First off,
Thank you everyone for your responses to my last post (question) regarding the ROCOR and the MP. This is an incredibly informed group, and a very valuable source of information (and debate!)
Well, yet again, another dumb question. I could probably research this on my own, but it is certainly more interesting to get a variety of responses and opinions, so with that: What is the current relationship within the WCC in relation to Orthodoxy? What I mean is, the WCC is somewhat of a mystery to me. Obviously, there are certain religious governing bodies that carry an amount of political weight, outside of their positions of spiritual leadership, for example, the Pope, the Archbishop of Canterbury. It seems to me, that the WCC has some degree of politcal influence, although I really don't know to what degree. What I find interesting is the fact that the majority of WCC members would describe themselves as Protestant denominations, and I'm wondering if there is any conflict with Orthodoxy on aligning itself with the WCC. (Obviously, "Orthodoxy" is not monolithic, since not all churches "march in step", so to speak.) What advantages does WCC membership offer to the Orthodox faith? What conflicts exist between the WCC and it's Orthodox members?
In my very limited and imperfect understanding of this issue, it seems odd that denominations with very different practices. I'm also curious to see what happens within the WCC as the issue of homosexual clergy and marriages continues to be raised. How will this affect Orthodox members?
I realize this is a LOT of question here. I guess I'm just interested in anything anyone has to say on this topic. I don't want to go on forever, but I think that the autonomy of Orthodoxy is an issues that really underlies my question. (Sorry about my horrendous spelling!) and thanks for any replies.
Sues
WCC and Orhtodoxy
WCC and Orhtodoxy
RE: Orthodoxy and the WCC
Yeah, it would be nice if I could spell "Orthodoxy." The lesson learned: don't type fast!
-
OrthodoxyOrDeath
Sue,
You will undoubtedly get a variety of answers to your question. Heres mine:
There are no Orthodox in the WCC. There are only fallen men who are indeed seeking political influence and a greater civilization. And if one carefully observes the sermons and pursuits of these people, he will see that what they seek and hope for is not so much the glory of the Church as the glory of civilization, a future greatness, not a greatness which the Church has today.
Such "Christians" the world wants and accepts, because basically they have the same goals. But the others who do not speak of a great Christian civilization but of monasticism, struggles, prayer, who have as their daily bread the continuous striving for the future city, these the world hates, for it does not recognize them as its own. It characterizes the former as truly religious people, and the latter as overzealous, religious fanatics, deniers of life.
It is imperative that Orthodox realize that the Church has sacramental and not administrative foundations; then they will not suffer that which has happened to the Westerners who followed the Pope in his errors because they thought that if they did not follow him, they would automatically be outside the Church.
You can actually read a little of this in the new thread at http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/vi ... .php?t=544
-
Justin Kissel
This is a difficult issue for me to talk about as I think I have some personal feelings here that might interfere. Perhaps I should go over those first so you can take that (possible bias) into account. Even apart from the theological issues, many traditionalists (myself included) feel somewhat betrayed by our Orthodox brothers on a very personal, down-to-earth level when it comes to "ecumenical dialogue" (WCC, etc.). It seems like these Orthodox Christians bend over backwards to not offend various other Christian--and even non-Christian--groups, but have no problem being very harsh when speaking of (dare I say, sometimes attacking) traditionalists.
It's interesting that at the very same meetings where these fellows talk about how close they are to "Oriental Orthodox," Lutherans, etc., they will also use extremely derogatory language regarding traditionalists. I just found out last night that even Fr. John Romanides (whom I had some degree of respect for) has made such comments--something that I found to be an unfortunate, though I suppose not altogether suprising, revelation. I am hypocritical on this point, I suppose. The good Fr. Dionysi, not more than a week ago, humbly (ie. not as an accusation, but as something to consider) pointed out that I too fall into this pattern, though with me I seem to give the benefit of the doubt to certain world Orthodox groups, and seem to look with skepticism on certain traditionalist groups. I'm trying to fix this.
Anyway, If I keep rambling this post is gonna be a few thousand words long! I better start on the actual topic at hand 
What is the current relationship within the WCC in relation to Orthodoxy?
Most local Orthodox Churches that are a part of (what traditionalists might call) "world Orthodoxy" are members in the WCC (though some world Orthodox Churches have pulled out of the WCC, it was mostly for non-theological reasons). Most traditionalists consider the WCC to be extremely dangerous, and some have even called it an pan-heresy. I believe that the Orthodox Churches recently became much more prominent, administratively speaking, since they threatened to withdraw if they weren't given more of a voice (Orthodoxy is the second largest Christians group in the world, after all; and by far the largest one participating in the WCC). I also believe that one of the head honchos right now is a Greek Orthodox Christian (I forget her name offhand).
It seems to me, that the WCC has some degree of politcal influence, although I really don't know to what degree.
Political influence usually arises from one of three sources: strength of military, strength of ideas, or strength of financial resources. With the WCC, based on what I've read, they seem to most of their influence from the last source.
What I find interesting is the fact that the majority of WCC members would describe themselves as Protestant denominations, and I'm wondering if there is any conflict with Orthodoxy on aligning itself with the WCC.
I would say that there is a conflict there, yes. I wouldn't automatically condemn someone (or some group) for participating in the Ecumenical movement, but I do think they're playing with fire that is sure to burn. Fr. Georges Florovsky, one of the most respected Orthodox theologians in the 20th century (across the board, from secular students to traditionalists to Orthodox ecumenists), is an interesting case to consider. He was there from the beginning participating in ecumenical activities, helping the whole movement get off the ground; on the other hand, later in life he started really regretting his participation in the movement and seeing that it was a dead end.
What advantages does WCC membership offer to the Orthodox faith?
Well, the most obvious one is a world-wide forum for discussing our views. Many Orthodox countries have, for at least a century (some for hundreds of years) had their freedoms suppressed so that they essentially couldn't speak out in the way that they wanted to. Now comes along this forum (ie. the WCC) in which the whole world, apparently, is willing to listen to what they have to say. It's hard for some to pass up. There are also, as I mentioned before, the financial advantages. I've heard that at least part of one Orthodox theological school (in Belgrade) can thank the WCC for it's being built; I'm sure there are other examples.
What conflicts exist between the WCC and it's Orthodox members?
That's a whole thread unto itself! I suggest going to the Orthodoxinfo site and looking at their Ecumenism section.
Justin
-
OrthodoxyOrDeath