World Orthodoxy, Roman Catholics, and Protestants have all become heretics.
When World Orthodoxy joins the Roman Catholics and Protestants, then I will have to reconfigure these forums. That time seems to coming very quickly.
[This topic has been split from another thread.]
Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner.
In my view, that "joining" (of World Orthodoxy to the heterodox), has already taken place, and the ecumenistic and heretically minded bishops of World Orthodoxy have only sought to maintain the appearance that the joining has not fully or truly happened yet, when in any meaningful or important sense, this has actually already happened since they have signed joint documents admitting the existence of genuine mysteries among the Catholics who in turn have made similar documented pronouncements about the baptisms of Lutherans presbyterians and anglicans whose baptisms the recognize in converts and refuse to baptise them when they enter the Roman Catholic Church. So by doing things in this indirect fashion they obfuscate the truth that they have already entered into communion with each other. Whether the degree of openness regarding this unity will increase in the future is a moot point. I think ever looking for some joint concelebration at the same altar of the Pope and the EP or something like that is a decoy argument that deceives the unwary and uninformed or simple minded. They make the same argument in World Orthodoxy circles all the time among their anti-ecumenist members, like the followers of Elder Ephrem. They say, "It is not Yet! However, If and when the EP or MP etc should ever stand at the same altar and share the same cup publicly such as a televised event, and most especially if documents are signed of joint communion, THEN we will break communion with the other World Orthodox. But until now they have not joined the heretics in any formal sense." And this faulty reasoning, this LIE, that they are not free to leave until the union is formal and public and direct, rather than indirect, has kept many of them enslaved to holding communion with hierarchs who publicly declare heresy year by year, decade by decade, and signed joint declarations upon declarations with the heterodox, particularly with the Latins. Know this, dear friends, No declaration or public demonstration of joint communion as I have just mentioned need ever happen right up to the appearance of Antichrist himself nor up until the Second Coming of Christ. The betrayal has already happened, the overthrow of the Creed's dogma of the Unity of the Church has already taken place, and all the Saints of heaven in the company of St. Mark of Ephesus, the pillar of Orthodoxy have already divorced themselves from the World Orthodox. For those who are waiting for some future "sharing of the eucharistic chalice" on TV between the pope and the patriarch of Constantinople, you have been warned. Get out now, because the water in the pot is nearing the boiling point and you are still waiting for "the sure sign" that World Orthodoxy has fallen away from the faith and is no longer in possession of genuine mysteries. That day need never come, because it has already come. If you are still in doubt, I will ask you this one simple question: If the Catholic heretics have not abandoned anything for which St Mark and St Paisius Velichkovsky and St Nektarios of Aegina declared the Latins to be truly heretics without grace, and in fact in Vatican 1 (19th century) and Vatican 2 (1960s) have even added to their errors, how can the anathema be lifted without the Orthodox thereby making the change within their own dogmatic confession making their own confession heretical by declaring heresies condemned by the saints to be no longer heresies?
Here is another proof from the offical website of the American Conference of Catholic Bishops:
The Results of our Investigation: "We Confess One Baptism"
The Orthodox and Catholic members of our Consultation acknowledge, in both of our traditions, a common teaching and a common faith in one baptism, despite some variations in practice which, we believe, do not affect the substance of the mystery. We are therefore moved to declare that we also recognize each other's baptism as one and the same. This recognition has obvious ecclesiological consequences. The Church is itself both the milieu and the effect of baptism, and is not of our making. This recognition requires each side of our dialogue to acknowledge an ecclesial reality in the other, however much we may regard their way of living the Church's reality as flawed or incomplete. In our common reality of baptism, we discover the foundation of our dialogue, as well as the force and urgency of the Lord Jesus' prayer "that all may be one." Here, finally, is the certain basis for the modern use of the phrase, "sister churches." At the same time, since some are unwilling to accept this mutual recognition of baptism with all its consequences, the following investigation and explanation seems necessary.
