less immersed in the same global cultural trends, so yes, anyone can criticize these trends and if anyone jumps in, from the humblest janitor to the Patriarchs, the criticism - which is not a bad thing or an attack - will apply to them as well.

Every single time anthropocentric global warming is challenged that hits Patriarch Bartholomew, not because people are irreverent, but because he chose to defend a wrong cause.

Do you believe that authority conveys infallibility? ;)

Theoretically the Church sends the Church's finest into this movement. And as Orthodox we believe in the Holy Spirit enlightening the prelates in their decisions as long as their motives are pure, or whatever... Supossingly they don't go alone, but with the Holy Spirit with them, who is present, who enlights, protects, and saves the truth in the end.

And how many millenia will it take to know that this is not the case?

Among bishops and patriarchs there are several competent men and some not so competent. A couple of saints, many right-hearted man and some definetelly ill-intentioned. And some of the ill-intentioned are among the competent ones and some of the saints may be among the politically incompetent ones, unfortunatelly.

Besides, good-intentions are *not* a guarantor of correctness or of good outcomes. Most of the evil done in the world is done out of good intentions that think good intentions are enough. Evil itself is too weak to do all this suffering we see around us.

The Holy Spirit prevails in keeping the Church anyway until final victory on the Last Judgement - that can mean even making it survive the mistakes of high hierarchs, as a minority group; again, remember Athanasius against the world.

The governance of the Holy Spirit does not mean there can't be massive blunders on the way, even by high hierarchs.

It means God is so powerful and merciful that He prevails even in the apparent and temporary victory of darkness. It's this that Rome forgot and thus had to create an infallible bishop and Protestants followed with an inerrant book. We don't need that for "hierarchs" in general either.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2014, 04:40:20 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #64 on: September 10, 2014, 04:38:26 PM »
Theoretically.

You are either Orthodox or you aren't.

That is what the Church professes.

It's the Body of Christ, not a sports team or a street gang.
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #65 on: September 10, 2014, 04:40:59 PM »
With religion it will always happen what God wants. If he wants to bring delusion He will.

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #66 on: September 10, 2014, 04:43:46 PM »
Theoretically.

You are either Orthodox or you aren't.

That is what the Church professes.

It's the Body of Christ, not a sports team or a street gang.

Either the truth is objective or not. If yes, then it is exclusive.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #67 on: September 10, 2014, 04:54:23 PM »
With religion it will always happen what God wants. If he wants to bring delusion He will.

There are two kinds of will in God. "Desiring" will and "Allowing" will, that is, things that He wants to happen and things that He doesn't want but gives permission to happen (when someone sins for example).

It's very clear that God does not force anyone not to sin, or even to not commit mistakes that are not sins. Patriarchs are no exception to that. Under God's permission - not under his "wanting" they can and have made mistakes in the past. We have to respect them always, according to their hierarchy. But *trust* in something each one has to conquer by themselves, as their actions reveal both a pious Orthodox heart and the required political discernment for the kind of role they have.

In my opinion, and this is just a forum, I'm not pestering patriarchs with letters or anything like that, Constantinople and Moscow are tainted by the two contemporary global trends, and their conflicts are a side-effect of the conflicts between these two trends: global meta-capitalism and the Russian echo of post-sovietism where an elite that was raised still in Soviet times tries to reconquer *that* specific kind of glory.

For Constantinople, that influence of globalism is manifest in Ecumenism (which is just multiculturalism for churches), Ecologism and the desire to build a global infrastructure for the Church that will necessarily rely on the loose network of Orthodox globalists. For Moscow, it means, again, mixing  the interests of the governing elite of Russia which sees the trend in which Constantinople is as "Western" and "the enemy".
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #68 on: September 10, 2014, 04:55:12 PM »
Theoretically.

You are either Orthodox or you aren't.

That is what the Church professes.

It's the Body of Christ, not a sports team or a street gang.

Either the truth is objective or not. If yes, then it is exclusive.

