Questions about ecumenism from a near-convert

[joasia]

The Revelation of John teaches us about the liturgy not as a prophecy of the future so much as a visitation of what currently takes place in Heaven. John was taken up into Heaven and he was given a glimpse of the liturgy. However, the bowls of wrath and the seals, etc., are the carrying out of God's judgment for breaking his covenant. The seals on the scroll in the Revelation are typical of the seals on covenantal, or contractual, scrolls during the old testament period. A seal of scrolls would be 'broken' open when the covenant needed to be read in a legal proceeding when one party broke the covenant. So, when one party to a covenant took the other party to court for violating the covenant they would 'break open' the wax seals on the scroll in oder to read the covenantal judgments - the stipulations for what would happen if one party broke the covenant.

In the book of the Revelation what you have is a marriage covenant. God was married to Israel, his people, and they became a whore riding on the back of the beast (Rome) to whom Israel had 'traded' herself. The judgments in the Revelation match the judgments in the book of Deuteronomy. And if you read Josephus he explains how, and when these judgments took place. He wasn't a Christian, but as a Jewish historian he understood that what he was witnessing was the covenantal judgment of God. During the final days of the siege of Jerusalem Josephus witnessed a spiral and column of clouds descend on the temple and he saw chariots and angels descending. He also witnessed a period of complete darkness that fell over the land - I believe it was for an hour, but it's been a while since I read Josephus. He viewed these signs in the heavens as the judgment of Isreal for breaking God's Covenant.

However, the remnant of Israel, who believed Christ's words were saved for they fled to the mountains as Christ commanded. They were Christ's true bride, the true bride of the Old Testament saints. Not another bride, but the faithful bride of true Israel. Unfaithful Israel who had slept with the beast, was destroyed. Their blood ran in the streets.

Now, it is true to say that this is an archetypical judgment and so the book of the Revelation certainly has some sort of indirect application today. We are still in the "day of the Lord", for the "day of the Lord" isn't a literal 'day', it is a period of time. The "age of the Lord" if you will. We are in his Kingdom which is in Heaven but comes to the Earth in the Church, and Christ is taking his dominion through the Church over the world. He is "sitting at the right hand of GOd waiting for his enemies to be made his footstool." The "Final enemy is death" which will be abolished at his second coming when Christ hands the Kingdom to the Father and the New Heavens (God and his kingdom) and the New Earth (Man, in Christ, and his kingdom which will have filled the earth by then) will come together, and the marriage supper of the lamb - which table we eat from - will continue forever. During the advance of Christ's Kingdom, the Church, we will suffer at times, and in other time we will experience glory. That is good. We must suffer since we are Christ's suffering body. Yet, we must also be glorified since we are Christ's glorified body. The history of the Church is history of suffering followed by glory, and that will continue for some time I'm sure. This is all the "day of the Lord". Eventually the Kingdom will "leven the whole lump", and "will become the largest of all trees" and the "nations will find rest in its branches", it will "cover the earth has the waters cover the sea", it is the stone that Daniel saw that grows into a mountain that "cover the earth". The Kingdom of God is his Church. The gates of hell cannot prevail against the Church's onslaught. The Kingdom will "have no end", the "great commission" will be fulfilled. We will make the nations His disciples.

The warnings of the Apostles regarding the last days had to do with the last days of the Old Covenant. Those last days they were living in. Those last days were full of Judgment, as Christ said he came to judge. His teachings were part of that judgment, and should understood in their context. It was important for them to understand, and be aware. However, the Church is now on the offensive.

Paul taught that when Christ returns he will destroy death by resurrection: 1 Cor 15:22 "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming."

Paul taught that the when Christ comes it will be to destroy his LAST enemy, death. 1 Cor 15:26 "The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death."

The chronology is 1 Cor 15 is obvious. Christ is reigning now, putting his enemies under his feet, and when he returns it will be to destroy his LAST enemy, death. Then, after destroying ALL enemies, including death, He can hand over the Kingdom to the Father.

Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

"Then cometh the end, when he shall have (past tense) delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have (past tense) put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign (present), until he has put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death."

We know that death is destroyed AT his coming, thus he will not destroy all other enemies AFTER his coming, but BEFORE his coming.