-Section I. On Baptism, Subsection C.
The fact that our churches share and practice this same faith and teaching requires that we recognize in each other the same baptism and thus also recognize in each other, however "imperfectly," the present reality of the same Church. By God's gift we are each, in St. Basil's words, "of the Church."
-Section III. Conclusions and Recommendations, Subsection A3.
In the document is an exact example of the hidden union approach that keeps so many traditionally minded and conscientious members of World Orthodoxy enslaved to their bishops who either maintain communion with other heirarchs who are confessing heresy, or who are themselves of heretical mind and interaction with the heterodox. In the quotation from the joint Catholic-Orthodox confession seen below, they draw an artificial distinction between the invisible oneness of the Church and the "less essential" visible oneness of the Church (a protestant error in ecclesiological dogma). We can say this because they present formal declarations of possessing the same baptismal grace in both their mysteries (and are therefore formally declaring each other to be one and the same Church spiritually and which is in the most real sense possible, that the Person of the Holy Spirit descends upon them both equally) on one hand, and on the other hand with visible ratified unity, the present rupture of which is a mere superficial difficulty arising from human ignorance or miscommunication and historical errors. They set invisible unity against visible unity, where one is essential (for as the Apostle writes, "the things that are invisible are eternal) and the other is non-essential -- since the loss of which, they have declared, does not deprive either one of the departing groups of remaining truly in the grace and salvation of the Church of Christ. This is in itself ecclesiological heresy. Anyone who is Orthodox, truly Orthodoxy, will have absolutely no communion with anyone, no matter how many degrees, awards, and how dignified his rank, who disavows and contradicts the Creed in which the whole Church has always confessed the visible unity of the Church along with her holiness, catholicity, and apostolicity. St John Chrysostom would never have said that it is possible for the Apostolic Church to be divided visibly into two equally grace-bearing pieces for centuries, living side by side during that time, and yet remain ONE spiritually and invisibly. He would have said to any bishop or jurisdiction that confessed that, "Away with you, heretic! Henceforth, until you repent to us the right believing Orthodox, you have no communion with us and are deprived of salvific mysteries." Here then, is the heretical and deceptive confession that was jointly signed by bishops of the Latins and the World Orthodox in America:
That our churches make clear that the mutual recognition of baptism does not of itself resolve the issues that divide us, or reestablish full ecclesial communion between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches, but that it does remove a fundamental obstacle on our path towards full communion.
-Section III. Conclusions and Recommendations, Subsection C5.
In other words, "Don't panic, all our great tithe paying traditionalist members! We have not entered into communion with the other groups. we are still not in union and us saying that each other has the same invisible reality in the Holy Spirit does not compromise us dogmatically nor set us against the declarations of the saints and Fathers who set down the creed and canons. Unity with the heretics? It is not yet...It is not yet. Sleep, sleep on. All is well, all remains as it ever was. Ye are all still truly Orthodox."
Source:
http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachi ... conomy.cfm
... Maria please delete this because I cannot see how to get rid of this.
+++++
Dear Matthew:
Deleting threads and posts has caused database errors in the past. Thus, all mods at ECafe and even OCnet have been instructed to move duplicate or offensive posts into the Mod Archives. No posts are deleted.