Truth is objective and exclusive. That is why infallible hierarchs is a concept excluded from the Church. :)
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #69 on: September 11, 2014, 10:52:47 AM »
With religion it will always happen what God wants. If he wants to bring delusion He will.

There are two kinds of will in God. "Desiring" will and "Allowing" will, that is, things that He wants to happen and things that He doesn't want but gives permission to happen (when someone sins for example).

It's very clear that God does not force anyone not to sin, or even to not commit mistakes that are not sins. Patriarchs are no exception to that. Under God's permission - not under his "wanting" they can and have made mistakes in the past. We have to respect them always, according to their hierarchy. But *trust* in something each one has to conquer by themselves, as their actions reveal both a pious Orthodox heart and the required political discernment for the kind of role they have.

In my opinion, and this is just a forum, I'm not pestering patriarchs with letters or anything like that, Constantinople and Moscow are tainted by the two contemporary global trends, and their conflicts are a side-effect of the conflicts between these two trends: global meta-capitalism and the Russian echo of post-sovietism where an elite that was raised still in Soviet times tries to reconquer *that* specific kind of glory.

For Constantinople, that influence of globalism is manifest in Ecumenism (which is just multiculturalism for churches), Ecologism and the desire to build a global infrastructure for the Church that will necessarily rely on the loose network of Orthodox globalists. For Moscow, it means, again, mixing  the interests of the governing elite of Russia which sees the trend in which Constantinople is as "Western" and "the enemy".

Orthodoxy believes in Conciliar inspiration especially when the intentions are good. See the Ecumenical Councils, where the truth prevailed in spectacle with an utterance of 7 thunders.

How much more in something this big that can ruin a 2000 y.o work will not the Holy Spirit involved to preserve the truth?

The faith that it is about here is not in the bishops, in the prelates but in Christ and the Holy Spirit to leave "a church" towards whom the gates of Hades will never prevail. And in the inspiration of the Holy Spirit "who can enlighten people on that very moment" and who supposingly is with the Church when the Church most needs it.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #70 on: September 11, 2014, 11:41:32 AM »
See the Ecumenical Councils, where the truth prevailed in spectacle with an utterance of 7 thunders.

LOL.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #71 on: September 11, 2014, 11:44:31 AM »
See the Ecumenical Councils, where the truth prevailed in spectacle with an utterance of 7 thunders.

LOL.
You're just mad you only heard three utterances.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2014, 11:44:41 AM by TheTrisagion »
God bless!

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #72 on: September 11, 2014, 11:58:13 AM »
See the Ecumenical Councils, where the truth prevailed in spectacle with an utterance of 7 thunders.

LOL.
You're just mad you only heard three utterances.

That must be it.  It has nothing to do with likening the ecumenical councils to bad weather. 

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #73 on: September 11, 2014, 12:04:00 PM »
See the Ecumenical Councils, where the truth prevailed in spectacle with an utterance of 7 thunders.

LOL.
You're just mad you only heard three utterances.

That must be it.  It has nothing to do with likening the ecumenical councils to bad weather. 
Well, now we have figured out the problem.  OO Churches are in sunnier climates and do not experience the benefit of thunder as often.  Someone must notify the episcopate immediately.
God bless!

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #74 on: September 11, 2014, 01:06:08 PM »
Theoretically.

You are either Orthodox or you aren't.

That is what the Church professes.

It's the Body of Christ, not a sports team or a street gang.

Either the truth is objective or not. If yes, then it is exclusive.

Truth is objective and exclusive. That is why infallible hierarchs is a concept excluded from the Church. :)

What is Truth?  Truth is a person, the Lord Jesus Christ.

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #75 on: September 11, 2014, 04:17:03 PM »
Theoretically.

You are either Orthodox or you aren't.

That is what the Church professes.

It's the Body of Christ, not a sports team or a street gang.

Either the truth is objective or not. If yes, then it is exclusive.

