OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 21, 2014, 04:52:53 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: THE ROCOR-MP CONNECTION  (Read 10948 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,464


« Reply #45 on: April 13, 2006, 11:42:04 PM »

While you are correct in that ecclesiastical authority does not shrink with the fall of empires, neither does it grow with the growth of a Nation. Moscow was given Jurisdiction over the lands defined by the bounds of Russia in the late sixteenth Century, before Russia acquired Alaska. When the Russian State conquered alaska are we to assume then that the authority of Moscow, independent of any council, expanded to include this area? Of course not, such a notion is inconsonant with both the Canons and customs of the Church. It is you, not I, who here argues that the boundaries of the Church change with the boundaries of nations, I reject that notion and accordingly I reject that Moscow ever had proper authority over Alaska.

When Churches are unable to follow the established canons and protocols, yes problems arise, and Constantinople has insisted on no right that is not either explicitly granted in the Canons or firmly established in the Traditions of the Christian Church.

How about when Constantinople is unable or unwilling to follow the Great Commanment of Christ to "baptize all nations"?  Yes, we've heard your arguments based on anachronistic canons, the Ecumenical Synods, etc., but I don't think you have addressed the "ought" or "should" of what HAS happened?  Should Moscow have never even attempted to missionize lands that were part of their nation's boundaries that I'm sure Constantinople was probably unaware existed or even able to reach?  Should Moscow have done all the work and then just given authority over to the EP?  Do you have any historical precedent to backup any cases of another Patriarchate missionizing a land (that may or may not have been outside her boundaries) and then outright given authority over to Constantinople?  What about the Church of Poland or the Church of the Czech lands?  AFAIK, they are both Autocephalous but yet I think I remember you saying that "it shouldn't have happened"...along with possibly Serbia, Albania, Bulgaria and the Church of Greece.  Well, it did and the EP has accepted them as such.  Please respond.
Logged
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,440



« Reply #46 on: April 14, 2006, 12:01:22 AM »

The great saint Athenagoras, doing a masonic handshake with one anti-Christ servant:

Oh golly!  not the masons again!  <Were is that emoticon of banging my head on the keyboard?>  
Just *how* is this supposed to be a "masonic" handshake?  How does one know?  It looks to me like an old man who is careful with his hand.

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #47 on: April 14, 2006, 02:37:51 AM »

There is no doubts about some members of parisian institute are heretical. Some like Bulgakov and others sophiologists. Im not acusing all of them of heretics, but is very clear that the parisian institute was a garden of hereticals.

About A. Schmemann and John Meyendorff:

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/pom_lit.aspx
http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/commentsschmey.aspx

If Schemann was not a heretic (im not acusing him), you theology (and of the Meyendorff also) are very dubious.

Yes, I am familiar with what orthodoxinfo.com has to say about the Frs. Schmemann and Meyendorff.  I've read the articles myself, and more than once.

Many posters here have seen me post my views on ROCOR, so what I'm about to say shouldn't be new to them, and I certainly don't want to renew any arguments with them (hint, Anastasios  Wink).  Just let me say that I see ROCOR's canonical foundation being very weak.  (To read a whole thread containing a very good discussion of ROCOR and her place in the Orthodox Church, together with statements of my own viewpoint, just follow this link.)  I don't see how a rogue synod of bishops whose churches had been destroyed, leaving the bishops without churches to rule, could have any canonical authority to rule all Russian Orthodox Christians outside of Russia and thereby interfere in the affairs of local Orthodox churches.  OTOH, Patriarch St. Tikhon actually appointed Metropolitan Evlogy to rule the Russian Orthodox Church in Western Europe, so Metr. Evlogy was actually a legitimate ruling bishop, unlike the rest of the Karlovci Synod.  Metr. Evlogy did not owe any canonical obedience to any synod of Russian bishops abroad, and neither did the bishops of the American Metropolia.  (IMHO, the very Ukase 362 that ROCOR loves to cite as the foundation of its authority could just as validly be cited as authorizing the American Metropolia to govern itself apart from communication with the MP.  It is significant to me that the same Patriarch St. Tikhon who issued this famous Ukase also abolished the first Karlovci Synod, so that the second Karlovci Synod actually convened against the Patriarch's expressed wishes.  Remember also that St. Tikhon understood the situation of the Church in North America, having been its archpastor for many years.)