Members and mods are encouraged to edit their posts down to a . [period]
In Christ,
Maria
Admin
Matthew wrote:In my view, that "joining" (of World Orthodoxy to the heterodox), has already taken place, and the ecumenistic and heretically minded bishops of World Orthodoxy have only sought to maintain the appearance that the joining has not fully or truly happened yet, when in any meaningful or important sense, this has actually already happened since they have signed joint documents admitting the existence of genuine mysteries among the Catholics who in turn have made similar documented pronouncements about the baptisms of Lutherans presbyterians and anglicans whose baptisms the recognize in converts and refuse to baptise them when they enter the Roman Catholic Church. So by doing things in this indirect fashion they obfuscate the truth that they have already entered into communion with each other. Whether the degree of openness regarding this unity will increase in the future is a moot point. I think ever looking for some joint concelebration at the same altar of the Pope and the EP or something like that is a decoy argument that deceives the unwary and uninformed or simple minded. They make the same argument in World Orthodoxy circles all the time among their anti-ecumenist members, like the followers of Elder Ephrem. They say, "It is not Yet! However, If and when the EP or MP etc should ever stand at the same altar and share the same cup publicly such as a televised event, and most especially if documents are signed of joint communion, THEN we will break communion with the other World Orthodox. But until now they have not joined the heretics in any formal sense." And this faulty reasoning, this LIE, that they are not free to leave until the union is formal and public and direct, rather than indirect, has kept many of them enslaved to holding communion with hierarchs who publicly declare heresy year by year, decade by decade, and signed joint declarations upon declarations with the heterodox, particularly with the Latins. Know this, dear friends, No declaration or public demonstration of joint communion as I have just mentioned need ever happen right up to the appearance of Antichrist himself nor up until the Second Coming of Christ. The betrayal has already happened, the overthrow of the Creed's dogma of the Unity of the Church has already taken place, and all the Saints of heaven in the company of St. Mark of Ephesus, the pillar of Orthodoxy have already divorced themselves from the World Orthodox. For those who are waiting for some future "sharing of the eucharistic chalice" on TV between the pope and the patriarch of Constantinople, you have been warned. Get out now, because the water in the pot is nearing the boiling point and you are still waiting for "the sure sign" that World Orthodoxy has fallen away from the faith and is no longer in possession of genuine mysteries. That day need never come, because it has already come. If you are still in doubt, I will ask you this one simple question: If the Catholic heretics have not abandoned anything for which St Mark and St Paisius Velichkovsky and St Nektarios of Aegina declared the Latins to be truly heretics without grace, and in fact in Vatican 1 (19th century) and Vatican 2 (1960s) have even added to their errors, how can the anathema be lifted without the Orthodox thereby making the change within their own dogmatic confession making their own confession heretical by declaring heresies condemned by the saints to be no longer heresies?
Here is another proof from the offical website of the American Conference of Catholic Bishops:
The Results of our Investigation: "We Confess One Baptism"
The Orthodox and Catholic members of our Consultation acknowledge, in both of our traditions, a common teaching and a common faith in one baptism, despite some variations in practice which, we believe, do not affect the substance of the mystery. We are therefore moved to declare that we also recognize each other's baptism as one and the same. This recognition has obvious ecclesiological consequences. The Church is itself both the milieu and the effect of baptism, and is not of our making. This recognition requires each side of our dialogue to acknowledge an ecclesial reality in the other, however much we may regard their way of living the Church's reality as flawed or incomplete. In our common reality of baptism, we discover the foundation of our dialogue, as well as the force and urgency of the Lord Jesus' prayer "that all may be one." Here, finally, is the certain basis for the modern use of the phrase, "sister churches." At the same time, since some are unwilling to accept this mutual recognition of baptism with all its consequences, the following investigation and explanation seems necessary.
-Section I. On Baptism, Subsection C.
The fact that our churches share and practice this same faith and teaching requires that we recognize in each other the same baptism and thus also recognize in each other, however "imperfectly," the present reality of the same Church. By God's gift we are each, in St. Basil's words, "of the Church."
-Section III. Conclusions and Recommendations, Subsection A3.
