Orthodox-Roman Catholic Relations

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Seraphim,

These are very good points. The Church has always struggled to bring people back into the fold and this is exactly why the word Syncretism should be used and not Ecumenism. It is just that many people don't understand the term Syncretism so for the sake of expediency, Ecumenism is more "universal" - no pun intended. This now makes me wonder, did the ROCOR condemn Ecumenism by name in 1983 or Syncretism?

I will take a petty exception to the meaning of the word Catholic and Ecumenical however.

The word Catholic, or "Katholicos", is a hybrid of two Greek words: "kata" which means "according to" and "holos" which means "complete and whole". I'm only writing this because this word is used in many Orthodox books and without its proper definition it is just simply confusing. In short, it really means "the fullness of the faith" or perhaps, "the pillar of real faith according to the Church". Orthodox books never use the word to mean "Universal" because only Westerners think it to mean this. Think about it, the Church began to call Herself Catholic to distinguish Herself from the heresies of the day, why would they call the Church "universal" to do this? But the definition I gave makes perfect sense - not that this needs to be proved, it is self-evident.

Patristically speaking, "Ecumenical" is derived from the Greek root "oixos" meaning inhabited and "nenon" meaning space. Again, patristically, it means of the entire empire, or within the imperial borders. The Romans never really considered barbarian lands "inhabited". When the title was given to the Patriarch in Constantinople, it had a very restricted meaning of

[Jakub]

Communication between the East & Western Churches is the only way to resolve issues which are widely known by the majority of us. Like many Orthodox, there are many Traditional Roman Catholics who do not relish the idea of Ecumenism either. But, in these times can we afford not to ?

In Christ,
james

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

What issues need to be resolved?

[Jakub]

Papal Primacy, Filioque , doctrine and canonical issues. Do you actually want to list them all for you ?

james

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Of course none of these issues need to be "resolved" among the Orthodox. And I would be astonished with the masterful perplexity of "religious thought" going on in the Vatican that they are somehow having a difficult time understanding the faith; it is after all, as simple and clear as mountain spring water.

These men who, as you say, are trying to "resolve" these heresies write piles of books, big and important, filled with so-called "theological learning" which is nothing else than the worldly knowledge the Apostle Paul calls "vain deceit" and "cunning deception". They are not trying to find Orthodoxy, far from it - they are contemplating ways in which differences can be explained away while the masses are slowly led to the belief in "branches" and then the union of the "branches". The Holy Gospel, which is simplicity itself, is dissected, examined, and dismembered according to systems of philosophy, of "vain deceit". Confusion, complexity, theories which confuse man, foolish searchings and legalistic battles, mud which clouds the clear water springing up unto eternal life.

The Apostle Paul meant them when he wrote, "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine: but after their own desires shall they heap to themselves teachers, tickling their hearing; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth and shall be turned unto fables" (2 Tim. 4:3, 4). "They shall heap to themselves teachers" - they shall bring forth many teachers, and in hearing them they shall be gratified because their empty wisdom shall tickle their ears. But in order that they may not hear the truth, the simple truth of Orthodoxy, they shall stop up their ears while they wish to be told myths, that is, theories and fantasies void of meaning. Thus today do we not see such "heaps" of teachers who with their talk tickle the ears of those from the Orthodox faith?

So what is it? Are they looking for someone to go over there and prove the Orthodox faith to them? How long should one tell them before they "kick the dust off their shoes"? 6 months? 1 year? 3 years? How about 80 years?

[Julianna]

"Those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christ's Church is divided into so-called "branches" which differ in doctrine and way of life, or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future when all "branches" or sects or denominations, and even religions will be united into one body; and who do not distinguish the priesthood and mysteries of the Church from those of the heretics, but say that the baptism and eucharist of heretics is effectual for salvation; therefore, to those who knowingly have communion with these aforementioned heretics or who advocate, disseminate, or defend their new heresy of Ecumenism under the pretext of brotherly love or the supposed unification of separated Christians, Anathema!"
The Russian Church Abroad's Anathema on Ecumenism.

[Seraphim Reeves]

One of the big problems in pursuing genuine ecumenism, is that such has yet to occur. Put simply, for all of the talk about being "more ecumenical", little genuin ecumenism has been made.

For example, what kind of outreach has been made towards heterodox laypeople, clergy, and heirarchs? Lots of ink has been poured to smooth over differences, but next to nothing has been done to highlight differences and then offer genuine correction.

Perhaps the greatest "ecumenical" venture of all, would be the establishment of missions to the western world - but where are the apostles of our age? For goodness sake, most non-Orthodox have never even heard of the Orthodox Church, or have some vague idea of Her (some sort of "greek thing".) And this is not the fault of the heterodox; it's not the fault of the infidels; it's not the fault of the pagans. It is the fault of those professing to be Orthodox, and it cuts right across the board...whether it be so called "liberals", or those who pride themselves on the pristine nature of their confession ("traditionalists.")

There have been some noble exceptions to this...often in the form of laygroups, or a cleric here or there making some effort to establish Orthodox publications for non-Orthodox audiences. On the whole however, these instances are rare - and more rare, is initiative being taken by heirarchs themselves. Why is it that this is never a subject when episcopal synod's get together?

When I look at how much money, time, and effort the evangelical protestants put into their missionary activities, it makes me very upset to see the near indifference of most of the Orthodox world. While we certainly don't want to copy the "Mc Spirituality" and superficiality of much of the evangelical approach, their effort of itself is certainly a rebuke to our stinginess.