Truth is objective and exclusive. That is why infallible hierarchs is a concept excluded from the Church. :)

What is Truth?  Truth is a person, the Lord Jesus Christ.

blah blah...

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #76 on: September 11, 2014, 04:18:33 PM »
I feel schizophrenic tendencies taking over when I read Skydive's posts.
God bless!

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #77 on: September 16, 2014, 10:05:22 AM »
Unionist ecumenism in one strip:

Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #78 on: September 16, 2014, 11:19:47 AM »
We get it, Fabio.  :P

Offline DeniseDenise

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,712
  • This place holds to nothing....
  • Faith: Does it matter?
  • Jurisdiction: Unverifiable, so irrelevant
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #79 on: September 16, 2014, 02:24:55 PM »
Wait.....how can that cartoon be right.

Fabio has previously stated that in Brazil and almost everywhere else he wishes to opine about, they merely syncretize it all together...


15 is far too many for that.


All opinions expressed by myself are quite tragically my own, and not those of any other poster or wall hangings.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #80 on: September 16, 2014, 04:06:26 PM »
Wait.....how can that cartoon be right.

Fabio has previously stated that in Brazil and almost everywhere else he wishes to opine about, they merely syncretize it all together...


15 is far too many for that.




Syncretism is for Brazil only and I wished it was just my opinion. It's just Brazilian Sociology 101.




For other places, then yes, it's opinion, mostly. :)

« Last Edit: September 16, 2014, 04:36:33 PM by Fabio Leite »
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #81 on: September 16, 2014, 04:07:49 PM »
We get it, Fabio.  :P

Ok, sorry for the insistence. I just found it funny. :)
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline biro

  • Site Supporter
  • Stratopedarches
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,210
  • Excelsior
    • Archive of Our Own works
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #82 on: September 16, 2014, 05:22:38 PM »
Okay, I'll never talk to anyone from another church again. Yeesh.  :-[
https://archiveofourown.org/users/Parakeetist


Warning: stories have mature content.

Offline Justin Kolodziej

  • Goths and rivetheads are entering the Kingdom of God before me
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,075
  • Screwing up the Church since 2017
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Metropolis of Atlanta
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #83 on: September 16, 2014, 07:59:06 PM »
Orthodoxy believes in Conciliar inspiration especially when the intentions are good. See the Ecumenical Councils, where the truth prevailed in spectacle with an utterance of 7 thunders.
Of course, for us Catholics it's been more like 20 thunders and a loud wet fart  :-\
Too many theologists, not enough theologians.

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #84 on: September 16, 2014, 08:05:37 PM »
Orthodoxy believes in Conciliar inspiration especially when the intentions are good. See the Ecumenical Councils, where the truth prevailed in spectacle with an utterance of 7 thunders.
Of course, for us Catholics it's been more like 20 thunders and a loud wet fart  :-\
ROTFL!!!

God bless!

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #85 on: September 17, 2014, 09:02:12 AM »
Orthodoxy believes in Conciliar inspiration especially when the intentions are good. See the Ecumenical Councils, where the truth prevailed in spectacle with an utterance of 7 thunders.
Of course, for us Catholics it's been more like 20 thunders and a loud wet fart  :-\

Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #86 on: September 17, 2014, 09:27:59 AM »
Orthodoxy believes in Conciliar inspiration especially when the intentions are good. See the Ecumenical Councils, where the truth prevailed in spectacle with an utterance of 7 thunders.
Of course, for us Catholics it's been more like 20 thunders and a loud wet fart  :-\

Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #87 on: September 17, 2014, 10:58:24 AM »
Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Where is this in the Bible?

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #88 on: September 17, 2014, 11:00:57 AM »
Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Where is this in the Bible?

Biblical references
The seven Spirits of God are mentioned four times in the Book of Revelation, and in the book of Isaiah it names each Spirit. [1][2]

Revelation 1:4 - John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;

Revelation 3:1 - And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars; I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead.