Again, let me reiterate that all I intend to do with this post is address daher's statements.  I don't want to renew my argument with those with whom I've already argued my viewpoint on the ROCOR issue, so if I've already argued ROCOR with you I would appreciate you not offering a response to this post.


p.s.  Watch out that Pravoslavbob and other fans of Fr. Schmemann here on this forum don't whack you over the head for calling Fr. Schmemann a heretic or calling his theology dubious.  I don't want anyone getting hurt.  Tongue
« Last Edit: April 14, 2006, 02:38:58 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
daher
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 42

Orthodoxy or Death!


WWW
« Reply #48 on: April 14, 2006, 08:16:50 AM »

p.s.  Watch out that Pravoslavbob and other fans of Fr. Schmemann here on this forum don't whack you over the head for calling Fr. Schmemann a heretic or calling his theology dubious.  I don't want anyone getting hurt.  Tongue

One of my best friends are a big fan and apologist of Fr. Schemenann. If he see this, i will be a dead man Tongue

About ROCOR foundation: may is usual to you read "The Truth About the Russian Church Abroad"; by M. Rodzianko. I have one online copy, if you want, rafael.daher@hotmail.com. And maybe be sual too this book.

Logged
Thomas
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,838



« Reply #49 on: April 14, 2006, 09:09:20 AM »

Re: the masonic handshake

The thumb is in the wrong place to be a masonic handshake. No I am not a mason, but I have knowledge from my past before becoming Orthodox.

Thomas
« Last Edit: April 14, 2006, 09:10:09 AM by Thomas » Logged

Your brother in Christ ,
Thomas
daher
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 42

Orthodoxy or Death!


WWW
« Reply #50 on: April 14, 2006, 11:45:09 AM »

The great patriarchate of Constantinopla:



Patriarch Athenagoras and the so-called pope of Rome.



Patriarch Athenagoras giving the bless with one heretic.



Patriarch Bartholomew doing the same.



Concelebration with the so-called pope Karol Wojtila.



Flowers to the freemason.



With the murder Fidel Castro.

Is with this that ROCOR must commung?
Logged
daher
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 42

Orthodoxy or Death!


WWW
« Reply #51 on: April 14, 2006, 11:57:03 AM »

There is no doubts about some members of parisian institute are heretical. Some like Bulgakov and others sophiologists. Im not acusing all of them of heretics, but is very clear that the parisian institute was a garden of hereticals.

About A. Schmemann and John Meyendorff:

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/pom_lit.aspx
http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/commentsschmey.aspx

If Schemann was not a heretic (im not acusing him), you theology (and of the Meyendorff also) are very dubious.



Please, your.  Shocked Is possible edit texts here?
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,636



« Reply #52 on: April 14, 2006, 11:57:46 AM »

Daxer,
You have mixed things up a bit.
That's not Patriarch Bartolomew, but Patriarch Teoctist.
Logged
daher
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 42

Orthodoxy or Death!


WWW
« Reply #53 on: April 14, 2006, 12:07:52 PM »

Daxer,
You have mixed things up a bit.
That's not Patriarch Bartolomew, but Patriarch Teoctist.

Sorry brothers. Thanks  Grin

BTW, EP are in comunion with all others ecumenists, like Romenia, Antioch;;;;
Logged
daher
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 42

Orthodoxy or Death!


WWW
« Reply #54 on: April 14, 2006, 12:11:25 PM »



Oh, now is Bartholomew





 Roll Eyes
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,636



« Reply #55 on: April 14, 2006, 12:15:17 PM »

Well, Moscow also is in communion with those you call "the ecumenists". Our patriarch always mentions Patriarch Alexei of Moscow (along with the heads of all of the Orthodox Autocephalos Churches), at every Sunday Liturgy.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #56 on: April 14, 2006, 12:34:32 PM »

One of my best friends are a big fan and apologist of Fr. Schemenann. If he see this, i will be a dead man Tongue

About ROCOR foundation: may is usual to you read "The Truth About the Russian Church Abroad"; by M. Rodzianko. I have one online copy, if you want, rafael.daher@hotmail.com. And maybe be sual too this book.



I've already read this, too.  I did a lengthy study of ROCOR-OCA relations last fall, reading documents from both sides, so I'm pretty well-read on this topic.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2006, 12:38:12 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #57 on: April 14, 2006, 12:46:41 PM »

How about when Constantinople is unable or unwilling to follow the Great Commanment of Christ to "baptize all nations"?

Ah yes, the sensualistic approach. The fact that you have an emotional sympathy with the actions of Moscow does not change that they were uncanonical and unacceptable.

Quote
Yes, we've heard your arguments based on anachronistic canons, the Ecumenical Synods, etc., but I don't think you have addressed the "ought" or "should" of what HAS happened?  Should Moscow have never even attempted to missionize lands that were part of their nation's boundaries that I'm sure Constantinople was probably unaware existed or even able to reach?