In the document is an exact example of the hidden union approach that keeps so many traditionally minded and conscientious members of World Orthodoxy enslaved to their bishops who either maintain communion with other heirarchs who are confessing heresy, or who are themselves of heretical mind and interaction with the heterodox. In the quotation from the joint Catholic-Orthodox confession seen below, they draw an artificial distinction between the invisible oneness of the Church and the "less essential" visible oneness of the Church (a protestant error in ecclesiological dogma). We can say this because they present formal declarations of possessing the same baptismal grace in both their mysteries (and are therefore formally declaring each other to be one and the same Church spiritually and which is in the most real sense possible, that the Person of the Holy Spirit descends upon them both equally) on one hand, and on the other hand with visible ratified unity, the present rupture of which is a mere superficial difficulty arising from human ignorance or miscommunication and historical errors. They set invisible unity against visible unity, where one is essential (for as the Apostle writes, "the things that are invisible are eternal) and the other is non-essential -- since the loss of which, they have declared, does not deprive either one of the departing groups of remaining truly in the grace and salvation of the Church of Christ. This is in itself ecclesiological heresy. Anyone who is Orthodox, truly Orthodoxy, will have absolutely no communion with anyone, no matter how many degrees, awards, and how dignified his rank, who disavows and contradicts the Creed in which the whole Church has always confessed the visible unity of the Church along with her holiness, catholicity, and apostolicity. St John Chrysostom would never have said that it is possible for the Apostolic Church to be divided visibly into two equally grace-bearing pieces for centuries, living side by side during that time, and yet remain ONE spiritually and invisibly. He would have said to any bishop or jurisdiction that confessed that, "Away with you, heretic! Henceforth, until you repent to us the right believing Orthodox, you have no communion with us and are deprived of salvific mysteries." Here then, is the heretical and deceptive confession that was jointly signed by bishops of the Latins and the World Orthodox in America:
That our churches make clear that the mutual recognition of baptism does not of itself resolve the issues that divide us, or reestablish full ecclesial communion between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches, but that it does remove a fundamental obstacle on our path towards full communion.
-Section III. Conclusions and Recommendations, Subsection C5.
In other words, "Don't panic, all our great tithe paying traditionalist members! We have not entered into communion with the other groups. we are still not in union and us saying that each other has the same invisible reality in the Holy Spirit does not compromise us dogmatically nor set us against the declarations of the saints and Fathers who set down the creed and canons. Unity with the heretics? It is not yet...It is not yet. Sleep, sleep on. All is well, all remains as it ever was. Ye are all still truly Orthodox."
Source:
http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachi ... conomy.cfm
You are correct, Matthew.
When I was in the OCA, my priest at that time told us that when he was a missionary priest in Alaska, he had permission to give Roman Catholics the last sacraments, Confession and Communion, if they were in danger of death and there was no Roman Catholic priest available (due to vacations and/or illnesses). Roman Catholic priests would reciprocate giving their sacraments to the Orthodox faithful. Then there is an ROCOR-OCA agreement, which stipulates that the OCA is in charge of Alaska and that the ROCOR should not interfere. This agreement was in place even before the ROCOR-MP merger.
In addition, Antiochians and Melkites in the Middle East have been sharing communion for decades.
Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner.
Thank you Maria for the confirming account from your W.O. days.
The Agreed statement quoted above claims that Traditionalist True Orthodox claims are entirely predicated on the "modern false logic" of the 19th Century called "Sacramental Economy", which they say is entirely foreign to the perennial teaching of the Orthodox Church which supposedly is to recognize the reality of genuine baptism among the Latins and, suggestively, even other heretics and schismatics who have maintained the apostolic forms and rites [presumably it is on this basis that the Roman Catholic Church recognizes and does not baptize anew Lutherans, Anglicans, and Presbyterians, for example, though they are grossly deficient in a number of dogmatic essentials such as belief in a Real Presence eucharist and recognition of ikons and the ever virginity of Mary.
Here then are two critiques of the assumed errors of "Sacramental Economy" noted in the heretical "Agreed Statement".
NOTE: only the first paragraph will be quoted to whet the appetite to visit the original source which for copy right reasons will not be posted here in full.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ecumenist Charges against “Sacramental Economy” Critiqued
The influential theory of "sacramental economy" propounded in the Pedalion commentaries does not represent the tradition and perennial teaching of the Orthodox Church; it is rather an eighteenth-century innovation motivated by the particular historical circumstances operative in those times. It is not the teaching of scripture, of most of the Fathers, or of later Byzantine canonists, nor is it the majority position of the Orthodox churches today.
