Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Result of Holy Great Council


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#21 Phoebe K.

Phoebe K.

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 278 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 02 July 2016 - 05:29 PM

The Patriarchate of Antioch have been vocal on the counsel and it's results.  Metropolitan Siluan of the Antiochian archdiocese of Great Britain and Ireland said this http://www.antiochia...-council-crete/ in the days after the conclusion of the counsel.

 

The Synod of the Patriachate of Antioch issued this statement http://antiochpatria...448/#English in the last week about the counsel and the problems they have with it.

 

Phoebe



#22 Rdr Andreas

Rdr Andreas

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,028 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 02 July 2016 - 08:12 PM

There is this from Met. Athanasios of Limassol: http://www.pravoslav...glish/94964.htm  I see him and Met. Hierotheos as guardians of the Orthodox faith.



#23 Rdr Andreas

Rdr Andreas

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,028 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 04 July 2016 - 02:14 PM

There is now this: http://www.pravoslav...glish/94963.htm



#24 Rdr Andreas

Rdr Andreas

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,028 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 04 July 2016 - 10:10 PM

The Metropolitan of Piraeus in Greece is a very prominent hierarch in Greece. There is this from Met. Seraphim: http://www.pravoslav...glish/94915.htm



#25 Kosta

Kosta

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,517 posts

Posted 08 July 2016 - 02:20 AM

The Metropolitan of Piraeus in Greece is a very prominent hierarch in Greece. There is this from Met. Seraphim: http://www.pravoslav...glish/94915.htm


Metropolitan Seraphim of Pireaus is the most vocal critic of the EP. The amount of bullying from both the EP and secular sources he has received is astounding, yet he is unwavering in his fidelity to Orthodox teaching. He along with Metropolitan Hierotheos and Metropolitan Athanasius of Limasol are the new pillars of Orthodoxy.

#26 Rdr Andreas

Rdr Andreas

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,028 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 08 July 2016 - 12:00 PM

The above piece by Met. Seraphim mentions 'the presence and joint prayer of heretical Papists, Protestants, and Monophysites at Matins and the Divine Liturgy of this great Feast of the Lord in the Church of St. Menas in Heraklion'. I cannot find any other reports of such joint prayers and services - does anyone know further details?



#27 Rdr Andreas

Rdr Andreas

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,028 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 09 July 2016 - 05:22 PM

In a thread called, ‘Making a choice between east and west’, Fr David posted this (on 17 December 2009):

'How can one have a relationship with Christ without having a relationship with His Body? For a classic essay on this matter, please read "Christianity or the Church" by St Hilarion Troitsky.'

St Hilarion commented on the ‘ecumenism’ of St Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow, thus:

'Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow, Philaret, who wrote in one of his early treatises: “No church which believes Jesus to be the Christ will I dare call false.” But there are quite a few obstacles to recognizing as valid Metropolitan Philaret’s reasoning that churches can be either pure truth or of impure truth. A church of impure truth seems to me to be evidently a false one, and there cannot be a false church; such a church ceases to be a church, becoming an extra-ecclesial community. For Metropolitan Philaret did not partake of the Eucharist with the Latins; and neither do other theologians of ours, who occasionally show too much zeal in defending the unacceptable doctrine of the unity the Church, according to which the one Church may embrace local churches that have for centuries been out of communion with each other. And this looks inconsistent to me.'

Here we have two prominent saints in apparent disagreement on the very matter that has caused such controversy in the Council on Crete. How should we view this discrepancy, bearing in mind the weight of opinion from local Churches and metropolitans which is in agreement with St Hilarion?



#28 Dcn Alexander Haig

Dcn Alexander Haig

    Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 323 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 14 July 2016 - 08:36 AM

I think Met. Seraphim is referring merely to their presence at the Liturgy as joint prayers and services; there are places - such as some, but not all, monasteries on the Holy Mountain - where non-Orthodox are not allowed in the nave of the Church but must be in the exo-narthex, thus preserving the strict interpretation of no prayer with heretics.  In these Athonite monasteries they are also not allowed to join the community for the meal after the Liturgy.  After explanation, they often have a better time: although they have to wait a bit, they have their meal afterwards where they can sit and chat while various monks keep bringing them more food.

 

Ultimately I think we need to affirm two truths here:

  • there is one Church of God, the Orthodox Church, and those who are outside are separate from Christ;
  • there are those outside the Church who try to follow Christ to the best of their abilities and form, in some sense, a "Church".

Both these positions seem (to my mind) true and to argue too strongly for one, over the other, appears to lead to error - towards either fanaticism or a denial of Christ.