Moscow should have went to Constantinople and asked premission to evangelize lands outside their borders, if Constantinople said no, then they should have refrained; but in all likelyhood Constantinople would have given their blessing, though maintained jurisdiction over her rightful lands. Of course, the Russians were more concerned with expanding their territory and influence than actually evangelizing anyone so this solution would not have met their true goals.

Quote
Should Moscow have done all the work and then just given authority over to the EP?

Authority should never have left the Oecumenical Throne, if Moscow wanted to send out priests out of concern for people's souls and not expanding political power this wouldn't have even been an issue.

Quote
Do you have any historical precedent to backup any cases of another Patriarchate missionizing a land (that may or may not have been outside her boundaries) and then outright given authority over to Constantinople?

The other patriarchates throughout history tended to know their places and didn't intrude on the lands of the other patriarchates. The one exception to this is the disputes beteween Old and New Rome...and we know where that lead. But with that said, I can think of one related issue. During part of the Ottoman rule Antioch was unable to govern the Metropolis of Aleppo, because of this the Oecumenical Patriarchate would oversee this Metropolis and the Metropolitan would sit on the Patriarchal Synod of Constantinople, this change remained in effect for hundreds of years. However, when the situation had normalized and the opportunity presented itself, the Oecumenical Throne would transfer this Metropolis back to Antioch, even against the express wishes of the sitting Metropolitan, as Constantinople desired to protect the ancient rights and territories of all the Sees.

Quote
What about the Church of Poland or the Church of the Czech lands?  AFAIK, they are both Autocephalous but yet I think I remember you saying that "it shouldn't have happened"...along with possibly Serbia, Albania, Bulgaria and the Church of Greece.  Well, it did and the EP has accepted them as such.  Please respond.

I have no problem with the Church of Serbia, they are amongst the few who went about originally obtaining autocephaly in an appropriate and Christian manner. As with the others, perhaps the autocephalies should some day be revoked, but not until the political situation better allows it. The autocephalies of the 19th century have dealt a near fatal blow to the Church, the worst such blow to Christianity since the fall of the City. They are the source of division, strife, and conflict. But, we should not create more problems than necessary by revoking the autocephalies at the wrong time, I agree that we should recognize them while expedient, always keeping in mind what is best for the Church, as our Patriarch does. Though as these lands are, by ancient canon and custom, under the authority of Constantinople, she can in the future, if she deems appropriate, revoke any autocephaly save those of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Cyprus...which can only be altered, like the posistion of Constantinople herself, by an Oecumenical Synod. (which is amongst the reasons that we have never actually deposed the Bishop of Rome or installed an 'orthodox' Bishop of Rome, we simply lack the authority to do so without an Oecumenical Synod, making the Current Pope the legitimate Bishop of Rome, even if out of Communion with the Rest of the Church)



BTW, EP are in comunion with all others ecumenists, like Romenia, Antioch;;;;

Yes, also known as the Christian Church. To be contrasted with the heterodox, which are those are not in Communion with the Oecumenical Throne.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,464


« Reply #58 on: April 14, 2006, 01:19:23 PM »

Ah yes, the sensualistic approach. The fact that you have an emotional sympathy with the actions of Moscow does not change that they were uncanonical and unacceptable.
Not sensualistic at all (or did you mean sensationalistic?)...but a tad baiting I suppose.  It still doesn't mean my charges can't be true.  Prove it.

Moscow should have went to Constantinople and asked premission to evangelize lands outside their borders, if Constantinople said no, then they should have refrained; but in all likelyhood Constantinople would have given their blessing, though maintained jurisdiction over her rightful lands. Of course, the Russians were more concerned with expanding their territory and influence than actually evangelizing anyone so this solution would not have met their true goals.

Authority should never have left the Oecumenical Throne, if Moscow wanted to send out priests out of concern for people's souls and not expanding political power this wouldn't have even been an issue.

OK.  But when?  When are they to know when it changes from supporting your own diaspora or flock that is doing activities outside of normal borders to "evangelizing"?

The italicized portion is pure speculation and conjecture.  Back it up....but I don't think you can find anything official stating this ulterior motive.

