EP "Spiritual Leader of 300 Million Orthodox"

[尼古拉前执事]

Are you speaking of the fact that the EP is making Fidel Castro a member of the Holy Order of Saint Andrew? Or that the Communist Cuban government owns the Church that is to be consecrated and not the EP?

[George Australia]

As to the rest of the posts above, you must make careful consideration of some of these genuine, if uncharitable, opinions and weigh them against what you have already learned about the Church.
Demetri

Dear Brother in Christ, Demetri,
I fully accept the honorific title of "first among equals" for the Ecumenical Patriarch. What's more, I know he is a warm, generous and engaging human being, since we have also corresponded peronally. I don't believe it's a question of uncharitableness though.
I genuinely agree with your advice above. I'm not sure what OL has already learned about the Church, but what I learned about the Church in Catechism (in an EP Sunday School btw) as a child was that there is only "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church."
Could you then please explain to me why the Ecumenical Patriarchate now believes there are two "sister" Churches? This is certainly un-orthodox teaching. ( see again, http://www.ec-patr.gr/deltiotypou/engdi ... ata&lang=1 )
The question is not "Is he the Ecumenical Patriarch", nor is is "Is he the first omong equals". The question is:"Is he teaching the Orthodox Christian doctrine given to us by the Apostles"?
Patriarchy is no guarentee of Orthodoxy- Nestorios was also Patriarch of Constantinople. John Vekkos was also an Ecumenical Patriarch under whom many martyrs for Orthodoxy were killed. The martyrs are now glorified as Saints of the Church- John Vekkos is referred to as "of sorry memory".

George

[George Australia]

To put it another way, should an Oecumenical Patriarch who holds and publically teaches, that the Body of Christ is divided into two "sister Churches" be allowed to remain in the position of Oecumenical Patriarch, let alone, presume to speak and act on behalf of the Orthodox Church?[/i]

[Giorgos]

Dear Brother in Christ, Nicholas,
Perhaps the two. Have you read the statements of Patriarchate in the press or the Web?
The behaviour of Bartholomew is "sergiasnist", and his thinking too.
My English is very hard, but I can not master him every time.
In Christ,
GIORGOS

[TomS]

Put another way, should a Patriarch, who can only become THE Patriarch if approved by MUSLIMS presume to speak for and act on behalf of the Orthodox Christian Church?

[George Australia]

Put another way, should a Patriarch, who can only become THE Patriarch if approved by MUSLIMS presume to speak for and act on behalf of the Orthodox Christian Church?

Dear In Christ, Tom,
In answer to your question, I'm not sure. But being an hellenic "Romios" myself, I view Constantinople as occupied territory, and it's Church to be a persecuted Church, like Jerusalem is and Moscow once was. I'm not sure Constantinople has a choice in this at present, and Constantinople is makes it clear it is opposed to the situation. For all it's errors, and despite the danger of further persecution, the title of the Ecumenical Patriarch is still "Archbishop of Constantinople", not "Archbishop of Istanbul". The name "Constantinople" is forbidden in Turkish Law, and there is no exception for the Phanar, however the Phanar continues to insist on this title despite the legal risk.
Similarly, in the centuries when the services and activities in the Church of the Ressurection in Jerusalem was subject to Ottoman Law and Jewish debt collectors, the miracle of the Holy Fire each Pascha never failed.

In Christ,
George

[Aristokles]

Dear Brother in Christ, Demetri,
I fully accept the honorific title of "first among equals" for the Ecumenical Patriarch. What's more, I know he is a warm, generous and engaging human being, since we have also corresponded peronally. I don't believe it's a question of uncharitableness though.
I genuinely agree with your advice above. I'm not sure what OL has already learned about the Church, but what I learned about the Church in Catechism (In an EP Sunday School btw) as a child was that there is only "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church."
Could you then please explain to me why the Ecumenical Patriarchate now believes there are two "sister" Churches? This is certainly an-orthodox teaching. ( see again, http://www.ec-patr.gr/deltiotypou/engdi ... ata&lang=1 )
The question is not "Is he the Ecumenical Patriarch", nor is is "Is he the first omong equals". The question is:"Is he teaching the Orthodox Christian doctrine given to us by the Apostles"?
Patriarchy is no guarentee of Orthodoxy- Nestorios was also Patriarch of Constantinople. John Vekkos was also an Ecumenical Patriarch under whom many martyrs for Orthodoxy were killed. The martyrs are now glorified as Saints of the Church- John Vekkos is referred to as "of sorry memory".

George

Christ is Baptized! Glory to Jesus Christ!

My Dear Brother in Christ, George,
I first must apologize for my tardy answer; my current bout with influenza has deprived me of my full ability to respond earlier.
As to your referenced letter from the EP to the Bishop of Rome, I see no direct offer to refute any Orthodox Doctrine, only an invitation to continue dialogue. Is this wrong? How are we to bring the apostate see of Rome back to orthodoxy otherwise? Certainly not by wishful thinking that they will regain the True Path without our blessed guidance.
As to the quotation of "two Lungs", frankly ----ΣΚΑΤΑ! It is merely extravagant HYBERBOLE For which His All Holiness has been roundly and correctly excoriated. Fortunately, this OPINION of his is not a TEACHING (DOGMA) and is pretty much ignored by most all Orthodox Christians (even within his see). Thankfully we Orthodox recognize that even saints (much less mere bishops) can have mistaken opinions. None are infallible! Orthodoxy has been blessed through the ages with a self-correcting mechanism which has been lost to the West. The concilar nature of the Church of Christ corrects such errors, eventually.
It is when certain groups of bishops organize themselves as separate synods in opposition to OPINIONS or changes not yet decided in Council that the Evil One truly finds a chink in our armour. When a jurisdiction (albeit understandably) forms itself and/or breaks with the rest of the Orthodox communion over these issues, the Evil One has a foothold in the Body of Christ. THIS I will not allow. (Burn me; flame me here as I'm sure many will; but that is my stance.) I am sure the papalists are enjoying the protestant-style fragmentation of the Orthodox over these issues. Shame be upon them - and upon this sinner's soul for allowing that to be.
ANY jurisdiction that separates itself from the Orthodox communion, for well-meaning reasons or not, deprives ALL of the Church of Christ with the full wisdom of the Holy Spirit and their needed input.

I have been, and still am, a Roman!

Demetri