The "Non-Chalcedonians"

[尼古拉前执事]

I looked online and found nothing, but I asked one source, an editor of a non-jurisdictional Orthodox periodical and he said in the early 90's it was reported to have happened at the signing in Eastern Churches Journal. ECJ was all for it I guess.

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

I think it to be impossible to believe in the "misunderstanding" theory, and still believe in the Church.

[Logos]

I think it to be impossible to believe in the "misunderstanding" theory, and still believe in the Church.

I do too. I mean isn't an Orthodox belief that the ecumenical councils were led by the Holy Spirit and are infallible? If that is the case, then there is something seriously wrong in all of this.

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Logos,

Of course any synod which teaches the truth of the Church (ie Holy Tradition) is infallible. Its an oxymoron really. The authenticity of an Ecumenical Synod, as well as that of any other council, is given chiefly by the Holy Spirit through the deified and god-bearing Fathers. So no council is above the Church, but rather any council is true because the mind of the Church is expressed by its deified saints.

The opinions of our God-bearing fathers often have greater spiritual value and explicitness than the definite decisions of synods. This is shown in the fact that even the so-called seventh ecumenical council of the iconoclasts in 754(?) was nothing more than a synod of theives and apostates which condemned the Orthodox. And while the apostates were having their "ecumenical" robber synod, the Orthodox still followed the truth which was only held at the time by the minority of true bishops. Therefore, many times the truth is revealed even without a synod.

So with these basic preconditions the Ecumenical Councils are unerring and express the consciousness and the life of the Church. And also for these reasons, people (Serge for example), expose unorthodox tendencies when they suppose that just because an ecumenical council never condemned papism by name that it has not been condemned. How many saints, encyclicals, and local synods condemned papism by name? Many!

This is important to realize as a new "ecumenical" synod of the apostates is being pursued in our time.

But I understand what you mean and agree, that the unerring mind of the church has been guided through the saints by the Holy Spirit in "all truths"!

Let nobody forget that many attempts were made by the saints of the Church through the centuries to bring the Monophysites back to the Church, and with some compromise; only it was not a compromise of faith like we have today.

[Lounger]

One cannot believe that the so-called Oriental Churches are Orthodox unless one believes in the branch theory which is a heresy and anthemized.

[尼古拉前执事]

I've always respected your Church and think you are Orthodox. Juliana's Church, however, is run by a deposed bishop who later was convicted of molesting a child so I can't consider that in any way Orthodox. And Juliana, I'm aware of Mr. Valentine's attempts to defend himself from the charges on his website but he just makes himself look like a fool and more guilty.

Glory to God!

Yes he was accused and even initially found guilty by a corrupt regional court, but ROCOR investigated this too and found him innocent!

He did not protest an investigation, in fact, asked for a COMPLETE investigation so as to be cleared.

The ROCOR did invistigate and found nothing in the charges. An Ukaz was issued, No. 11/35/204a, declaring this.

And then yesterday, Metropolitan Valentine was cleared of ALL CHARGES by the Russian courts, as the charges were proven to be lies with no basis in fact. So he has been cleared by his former synod and by the government! Hopefully we can now drop the false accusation of him being a child molestor?

Also in many threads throughout the Cafe it has been shown how ROCOR deposed the entire FROC after the fact of their 2nd separation and of course Bp Gregory Grabbe has shown how the first depositions (that ROCOR went back on) were illegal and not valid, just like the 2nd ones obviously were. You cannot depose someone not in your synod!

[Anastasios]

"You cannot depose someone not in your Synod."

Thanks Nicholas! You just cleared Met Cyprian from Chrysostomos II's attempted deposition of him "after the fact."

Seriously, I don't see why you are bringing this up in this thread almost a year later--were you waiting all along to show me to be wrong?

Since I proclaim I am a fair guy, I say glory to God that he was found not guilty and cleared.

Whether I think ROAC is a canonical Church is still not affected by this though. Not that my opinion counts

Anyway, thanks for bringing this to our attention.

anastasios