The other patriarchates throughout history tended to know their places and didn't intrude on the lands of the other patriarchates. The one exception to this is the disputes beteween Old and New Rome...and we know where that lead. But with that said, I can think of one related issue. During part of the Ottoman rule Antioch was unable to govern the Metropolis of Aleppo, because of this the Oecumenical Patriarchate would oversee this Metropolis and the Metropolitan would sit on the Patriarchal Synod of Constantinople, this change remained in effect for hundreds of years. However, when the situation had normalized and the opportunity presented itself, the Oecumenical Throne would transfer this Metropolis back to Antioch, even against the express wishes of the sitting Metropolitan, as Constantinople desired to protect the ancient rights and territories of all the Sees.
Oh really??  So what about the Bulgarians, Serbs, Romanians, Antiochians, Albanians (and others?) that have their own bishops here (in the US).  This seems rather obvious that "other patriarchates" are imposing on the Phanar's "barbarian lands."

I have no problem with the Church of Serbia, they are amongst the few who went about originally obtaining autocephaly in an appropriate and Christian manner. As with the others, perhaps the autocephalies should some day be revoked, but not until the political situation better allows it. The autocephalies of the 19th century have dealt a near fatal blow to the Church, the worst such blow to Christianity since the fall of the City. They are the source of division, strife, and conflict. But, we should not create more problems than necessary by revoking the autocephalies at the wrong time, I agree that we should recognize them while expedient, always keeping in mind what is best for the Church, as our Patriarch does. Though as these lands are, by ancient canon and custom, under the authority of Constantinople, she can in the future, if she deems appropriate, revoke any autocephaly save those of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Cyprus...which can only be altered, like the posistion of Constantinople herself, by an Oecumenical Synod. (which is amongst the reasons that we have never actually deposed the Bishop of Rome or installed an 'orthodox' Bishop of Rome, we simply lack the authority to do so without an Oecumenical Synod, making the Current Pope the legitimate Bishop of Rome, even if out of Communion with the Rest of the Church)
See above comment regarding the Serbs.  "...dealt a near fatal blow..."  Riiiiiiight.  Roll Eyes  So you are obviously much wiser than those Patriachs of Constantinople who DO accept the Autocephaly of those newer Churches.  Don't you think that sounds rather hypocritical on your part?  Does your Patriarch always know what is best for the Church or not?  

I'll believe any revoking of autocephalies when it happens.  Until then it is inane academic speculation.

Yes, also known as the Christian Church. To be contrasted with the heterodox, which are those are not in Communion with the Oecumenical Throne.
Hmmmm...again, how is being in Communion with the Ecumenical Throne again the definition of Orthodoxy given that several of their Patriarchs have been declared heretics at various times throughout history?
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,464


« Reply #59 on: April 14, 2006, 01:21:30 PM »

daher,
Pictures may be worth 1000 words, but they don't necessarily PROVE anything.
Logged
daher
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 42

Orthodoxy or Death!


WWW
« Reply #60 on: April 14, 2006, 01:29:24 PM »

daher,
Pictures may be worth 1000 words, but they don't necessarily PROVE anything.

Pictures don't prove anything? And the actions of EP? And the ecumenist attitude of EP? And the actions and phrases of Met. Zizoulas?

Give-me a break! If these pictures don't prove the heresy of ecumenisn in EP, i don't know what you want acept as prove.
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,464


« Reply #61 on: April 14, 2006, 01:34:38 PM »

Pictures don't prove anything? And the actions of EP? And the ecumenist attitude of EP? And the actions and phrases of Met. Zizoulas?

Give-me a break! If these pictures don't prove the heresy of ecumenisn in EP, i don't know what you want acept as prove.

I'll let those here of the more juridical sort poke holes in the concept of pictures proving things.  I'll just say that pictures w/o context don't hold too much water.  What is the term...circumstantial evidence?
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #62 on: April 14, 2006, 01:34:51 PM »

Pictures don't prove anything? And the actions of EP? And the ecumenist attitude of EP? And the actions and phrases of Met. Zizoulas?

Give-me a break! If these pictures don't prove the heresy of ecumenisn in EP, i don't know what you want acept as prove.

But pictures can be so easily taken out of context, and--worse yet--can be cut and pasted to another totally unrelated context.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Online Online

Posts: 30,517


« Reply #63 on: April 14, 2006, 01:36:20 PM »

Quote
Give-me a break! If these pictures don't prove the heresy of ecumenisn in EP, i don't know what you want acept as prove.