Revelation 4:5 - And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.

Revelation 5:6 - And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
Isaiah 11:2 ( New International Version)

The Spirit of the Lord will rest on him the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of might, the Spirit of the knowledge and fear of the Lord—

Interpretations

The "Sevenfold Ministry of the Spirit" interpretation holds that the seven Spirits refer to Book of Isaiah 11:2. In this interpretation, "The "seven Spirits" represent the sevenfold ministry of the Spirit as depicted in Isaiah 11:2." [2] As it is written in the Holy Bible in the Book of Isaiah, 2 And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD; Isaiah 11:2 (KJV). Including the Spirit of the Lord, and the spirits of wisdom, of understanding, of counsel, of might, of knowledge and of fear of the LORD, here are represented the seven spirits, which are before the throne of God.[4] The reference to the lamb in Revelation 5:6 relates it to the Seven Spirits which first appear in Revelation 1:4 and are associated with Jesus who holds them along with seven stars.[5]

In the New Testament, the term "Dynamis" (translated as Virtues) suggests a class of exalted spiritual beings; the same perhaps parallel to the "chief Princes" (Sar rishown) in the Old Testament, of which Michael is stated to be one (Daniel 10:13).[6]

Note: the word "Dynamis" means something closer to 'strength', 'power' or 'ability' not 'virtues', as examinations of a Greek lexicon or concordance would reveal. "Dynamis" is used by Paul to refer to spiritual beings in Romans 8:38, Eph 1:21, 3:10, 6:12, Col 1:16, 2:10 & 15. "Powers and principalities" can apply to both angelic and demonic beings, more often in the New Testament to demonic beings.

Seven fold may also be connected with the Biblical understanding of the number 7 representing perfection. The "Seven Fold Spirit of God" could be the "perfect" Spirit of God, the Holy Spirit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Spirits_of_God
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #89 on: September 17, 2014, 11:05:52 AM »
Yes, I'm familiar enough with the Bible to pick a "symbolic" number and provide a number of references where it means something more than just its numeric value.  What I am curious to know is where the Bible speaks of "seven thunders" and where this is interpreted as being "seven ecumenical councils".  "Seven pillars" I've heard of, but not "seven thunders". 

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #90 on: September 17, 2014, 11:08:50 AM »
I believe that there will end up being 80 ecumenical councils because there were 40 days and 40 nights of the flood which purged wickedness from the earth. This adds up to 80 and so 80 ecumenical councils are needed to purge all the heresies from the Church.

 ;)
God bless!

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #91 on: September 17, 2014, 11:09:52 AM »
I believe that there will end up being 80 ecumenical councils because there were 40 days and 40 nights of the flood which purged wickedness from the earth. This adds up to 80 and so 80 ecumenical councils are needed to purge all the heresies from the Church.

 ;)

Or 144,000.

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #92 on: September 17, 2014, 11:13:18 AM »
You are going down the road of the ill-fated Harold Camping, who prophesied that the world would end on May 21, 2011.  (Remember him?)

Too much such thinking and you start reaching these conclusions:

Quote
Since the word “come” used in both Ezra Chapter 3 and Daniel 12:12 ordinarily signifies “touch,” we can know that Daniel 12:12 is teaching that Christ
as the Blessed One had to wait for the fullness of God’s timetable before He could come to, or be in touch with, the 1,335 days, which was the period of time when Jesus did all of His work as Savior. It began on the feast of Tishri 1 in A.D. 29 and ended 1,335 days later on May 21, A.D. 33 when the Holy Spirit was given at Pentecost. How beautiful and harmonious is the Word of God! How trustworthy are all the prophecies and numbers of the Bible!