As a result we should take courage. Though we suffer it is to 'fill up' that which was lacking in Christ's sufferings. In so far as the Church is his body and suffers as a sacrifice for the life of the world IN, BY, THROUGH, and on behalf the Christ. We are his body being poured out as a drink offering. We must share in his sufferings to share in his glory.

His glory will come. We've tasted of it before, when the "nations brought their glory/riches into the Church". We will taste of it again, and one day the the great commission will be fulfilled.

After that, at the very end, Satan will be released on last time to deceive the nations (Rev 20:8) but before he can destroy the Church the Christ will come and destroy him through resurrection.

That is the future. When it will happen no one knows but NOW we are to establish his Kingdom on earth - his will, in the Church, as it is in heaven.

Welcome Watt. What you wrote is very profound. My question is, what do we need to do in our lives? There is one word that says it all. As a student of the Holy Bible, I was wondering if you know what that one word is.

Joanna

[joasia]

Hello Watt,

God bless.

I am a convert to Orthodoxy from papist despotism. I came to understand the great injustices and spiritual crimes that the See of Rome committed. If this sounds severe, it should be. Because I, my family and ancestors were deprived of the truth, but now I have it back. I am Polish and my ancestors, were at one time Orthodox, before the Great Schism. But, the Pope destroyed that and at one point, my ancestors became papists. I hope my family, will one day, also see the truth. What made me start asking questions is my need to know the truth ( I value truth very much). If that is also your feeling then I hope my answers, by the Grace of God, will guide you to what you are seeking.

1) Do you believe that the Orthodox Churches involved in ecumenism are disobeying the Church's canons? – Yes. St. Philaret of New York expressed it best. Even back in 1965 he saw the dangers. On the surface, it may seem like a good effort is being done to unite all people, but the meaning behind why they are doing it is more significant. They are creating their own "church", controlled by man. They have left behind the Apostles and Holy Fathers who preserved the true Church of Christ. I would say that this is analogous to creating a hybrid. And they have left Jesus Christ. Seems to me that they are doing the same thing that the evil one did when he rejected God. And look where that got him. Can anything good really be produced out of ecumenism when you unite in prayer with those who don't worship Jesus Christ as our Lord and Saviour?
“The organic belonging of the Orthodox to the union of the contemporary heretics does not sanctify the latter, while it tears away the Orthodox entering into it from Catholic Orthodox Unity… Your gesture puts a sign of equality between error and truth. For centuries all the Orthodox Churches believed with good reasons that it has violated no doctrine of the Holy Ecumenical Councils; whereas the Church of Rome has introduced a number of innovations in its dogmatic teaching. The more such innovations were introduced, the deeper was to become the separation between the East and the West. The doctrinal deviations of Rome in the eleventh century did not yet contain the errors that were added later. Therefore the cancellation of the mutual excommunication of 1054 could have been of meaning at that time, but now it is only evidence of indifference in regard to the most important errors, namely new doctrines foreign to the ancient Church, of which some, having been exposed by St. Mark of Ephesus, were the reason why the Church rejected the Union of Florence… No union of the Roman Church with us is possible until it renounces its new doctrines, and no communion in prayer can be restored with it without a decision of all the Churches, which, however, can hardly be possible before the liberation of the Church of Russia which at present has to live in the catacombs… A true dialogue implies an exchange of views with a possibility of persuading the participants to attain an agreement. As one can perceive from the Encyclical Ecclesiam Suam, Pope Paul VI understands the dialogue as a plan for our union with Rome with the help of some formula which would, however, leave unaltered its doctrines, and particularly its dogmatic doctrine about the position of the Pope in the Church. However, any compromise with error is foreign to the history of the Orthodox Church and to the essence of the Church. It could not bring a harmony in the confessions of the Faith, but only an illusory outward unity similar to the conciliation of dissident Protestant communities in the ecumenical movement.” (Full text in Ivan Ostroumoff, The History of the Council of Florence, pp. 193-199)

2) Do you believe that the canons truly apply today, in the same way they may have applied 1,200 years ago. – Yes. The Canons were not a creation of man, but an inspiration from God, as was the events with Mose. Mose didn't create the 10 Commandments. Through the holy ones, God revealed His will and the Canons are just that. A person who calls himself Orthodox cannot reject the Canons otherwise, then, he is not Orthodox. Can a Republican speak like a Democrat or vise-a-versa? If politicians are scrutinized for every word, then why should we be so lenient when it comes to the hierarchy?