In what way is the type of ecumenism that they are engaging in heretical? For example, when people say that Arianism is heretical, what is meant is that the Church hold to certain beliefs which Arianism contradicts, such as the orthodox belief that Jesus was begotten and not created, or the orthodox belief that there was never a time when Jesus was not. Thus, if Arius or Joe or Abram says that Jesus was created shortly after time began, he can be considered a heretic. So then, by what criteria are you judging the the people in the pictures as being heretics? If they are heretics, then explain what specific transgression makes them heretics, and how you came to conclude that that transgression was heretical? By what criteria (or criterion) do you judge them?
« Last Edit: April 14, 2006, 01:37:33 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

Large Marge sent me...
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,636



« Reply #64 on: April 14, 2006, 01:40:36 PM »

It seems that shaking hands with the Pope is a grevious heresy Grin
Logged
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #65 on: April 14, 2006, 01:45:19 PM »

Daher, spam isn't Lenten.  Tongue
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
daher
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 42

Orthodoxy or Death!


WWW
« Reply #66 on: April 14, 2006, 01:55:11 PM »

But pictures can be so easily taken out of context, and--worse yet--can be cut and pasted to another totally unrelated context.

Unrelated context? So, exist some context to embrace the so-called pope of Rome and call them of "brother", or worst, call him of bishop?  Roll Eyes
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #67 on: April 14, 2006, 01:58:19 PM »

In what way is the type of ecumenism that they are engaging in heretical? For example, when people say that Arianism is heretical, what is meant is that the Church hold to certain beliefs which Arianism contradicts, such as the orthodox belief that Jesus was begotten and not created, or the orthodox belief that there was never a time when Jesus was not. Thus, if Arius or Joe or Abram says that Jesus was created shortly after time began, he can be considered a heretic. So then, by what criteria are you judging the the people in the pictures as being heretics? If they are heretics, then explain what specific transgression makes them heretics, and how you came to conclude that that transgression was heretical? By what criteria (or criterion) do you judge them?

Anti-ecumenists--and I do include myself in this group--believe that much of what passes for ecumenism today is the relativistic belief that all Christian religions are equally salvific and that all Christians regardless of confession are all members of the same Church.  The Orthodox Church, however, has always taught that it alone is the Church of Christ and that it alone possesses the fullness of the means of salvation.  The Church cannot be divided.  Modern ecumenism would require the Orthodox to believe that the Church can be divided or that the Orthodox Church does not preach the fullness of Christian Truth.  This is why most Orthodox consider modern ecumenism to be a heresy.

OTOH, the only ecumenism that the Orthodox can support is the return of all Christians to the Orthodox Faith.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #68 on: April 14, 2006, 02:01:43 PM »

Unrelated context? So, exist some context to embrace the so-called pope of Rome and call them of "brother", or worst, call him of bishop?  Roll Eyes

All I'm saying is that I don't know the context of these pictures, nor am I qualified to judge the intent of the participants in these pictures, because the pictures don't show this.  The photos just don't provide enough information for me to make a reasoned judgment of what they signify.
Logged
daher
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 42

Orthodoxy or Death!


WWW
« Reply #69 on: April 14, 2006, 02:02:41 PM »

By what criteria (or criterion) do you judge them?

First, im not judgind them. Im only talking about the ecumenists actions of EP, and because this, the Orthodox Christian must apart from them.

Im using the criterion of the Holy Fathers and the Holy Canons of the Only True Church.

Canon XLV of the Holy Apostles

"Let any Bishop, or Presbyter, or deacon that merely joins in prayer with heretics be suspended, but if he had permitted them to perform any service as Clergymen, let him be deposed."

Canon LXV Of the Holy Apostles:

"If any clergymen, or laymen, enter a synagogue of Jews, or of heretics*, to pray, let him be both deposed and excommunicated."

Canon XXXIII of Laodicia

"One must not join in prayer with heretics or schismatics."


* Like the Patriarch Bartolomew on the devil see's, the Vatican.

Logged
daher
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 42

Orthodoxy or Death!


WWW
« Reply #70 on: April 14, 2006, 02:04:12 PM »

It seems that shaking hands with the Pope is a grevious heresy Grin

Pray with him is against the Holy Canons. Pray in your church too.
Logged
augustin717
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: The other ROC
Posts: 5,636



« Reply #71 on: April 14, 2006, 02:09:26 PM »

Quote
Like the Patriarch Bartolomew on the devil see's, the Vatican.
* Is this JW or SDA litterature?
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #72 on: April 14, 2006, 02:13:32 PM »

First, im not judgind them. Im only talking about the ecumenists actions of EP, and because this, the Orthodox Christian must apart from them.

Im using the criterion of the Holy Fathers and the Holy Canons of the Only True Church.

Canon XLV of the Holy Apostles

"Let any Bishop, or Presbyter, or deacon that merely joins in prayer with heretics be suspended, but if he had permitted them to perform any service as Clergymen, let him be deposed."