--III. Conclusions and Recommendations, A5
That our churches address openly the danger that some modern theories of "sacramental economy" pose, both for the continuation of ecumenical dialogue and for the perennial teaching of the Orthodox Church;
--III. Conclusions and Recommendations, C2
Note: Both of these critiques, while making helpful points worthy of reading, are nonetheless presented by men outside of the Church; men who entertain yet another, more subtle heresy, the heresy that one can be right-believing but in communion with heretics who are publicly and formally affirming heresies and yet these “anti-ecumenist World Orthodox” can be in communion with those heresies but it does not deprive them of grace, thus declaring, contrary to the teaching of the Holy Fathers and ecumenical councils, that heresy does not in itself drive out or deprive grace, or that there are two kinds of heresy, one serious and 100% grace depriving, and another, not so serious that, while problematic, does not deprive either the heretic bishop or those in communion with him (decade after decade) of the genuine grace of the Holy Mysteries. This of course is an error, though more subtle, that is equally destructive to salvation and the maintenance of membership in the true Mystical Body of Christ that is the Genuine Orthodox Church. Hence, we must read with caution, not uncritically accepting all that they say, either here, or in any of their other works.
By the mercy of God,
Matthew
First Critique by Hierotheos Vlachos
http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/methi ... ptism.aspx
Baptismal Theology
by Metropolitan Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Navpaktos and Hagios Vlasios
THERE HAS BEEN in the past, and there is in our own day, a good deal of discussion about the Baptism of heretics (the heterodox [1]); that is, whether heretics who have deviated from the Orthodox Faith and who seek to return to it should be Baptized anew or simply Chrismated after making a profession of faith. Decisions have been issued on this matter by both local and Œcumenical Synods. In the text that follows, I should like to discuss, by way of example, the agreement reached between the Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of America and the National Conference of Catholic Bishops in America [2] on June 3, 1999. The Greek translation of the original text was made by Protopresbyter George Dragas, a professor at the Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology in Boston [Brookline—Trans.], who also provided a summary and critique of this agreed statement between Orthodox and Roman Catholics in America. The basis of this document is the Balamand Agreement of 1993, “Uniatism, Method of Union of the Past and the Present Search for Full Communion,” which it evidently wishes to uphold. The text on which we are commenting, that is, the agreement signed by Orthodox and Roman Catholics in America and entitled “Baptism and ‘Sacramental Economy,’” is based on several points, in my observation, that are very typical of the contemporary ecumenical movement and indicative of its entire substance. The first point is that “Baptism rests upon and derives its reality from the faith of Christ Himself, the faith of the Church, and the faith of the believer” (p. 13). At first sight, one is struck by the absence, here, of any reference to the Triune God—perhaps in order to justify this flexible interpretation of Baptism. Faith, then, becomes the fundamental mark and element of Baptism. The second point is that Baptism is not a practice required by the Church, but is, “rather, the Church’s foundation. It establishes the Church” (p. 26). Here, the notion that Baptism is not the “initiatory” Mystery whereby we are introduced into the Church, but the foundation of the Church, is presented as the truth. The third point is that “Baptism was never understood as a private ceremony, but rather as a corporate event” (p. 13). This means that the Baptism of catechumens was “the occasion for the whole community’s repentance and renewal” (p. 13). One who is Baptized “is obliged to make his own the community’s common faith in the Savior’s person and promises” (p. 14). The fourth point is a continuation and consequence of the foregoing points. Since Baptism rests upon faith in Christ, since it is the basis of the Church, and since, moreover, it is the work of the community, this means that any recognition of Baptism entails recognition of the Church in which the Baptism is performed. In the Agreed Statement we read: “The Orthodox and Catholic members of our Consultation acknowledge, in both of our traditions, a common teaching and a common faith in one baptism, despite some variations in practice which, we believe, do not affect the substance of the mystery” (p. 17). .....