 

In Xp

Dcn Alexander



#29 Anna Stickles

Anna Stickles

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,365 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 14 July 2016 - 01:30 PM

 

  • there is one Church of God, the Orthodox Church, and those who are outside are separate from Christ;
  • there are those outside the Church who try to follow Christ to the best of their abilities and form, in some sense, a "Church".

 

 Maybe it would be more accurate to switch these about.  We understand that before the Church the Jewish nation was the God-founded and directed worshiping community within which His presence dwelt, the iconic forerunner of the Church.  But at the same time, God (Father, Son and Spirit) was working among the Gentiles according to their conscience and their ability to understand God according to the witness in creation that God provided for them. (Rom 1-2, Acts 14:16-17)



#30 Rdr Andreas

Rdr Andreas

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,028 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 14 July 2016 - 10:12 PM

I do not warm to attaching labels such as 'fanaticism' (nor 'fundamentalism') to those who defend an uncompromising view of what the Orthodox Church is. For one thing, such terms are vague and may be defined by any person according to his own feelings and prejudices rather than by clear ecclesiology. Are those such as Metropolitans Hierotheos of Nafpaktos, Athanasios of Limassol, Seraphim of Piraeus and others, together with Fathers of the Holy Mountain and many ordinary people among the faithful 'fanatics' because they believe when they say in the Creed  - One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church - that this means the Orthodox Church and no other? Is even our own Father David a 'fanatic'? I mention the Athonite Fathers because there is now this: http://www.pravoslav...glish/95378.htm



#31 Lakis Papas

Lakis Papas

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 15 July 2016 - 12:06 AM

When common prayers with people who failed and follow separate paths are not allowed, this is asked so that people who failed may experience the exclusion as personal failure, as a mean for awareness of reality.

But in the same Spirit, as st Paul wrote, the sinner must be accepted back in due time, or else devil will find an easy abandoned victim.

#32 Rdr Andreas

Rdr Andreas

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,028 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 16 July 2016 - 07:16 PM

I think it is worth noting what the web site of the American Antiochian Archdiocese says (quoting St Justin Popovich) about the nature of the Church:

'The Unity and Uniqueness of the Church

Just as the Person of Christ the God-man is one and unique, so is the Church founded by Him, in Him, and upon Him. The unity of the Church follows necessarily from the unity of the Person of the Lord Christ, the God-man. Being an organically integral and theanthropic organism unique in all the worlds, the Church, according to all the laws of Heaven and earth, is indivisible. Any division would signify her death. Immersed in the God-man, she is first and foremost a theanthropic organism, and only then a theanthropic organization. In her, everything is theanthropic: nature, faith, love, baptism, the Eucharist, all the holy mysteries and all the holy virtues, her teaching, her entire life, her immortality, her eternity, and her structure.

Yes, yes, yes; in her, everything is theanthropically integral and indivisible Christification, sanctification, deification, Trinitarianism, salvation. In her everything is fused organically and by grace into a single theanthropic body, under a single Head — the God-man, the Lord Christ. All her members, though as persons always whole and inviolate, yet united by the same grace of the Holy Spirit through the holy mysteries and the holy virtues into an organic unity, comprise one body and confess the one faith, which unites them to each other and to the Lord Christ.

The Christ-bearing apostles are divinely inspired as they announce the unity and the uniqueness of the Church, based upon the unity and uniqueness of her Founder — the God-man, the Lord Christ, and His theanthropic personality:

“For another foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (I Cor. 3:11)

Like the holy apostles, the holy fathers and the teachers of the Church confess the unity and uniqueness of the Orthodox Church with the divine wisdom of the cherubim and the zeal of the seraphim. Understandable, therefore, is the fiery zeal which animated the holy fathers of the Church in all cases of division and falling away and the stern attitude toward heresies and schisms. In that regard, the holy ecumenical and holy local councils are preeminently important. According to their spirit and attitude, wise in those things pertaining to Christ, the Church is not only one but also unique. Just as the Lord Christ cannot have several bodies, so He cannot have several Churches. According to her theanthropic nature, the Church is one and unique, just as Christ the God-man is one and unique.

Hence, a division, a splitting up of the Church is ontologically and essentially impossible. A division within the Church has never occurred, nor indeed can one take place, while apostasy from the Church has and will continue to occur after the manner of those voluntarily fruitless branches which, having withered, fall away from the eternally living theanthropic Vine — the Lord Christ (Jn. 15:1-6). From time to time, heretics and schismatics have cut themselves off and have fallen away from the one and indivisible Church of Christ, whereby they ceased to be members of the Church and parts of her theanthropic body. The first to fall away thus were the gnostics, then the Arians, then the Macedonians, then the Monophysites, then the Iconoclasts, then the Roman Catholics, then the Protestants, then the Uniates, and so on—all the other members of the legion of heretics and schismatics.'






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users