Canon LXV Of the Holy Apostles:

"If any clergymen, or laymen, enter a synagogue of Jews, or of heretics*, to pray, let him be both deposed and excommunicated."

Canon XXXIII of Laodicia

"One must not join in prayer with heretics or schismatics."


* Like the Patriarch Bartolomew on the devil see's, the Vatican.



Not to suddenly vacillate and agree with your assessment of the photos, for I still don't agree.  However, to pray with heretics in a heretic place of worship--it's OK to invite a heretic to pray with us in an Orthodox service as long as we don't allow the heretic to receive the grace of our Sacraments--is to essentially validate the heresy and say to the heretics with whom we are praying that their faith is not in fact heretical and that their services communicate the same grace given by our Orthodox services.

I do agree with Fr. Seraphim Rose, though, that we Orthodox are too quick to apply the term heretic to individual non-Orthodox Christians.  Many non-Orthodox Christians are indeed very sincere in living the Christian life as best they know it and are very committed to pursuing Truth.  Most of them just are not at all aware that they've grown up in an atmosphere of deception and don't know any better than to live in accordance with the heresies they've been taught.  Can we fault such sincere followers of Christ for something totally beyond their control?  IMHO, we should reserve the term heretic for only those individuals who know what the Church teaches and continue to proclaim their own doctrines in defiance of the Church's authority.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2006, 02:24:38 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
daher
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 42

Orthodoxy or Death!


WWW
« Reply #73 on: April 14, 2006, 02:29:41 PM »

IMHO, we should reserve the term heretic for only those individuals who know what the Church teaches and continue to proclaim their own doctrines in defiance of the Church's authority.

Like the popes, who knows what the Church teaches and work against the Church.  Grin
Logged
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #74 on: April 14, 2006, 02:29:56 PM »

LOL, you beat me to it, so I wont elaborate too much...except to say that when refering to person in question I may not use the term 'saint' but another 's' word does come to mind Wink

Sorry, I've been a little slow to get to this, but please do not disparage Saints of the Church in this way, despite your personal feelings.
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
Augustine
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 565

pray for me, please


WWW
« Reply #75 on: April 14, 2006, 02:38:56 PM »

Greekis"Christian",

Quote
LOL, you beat me to it, so I wont elaborate too much...except to say that when refering to person in question I may not use the term 'saint' but another 's' word does come to mind

Disgusting.  Fortunately, the grace of God and the ecumenicity of the Church are already showing that your brand of hellenic-papism is not part of the dogmatic constitution of the Church.

Quote
Perhaps greater in prestige, but since Chalcedon not in authority; for she was not graced by the presence of the Imperial Senate and our God-ordained Emperors.

Ha!  And hasn't occured to you that there hasn't been a Roman Empire, Imperial Throne, or Imperial Senate since the fiftheenth century?!  Funny, how historical context only seems to matter when it serves your perverse ecclessiology.

Quote
It should be remembered that the break was first between Rome and Constantinople and all the rest of the Church, in time, followed the Imperial See, which is the standard of Christendom.

Yes, just as Rome once was viewed as a standard of Orthodoxy.  IOW. there is nothing in this which is not beyond modifacation, either by circumstance or (God forbid) the EP becoming the seat of an anti-Christ (which has happened, and may happen again.)  IOW. purity of confession is the ultimate criterion underpinning ecclessiastical authority.  Lacking this, the EP becomes merely the Archlayman of Constantinople.

« Last Edit: April 14, 2006, 02:46:10 PM by Augustine » Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #76 on: April 14, 2006, 02:46:03 PM »

There is no canon, deposition, anathema, excommunication, or suspension within Orthodoxy that is used without first being applied by a competent ecclesiastical body; on the laity, the spiritual father/parish priest and their own bishop (not just any 'ol one), on the priests, their own bishop or synod, on the bishops, the synod of their Patriarchate/Autocephalous Church, and on the Patriarchs, Their own synods or the Synod of Constantinople (as the seat of appeals) or an Ecumenical Synod (over anyone).  So there is no condemnation of the EP, or Metr. Zizoulas, without a synod to do so.  