Quote
As we continue our study, we will learn that the Church Age, in all likelihood, ended on May 21, A.D. 1988, the day before Pentecost of that year.  40 years is certainly a significant period of time given the fact that so many other periods of Gospel history identify with the number 40. (For example, Israel was in the wilderness for 40 years.)
Moreover, the period of time from A.D. 1948 to the Jubilee Year A.D. 1994 is 46 years, which breaks down into the significant numbers 2 x 23.  Furthermore, the period of time from A.D. 1948 to A.D. 2011, which we will learn is the likely year that ends the world, is 63 years. The number 63 is made up of the significant numbers 3 x 3 x 7. Is all of this coincidental? Or, does it indicate that God has a carefully designed plan for the unfolding of history?

From the book "Time Has An End," by Harold Camping

Offline DeniseDenise

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,712
  • This place holds to nothing....
  • Faith: Does it matter?
  • Jurisdiction: Unverifiable, so irrelevant
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #93 on: September 17, 2014, 11:15:32 AM »
42
All opinions expressed by myself are quite tragically my own, and not those of any other poster or wall hangings.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #94 on: September 17, 2014, 11:18:11 AM »
I miss Harold Camping, he had a distinctive voice and quirky teachings to match.  I wonder what he's up to these days...  ;)

Offline Yurysprudentsiya

  • Private Fora
  • Archon
  • *
  • Posts: 2,737
  • God, the Great, the Only, Keep for Us Our Ukraine!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: OCA, with a love for the UOC-USA
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #95 on: September 17, 2014, 11:20:26 AM »
The soft spot in me pictures a compassionate Christ putting his arm around Harold, whose jaw is on the floor at realizing how far off-base he was and saying, "Oh, Harold.  You just TRIED too hard."

Harold did repent of many of his date-setting efforts shortly before his passing.  He didn't repent of his many other heterodox ideas, as far as I know, but he did publicly jettison the big one via a letter.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #96 on: September 17, 2014, 11:23:16 AM »
The soft spot in me pictures a compassionate Christ putting his arm around Harold, whose jaw is on the floor at realizing how far off-base he was and saying, "Oh, Harold.  You just TRIED too hard."

Harold did repent of many of his date-setting efforts shortly before his passing.  He didn't repent of his many other heterodox ideas, as far as I know, but he did publicly jettison the big one via a letter.

What I really want to know is how he reacted to the hug from our Lady. 

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #97 on: September 17, 2014, 12:45:53 PM »
The soft spot in me pictures a compassionate Christ putting his arm around Harold, whose jaw is on the floor at realizing how far off-base he was and saying, "Oh, Harold.  You just TRIED too hard."

Harold did repent of many of his date-setting efforts shortly before his passing.  He didn't repent of his many other heterodox ideas, as far as I know, but he did publicly jettison the big one via a letter.

What I really want to know is how he reacted to the hug from our Lady.  

Something like...this......perhaps?



"oh oh...."
« Last Edit: September 17, 2014, 12:46:19 PM by podkarpatska »

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #98 on: September 17, 2014, 03:41:42 PM »
Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Where is this in the Bible?

Somewhere.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #99 on: September 17, 2014, 03:53:48 PM »
Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Where is this in the Bible?

Somewhere.

Yeah.  Probably next to the passage about how Subaru's all wheel drive transfers power from the wheels that slip to the wheels that grip.  Maybe it's in Ezekiel. 

Offline TheTrisagion

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,814
  • All good things come to an end
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #100 on: September 17, 2014, 04:12:54 PM »
God bless!

Offline DeniseDenise

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,712
  • This place holds to nothing....
  • Faith: Does it matter?
  • Jurisdiction: Unverifiable, so irrelevant
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #101 on: September 17, 2014, 04:16:31 PM »
Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Where is this in the Bible?

Somewhere.

Yeah.  Probably next to the passage about how Subaru's all wheel drive transfers power from the wheels that slip to the wheels that grip.  Maybe it's in Ezekiel. 
\


pretty sure the fantasticness of the Subaru is covered by


Proverbs 4:26-27


Watch the path of your feet And all your ways will be established. Do not turn to the right nor to the left; Turn your foot from evil.
All opinions expressed by myself are quite tragically my own, and not those of any other poster or wall hangings.