3) Do you believe that dialogue with Roman Catholics and Protestants is wrong? - I forget who said it, perhaps St. John Maximovitch; There is no dialogue when it comes to Orthodoxy, there's only monologue. Orthodoxy is the full truth and the Pope of Rome left it in 1054 A.D. and the Protestants thereafter. Only Orthodox has preserved the truth, of course, up to the point that the Patriarch of Constantinople fell away in 1921 A.D.

4) At what "level" it become wrong? – It becomes wrong when the Orthodox hierarch or clergy accept the other as a "sister" Church or a branch of the full truth. There is only one truth and one answer to a question. There cannot be a plethora of different versions of an answer.

5) Is an Orthodox person allowed to share the Gospel with a Roman Catholic and invite them to convert? – You're thinking like a Protestant, of course. That's okay. That's what you know, because you love Christ. I like that. But, what I've learnt from life is that a person will come to the truth when they seek the answer and not when it's thrown at them like...JESUS CHRIST WILL SAVE YOU. Would you have accepted, 10 years ago, an Orthodox person telling you that ORTHODOXY IS THE TRUTH AND YOU ARE HERETIC. I prefer the subtle but determined preaching of Kent Hovind. He was invited to teach about creation and he made it clear that he was there to convert them, but he went when invited and didn't push it on others. But, when he went, he made sure that they understood that he was there to also preach the Gospel. God bless him. I have always hoped that he would learn about Orthodoxy. Can you imagine him as an Orthodox preacher? That would be amazing. And I also read ICR. They really give it to the Evolutionists. Protestants converted to Orthodoxy are so knowledgeable. They have the biblical background and once they understand and BELIEVE the teachings of the Holy Fathers, they are transformed like coal to diamonds.

6) If so, can this happen during a conversation over coffee, or at a conference? – It depends on the reception of acceptance of the person you are talking to. But, again, only if they ask. Don't say things like, do you want to be saved. You have to be subtle. We Orthodox believe in living our faith and not hiding it. I have icons at my desk, at work. I observe the Orthodox fasts. If someone asks me about it, I will tell them with honesty. I have nothing to hide. But, if someone doesn't, I keep silent. Only God will determine the action of that person. What I mean is that if He suggests, to that person, to ask a question, then it will be. But, force is never the answer and Jesus Christ showed us that.

7) Do you believe that the recent ecumenism may prove to be short lived and that the non-ecumenical Orthodox will triumph? Or do you believe that it's too late for that? - True Orthodoxy will always triumph, but ecumenism will continue. There is no "too late" for true Orthodoxy. It always exists, like the air we need to breathe. But, those who choose to asphyxiate themselves with ecumenism will suffer the consequences.

Do you believe that it's ok to break communion with Bishops after only 20-30 years of error in light of the fact that the Eastern Church refused to anathematize the Western Church for the Filioque, and appears to have considered the Roman see "vacant" for 1,000 years rather than fill it with a Patriarch. This, appears to me to be the Church showing patience with the West. Am I wrong? - Yes. You are wrong. Your view is tainted from where you sit, but that's okay, because you are asking the questions. And if you are asking, that means that you are ready to hear the truth. To clarify, the See of Constantinople didn't refuse to anathematize the See of Rome, they actually lifted the anathema in 1965 in opposition to the anathema of 1054 A.D. That means that Constantinople had always recognized the anthema, but now have decided that it wasn't necessary.

In conclusion, if you are really interested in knowing the truth of Orthodoxy, then look to the history of the Church. One book that I would recommend is the The Lives of the Pillars of Orthodoxy by the Holy Apostles Convent in Buena Vista, CO. The three pillars are St. Photios the Great, St. Gregory Palamas and St. Mark of Ephesus. I think you will find their theological explanations very interesting.

Also, I've provided some links here about the ancient fathers. I hope you enjoy them. The third link is actually a library of many Orthodox saints. Just search by first name.

http://www.ccel.org/fathers.html
http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/ecf/index.htm
http://www.voskrese.info/spl/index.html
http://www.balamand.edu.lb/theology/WritingsSJD.htm
http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/chr ... story.html
http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/people_menu.php

I pray your journey of truth will be your greatest joy.

Joanna