If you feel they are in heresy, then do what you can personally to separate yourself; but chose your words and accusations wisely, for those who falsely accuse someone of heresy or apostasy face as great a punishment as they would have had brought upon their targets.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #77 on: April 14, 2006, 02:50:16 PM »

LOL, you beat me to it, so I wont elaborate too much...except to say that when refering to person in question I may not use the term 'saint' but another 's' word does come to mind Wink

I just find it rather interesting that because so many people in the ROCOR hated and persecuted St. John Maximovich, it was actually Greek Orthodox Americans under the authority of the EP who venerated St. John first.  The ROCOR saw this and decided that it was high time they look into officially glorifying Archbishop John as a Saint.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,146


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #78 on: April 14, 2006, 02:51:30 PM »

I just find it rather interesting that because so many people in the ROCOR hated and persecuted St. John Maximovich, it was actually Greek Orthodox Americans under the authority of the EP who venerated St. John first.  The ROCOR saw this and decided that it was high time they look into officially glorifying Archbishop John as a Saint.  

I've noticed this as well; I've come across many in the GOA who venerate St. John, and have done so for awhile.

But because he's not 'official' in our Patriarchate (and there's a seperate discussion - the local nature of the veneration of most saints), let GiC speculate all he wants (just be careful not to be disparaging; be respectful please).  If he's right, more power to him, and if he's wrong, St. John is still praying for his salvation anyway - why not take his example?
« Last Edit: April 14, 2006, 02:53:24 PM by cleveland » Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Starlight
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of USA (Ecumenical Patriarchate)
Posts: 1,537


« Reply #79 on: April 14, 2006, 02:54:09 PM »

There is no canon, deposition, anathema, excommunication, or suspension within Orthodoxy that is used without first being applied by a competent ecclesiastical body

Exactly.
Personally, I would include both St. Archbishop John Maximovich and Patriarch Athenogoras in top (5) Orthodox hierarchs of XX century. And I don't see contradictory there.
Logged
Starlight
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of USA (Ecumenical Patriarchate)
Posts: 1,537


« Reply #80 on: April 14, 2006, 02:57:51 PM »

To at least try to say something vaguely related to the original topic, does anyone here have a link to the schedule/agenda/activities/etc. [IN ENGLISH please]of the upcoming All-Diaspora conference in SF in May for ROCOR?  Thanks.

Elisha,
I just found this. I believe it is a brand new update.
http://www.sobor2006.com/ivall-diasporaco.php
Good luck with your singing on this event!
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #81 on: April 14, 2006, 02:58:17 PM »

I've noticed this as well; I've come across many in the GOA who venerate St. John, and have done so for awhile.

But because he's not 'official' in our Patriarchate (and there's a seperate discussion - the local nature of the veneration of most saints), let GiC speculate all he wants (just be careful not to be disparaging; be respectful please).  If he's right, more power to him, and if he's wrong, St. John is still praying for his salvation anyway - why not take his example?

I actually have a couple of friends who credit the miraculous survival--they really think of the miracle as more of a resurrection from the dead--of their newborn infant to the intercessions of St. John realized through oil from the vigil lamp at his tomb.  This couple is now active in a GOA parish--a missionary parish that is in fact Greek in name and jurisdiction only--but they were a few years ago members of my own OCA parish.  (They transferred to the GOA parish to be closer to her parents.)
« Last Edit: April 14, 2006, 02:59:29 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Starlight
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of USA (Ecumenical Patriarchate)
Posts: 1,537


« Reply #82 on: April 14, 2006, 03:52:38 PM »

Pictures don't prove anything? And the actions of EP? And the ecumenist attitude of EP? And the actions and phrases of Met. Zizoulas?

Give-me a break! If these pictures don't prove the heresy of ecumenisn in EP, i don't know what you want acept as prove.

Daher, by this and other comments you are supporting schisms. That is not Orthodox! As a faithful of Ecumenical Patriarchate, I have not seen any heresy in publicly known actions of my Synod and my hierarchs.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #83 on: April 14, 2006, 04:16:00 PM »

Daher, by this and other comments you are supporting schisms. That is not Orthodox! As a faithful of Ecumenical Patriarchate, I have not seen any heresy in publicly known actions of my Synod and my hierarchs.

Daher,

I haven't yet asked, but I think it's important to our discussion.  What jurisdiction do you call home?
« Last Edit: April 14, 2006, 04:25:00 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
SouthSerb99
Archbishop of Shlivo, Patriarch of All Vodkas & Defender Against All Overstepping!
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Church
Posts: 2,800


Now Internet Forum Friendly


WWW
« Reply #84 on: April 14, 2006, 04:21:25 PM »

Daher,

    Please don't be throwing around words like heresy so freely when discussing the EP or any other jurisdiction.