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #102 on: September 17, 2014, 04:57:21 PM »
Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Where is this in the Bible?

Somewhere.

Yeah.  Probably next to the passage about how Subaru's all wheel drive transfers power from the wheels that slip to the wheels that grip.  Maybe it's in Ezekiel. 

the biblical ignorance of the people here amazes me :)

It's in Revelation , the 7 thunders.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #103 on: September 17, 2014, 05:01:30 PM »
the biblical ignorance of the people here amazes me :)

Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Where is this in the Bible?

Somewhere.


Chapter and verse, buddy.  Out with it. 

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #104 on: September 17, 2014, 05:02:48 PM »
the biblical ignorance of the people here amazes me :)

Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Where is this in the Bible?

Somewhere.


Chapter and verse, buddy.  Out with it. 

Say 'Please'

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #105 on: September 17, 2014, 05:03:45 PM »
the biblical ignorance of the people here amazes me :)

Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Where is this in the Bible?

Somewhere.


Chapter and verse, buddy.  Out with it. 

Say 'Please'

Say "I'm sorry for calling everyone here ignorant". 

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #106 on: September 17, 2014, 05:05:42 PM »
the biblical ignorance of the people here amazes me :)

Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Where is this in the Bible?

Somewhere.


Chapter and verse, buddy.  Out with it. 

Say 'Please'

Say "I'm sorry for calling everyone here ignorant". 

I guess you'll have to find it out for yourself :)

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #107 on: September 17, 2014, 05:06:16 PM »
the biblical ignorance of the people here amazes me :)

Read the Bible. There are only 7 thunders.

Where is this in the Bible?

Somewhere.


Chapter and verse, buddy.  Out with it. 

Say 'Please'

Say "I'm sorry for calling everyone here ignorant". 

I guess you'll have to find it out for yourself :)

So will you, I suppose.

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #108 on: September 17, 2014, 05:08:44 PM »

Offline dzheremi

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,371
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #109 on: September 17, 2014, 05:25:36 PM »
It's Revelation 10:4, folks:

Now when the seven thunders uttered their voices, I was about to write; but I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, “Seal up the things which the seven thunders uttered, and do not write them.”

I don't know what this is supposed to prove or why it would've been so hard for Skydive to post that, but there it is.

Offline Fabio Leite

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 4,790
    • Vida Ortodoxa
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #110 on: September 17, 2014, 05:43:16 PM »
It's Revelation 10:4, folks:

Now when the seven thunders uttered their voices, I was about to write; but I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, “Seal up the things which the seven thunders uttered, and do not write them.”

I don't know what this is supposed to prove or why it would've been so hard for Skydive to post that, but there it is.

Shazam!
Many Energies, 3 Persons, 2 Natures, 1 God, 1 Church, 1 Baptism, and 1 Cup. The Son begotten only from the Father, the Spirit proceeding only from the Father, Each glorifying the Other. The Son sends the Spirit, the Spirit Reveals the Son, the Father is seen in the Son. The Spirit spoke through the Prophets and Fathers and does so even today.

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • Ο προκαθήμενος της Ορθοδοξίας - The President of Orthodoxy
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 34,345
  • Two half-eggs
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: The Ancienter Faith
  • Jurisdiction: But my heart belongs to FOCOF
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #111 on: September 17, 2014, 05:56:36 PM »
I don't know what this is supposed to prove or why it would've been so hard for Skydive to post that, but there it is.

Biblical ignorance is the prevailing theory, or so I'm told. 

Offline Skydive

  • BANNED for rules violations
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 656
Re: For a new Ecumenical Path
« Reply #112 on: September 18, 2014, 09:23:36 AM »
I don't know what this is supposed to prove or why it would've been so hard for Skydive to post that, but there it is.

Biblical ignorance is the prevailing theory, or so I'm told. 

yeah, yours :)