Second Critique by Hieromonk Patapios
http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/orth_ ... ponse.aspx
When Is A Chrismation Not A Chrismation?
A Critique of the Orthodox-Catholic "Agreed Statement" of the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation
by Hieromonk Patapios
On June 3, 1999 (New Style), in the context of a meeting at St. Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary in Crestwood, New York, the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation issued an "Agreed Statement" entitled "Baptism and 'Sacramental Economy.'" Present at this meeting were, on the Orthodox side, Metropolitan Maximos of Ainou (Bishop of Pittsburgh), Bishop Demetrios of Xanthou, Fathers Nicholas Apostola, Alkiviadis Calivas, James Dutko, Alexander Golitzin, Emmanuel Gratsias, Paul Schneirla, and Robert Stephanopoulos, Professor John Erickson, and Drs. Robert Haddad and Lewis (Elias) Patsavos; and on the Roman Catholic side, Archbishop Rembert Weakland of Milwaukee and Fathers Brian Daley, Peter Galadza, John Galvin, Sidney Griffith, John Long, David Petras, and Ronald Roberson. It is interesting to note that two of the Roman Catholic members of the Consultation, namely Father Galadza and Father Petras, are Uniates, representing the Ukrainian and Ruthenian rites, respectively. Given this, it was a foregone conclusion that the Consultation would seek to re-affirm the notorious Balamand Agreement of 1993, in which the Orthodox participants, to their great shame, accepted not only that the Uniates "have a right to exist and to respond to the spiritual needs of their faithful" ( 3), but also that they "should be fully incorporated...into the dialogue of love...with all of the functional rights that accrue thereto" ( 16 and 34). By contrast, the Third Pan-Orthodox Consultation, meeting in Rhodes in 1963, "demanded the total removal from Orthodox countries of all the Uniate agents and Vatican propagandists before the dialogue [with the Catholics] could begin," ...because "Unia and dialogue are simultaneously incompatible" (John N. Karmiris (Ed.), Ta Dogmatika kai Symbolika Mnemeia tes Orthodoxou Katholikes Ekklesias, Vol. II [Graz, Austria: Akademische Druck u. Verlagsanstalt, 1968], pp. 1007-1008). No attempt is made, in the Agreed Statement issues by the participants in the Consultation to explain how is it that the Uniates no longer constitute an impediment to dialogue between Orthodox and Roman Catholics; nor are the legitimate concerns raised by critics of the Balamand Agreement addressed anywhere in this document, despite an intimation, in its opening section, that such would be the case......
Thank you for your incisive points, Matthew. Very sharp you are in both catching and cogently explaining for all the subtle tricks and traps for the unwary.
We are indeed fortunate to have you here on the Forum.
What about Elder Ephraim's system of monastic institutions ? Where will they go when they can no longer put forward such deceptive excuses as you explained ?
Will they join a Greek True Orthodox synod, do you think ? Which one if you have any sense of that ? GOC-K maybe ?
Maria,
What about that agreement you mentioned ? Do you have any idea whether it was a formal document or informal agreement that Rocor would not 'interfere' with the OCA in Alaska ?
Why on earth would Rocor 'cede' that huge stretch of territory to their bitter rival ?
Perhaps the OCA was already too strong there, even since the days of Archimandrite Gerasim [Schmaltz] who was pressured by various OCA figures to not commemorate the ROCOR First Hierarch and/ or other Rocor hierarchs. I think this Spruce Island monastic may have commemorated St John Maximovitch, for whom he had immense respect.
What is behind all this ? Was it impossible for Rocor to compete, I wonder, being too far away and Rocor having scarce resources ?
How did that StMichael's Cathedral in Sitka fall under OCA control ? I was reading about the early days of the Russian American Company in connection with St Herman's Feast Day. I notice it is listed for today, the 26th, as well.