All,

This thread is very close to being closed and official warning issued.  The room is Free For All, and it is moderated, but it's not ROMPER ROOM.
Logged

"Wherever you go, there you are."
 Guy from my office

Orthodox Archbishopric of Ohrid
Hungry? Click Here
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,464


« Reply #85 on: April 14, 2006, 05:16:14 PM »

Elisha,
I just found this. I believe it is a brand new update.
http://www.sobor2006.com/ivall-diasporaco.php
Good luck with your singing on this event!
vielan dank.  I get nervous in front of unfamilar people, sometimes people I know who I haven't seen in a while, singing the melody solo and "crowds"/"audiences".  If I can learn the music (and the words to the best of my ability) and RELAX, then I should be fine.  Thanks again for the info.
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,464


« Reply #86 on: April 14, 2006, 05:29:23 PM »

Daher,

I haven't yet asked, but I think it's important to our discussion.  What jurisdiction do you call home?

I would be HOCNA or ROAC...is ROCiE different from ROCOR?  I thought ROCiE=ROCA=ROCOR="The Synod".
Logged
drewmeister2
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Hellenic Orthodox Traditionalist Church of America
Posts: 415


Christmas at St Markella's Cathedral, Astoria, NY


« Reply #87 on: April 14, 2006, 05:53:42 PM »

I would be HOCNA or ROAC...is ROCiE different from ROCOR?  I thought ROCiE=ROCA=ROCOR="The Synod".

Most often I have heard ROCiE refer to the Synod under Metr. Vitaly, as this used to be his Synod's official title at one time if I recall correctly.  ROCA=ROCOR as I have heard it.  ROAC though is seperate from ROCiE (Vitaly).
Logged

Orthodoxia i Thanatos

IC    XC      ...and in ONE HOLY CATHOLIC
    +                   and APOSTOLIC CHURCH...
NI    KA

www.hotca.org | www.YouTube.com/GreekOrthodoxTV
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #88 on: April 14, 2006, 07:18:25 PM »

Sorry, I've been a little slow to get to this, but please do not disparage Saints of the Church in this way, despite your personal feelings.

Many here have attacked some who I would veiw to be the greatest Bishops of the Orthodox Church in the 20th Century, Patriarchs Meletios, Athenagoras, and Bartholomew...am I not even allowed to make an indirect comment about my personal opinion of a man who openly slandered the Great Church of Christ and these patriarchs who I hold as great and holy men? Furthermore, my implication that he was a schismatic, and died in schism against the Church of Christ, is not mere personal opinion, but rather objective fact.

This I say not only from the perspective of the most Holy and Oecumenical Throne of Constantinople, but also in defence of the rights of Moscow and in defence of the great Patriarchs of Moscow who lead the Church of Russia successfully through persecution and difficult times, whose names and memories should be blessed and not slandered. For the patriarchs against which John of San Francisco schismed have NOT been declared heretics by any synod of the Church; furthermore, none of the several autocephalous Church even broke communion with the Patriarchate of Moscow over these affairs. Thus, we can conclude that in the opinion of the Christian Church these Patriarchs were NOT heretics, as many who slander their blessed memories would lead us to believe, rather they were faithful and holy Christian Bishops, leading their flocks in times of travail. Since this is manifest, I myself need to make no proclamation, for any I would make would pale in comparison to those of the fathers; however, I shall allow the fathers to speak on this issue: it was decreed in the 15th canon of the First-Second Synod under St. Photius the Great, in the Year of our Lord 861, and proclaimed by all the Bishops of the Eastern Church:

'The rules laid down with reference to Presbyters and Bishops and Metro­politans are still more applicable to Patriarchs. So that in case any Presbyter or Bishop or Metropolitan dares to secede or apostatize from the communion of his own Patriarch, and fails to mention the latter’s name in accordance with custom duly fixed and ordained, in the divine Mystagogy, but, before a conciliar verdict has been pronounced and has passed judgment against him, creates a schism, the holy Council has decreed that this person shall be held an alien to every priestly function if only he be convicted of having committed this trans­gression of the law. Accordingly, these rules have been sealed and ordained as respecting those persons who under the pretext of charges against their own presidents stand aloof, and create a schism, and disrupt the union of the Church.'

I trust that all here understand the implications of Schism, which has here been, as above demonstrated, clearly committed, and that it would be unnecessary for me to quote the fathers to demonstrate what a grave offence, against our Lord and his Most Sacred Body, schism truly is.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #89 on: April 15, 2006, 12:10:47 AM »

The fact that St John's veneration has already spread to other Orthodox Churches is a far more Orthodox argument for his sainthood than your academic and canonical arguments are against it.  You are offending many posters, especially GOA and OCA members (believe me, I am on the receiving end) and we are just not going to let this continue.  The thread is closed.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.149 seconds with 72 queries.