What's Up With This About ROAC?

[Seraphim Reeves]

Christ is Born!

We live in very confused times. Nothing is taken seriously amongst those who deem themselves to be "civilized." Those left in the world who do take anything seriously (even if mistakenly - ex. Islamists) are not so much derided for what they believe, but how they believe it - it is this which disgusts us, more than any particular tenant of their belief systems.

It is with a similar disdain, that "civilized" western man, in his decadence and lukewarmness, views the confessing Orthodox Christian when he happens upon him.

Ecumenism, in it's varying shades, will always more so than not meet with the praise and approval of the world. It has all that the world desires - truth slain at the altar of "peace"; obstensible unity purchased at the cost of integrity. In a society like ours, the appearance of seriousness and (even more so) true piety, raises alarm.

Ecumenism is a pan-heresy, the most damning of all (for generally past heresies at least had that one characteristic of truth - integrity, seriousness amongst their adherants.) Ecumenism lacks even this. Those possessed of it's pathos are in the worst possible place, for not only do they not have the truth, but they have been rendered incapable (naturally speaking at least) of accepting it should they happen upon it.

Ecumenists will never understand the genuine Orthodox - it is not in their nature to do such. I suspect you'd have better luck finding understanding amongst Islamist fundamentalists, hard-core atheist-marxists, or outright satanists.

15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of my mouth. (Apocalypse 3:15-16)

Seraphim

[canonical]

Al, The Protestants, just like the new-calendar ecumenist heretics, despite all of their differing faiths and confessions they have unity!

Pullleeeeze. How can the calendasr possibly make one a heretic. Julius Ceasar's pagan calendar is hardly theological or dogmatic.

In addition, Protestantism is a denial of the historical faith and an invention of new ones. It is a denial that the Holy Spirit has guided and lit the footsteps of the Holy Fathers. You share this denial of the Protestants when you commune with those the Church cast out, the Monophysites. You blashpheme the Chuch and call its fathers sick and darkened men who could not get past their own egos and fanaticism.

I wasn't arguing protestant theology, nor comparing it to Orthodox theology and dogma. My reference was to the protestant-like schisms that seems to be infecting Orthodoxy these days.

Therefore, it is you who mirror the Protestants, not us. And you look more and more like them every day.

Hold that thought. I'm sure it will earn you some brownie points at the Last Judgment.

Perhaps if you had a definition of "canonical" you would know this.

I do know what canonical means, and there's a unity factor there that schismatics seem to forget about. I haven't defined canonical at all. But it seems to me that those who break away over issues like calendars redefine the word to suit their situation.

Be at peace with the course you have chosen. I may be considering a change in jurisdictions over issues I have with the OCA, but I would NEVER consider fractionalizing the Holy Church by breaking away and forming a new jurisdiction.

[canonical]

Christ is Born!

Ecumenism is a pan-heresy, the most damning of all (for generally past heresies at least had that one characteristic of truth - integrity, seriousness amongst their adherants.) Ecumenism lacks even this. Those possessed of it's pathos are in the worst possible place, for not only do they not have the truth, but they have been rendered incapable (naturally speaking at least) of accepting it should they happen upon it.

By definition, ecumenism is 1) A movement promoting unity among Christian churches or denominations and 2) A movement promoting worldwide unity among religions through greater cooperation and improved understanding.

You seem to bandy about the word as if ALL contact with the nonOrthodox is forbidden, but fail to define what it means. You do not indicate what kind of ecumenism it is that prompts you to call people who shake hands with a Baptist, socially or otherwise, are "heretics."

What is your definition of ecumenism?

Al

[John the Russian]

Cannonical,

It is not a matter of contact with other religions but about praying with them and legitimizing their false teachings. Accepting their teachings as being equal to the ones of the holy catholic and apostolic church is wrong. A real ecumenist would feel comfortable going to a snake worshipping ceremony instead of a liturgy and having communion then say that both a valid for the remission of sins. Whena n orthodox jurisdiction joins these folks it is your duty as a true orthodox to leave those bishops and seek ones who have stayed to the true path. Some bishops may also leave and continue the true path by forming their own jurisdiction as was the case with ROAC and ROCIE. It is not they that caused the schism it is those who strayed from the truth.

[CGW]

It is not a matter of contact with other religions but about praying with them and legitimizing their false teachings. Accepting their teachings as being equal to the ones of the holy catholic and apostolic church is wrong. A real ecumenist would feel comfortable going to a snake worshipping ceremony instead of a liturgy and having communion then say that both a valid for the remission of sins.

Well, not to put too fine a point on it, but this implies that most ecumenists aren't "real ecumenists". Nor does praying with them legitimize what is false about another group.

Anyone can see what is wrong with this sort of definition: that ecumenism is a matter of degree. In this age the pretense that the various Christian bodies are essentially unlike is no longer sustainable. Within fifteen minutes of my house I could attend worship of every major world religion, and plenty of minor ones. The precise similarities and differences are there to see for any passerby. One might be forgiven for believing that the Ukrainian Catholic and Ukrainian Orthodox churches were in the same church.

It is the commonplace here to identify ecumenism with syncretism and universalism. But they are not the same; they are only similar because they aren't pigheaded. Ecumenism simply admits the truth that there is something common and unique that all Christian bodies share in their devotion to Jesus. Everything else depends upon what you do with this truth. You can say that it is unimportant and be a separatist, or (at the other extreme) you can set aside almost all boundaries of theological dispute and polity and commune with nearly anyone. Of course, there is plenty of room in the middle.

When ROAC starts pointing fingers at everyone else for being "ecumenists", a disinterested observer can hardly take these accusations at face value. This observer can hardly see a real theological difference between ROCOR and ROAC, but the political dispute is hard to miss. The whole thing gives "ecumenism" a good name, because it looks very much in this context as a mere pretext to enlarge what would appear to be a very small difference.

[Daniel]

Nor does praying with them legitimize what is false about another group.

Respectfully...

How does an Orthodox Christian praying with a Baptist/Latin/Methodist/Pentacostal not give the Baptist/Latin/Methodist/Pentacostal the impression that they are of the same body? That they have the same fundemental faith? That they have the same god?

[CGW]

Nor does praying with them legitimize what is false about another group.

Respectfully...

How does an Orthodox Christian praying with a Baptist/Latin/Methodist/Pentacostal not give the Baptist/Latin/Methodist/Pentacostal the impression that they are of the same body? That they have the same fundemental faith? That they have the same god?

That is not respectful. You had a chance until that last sentence, but who is it that is claiming that there is more than one Jesus-- you, or they?