Reflections

Discussion about the various True Orthodox Churches around the world including current events. Subforums in other langauges, primarily English on the main forum.


Moderator: Mark Templet

Post Reply
John Haluska
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Thu 1 July 2004 6:23 pm

Post by John Haluska »

Edward,

Regarding your comments concerning Ecumenism...

The following is offered as a 'response', if you will, to what appears to be your thoughts, convictions on Ecumenism:

http://euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5240

Also, an extremely timely article which deals specifically with Moscow's Ecumenism with regard to the Latins, is presented for your information.

After reading this article, and the ones above, what are your views on Ecumenism and Moscow's unilateral talks with the Latins with respect to Ecumenism?

http://euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5146

Also, continuing with another question specific to Ecumenism, and the fact that you live in Russia, in what light do you view the Uniates as far as Ecumenism is concerned?

Thank you,

John Haluska

Edward
Jr Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri 30 September 2005 10:02 am
Location: Fort Myers, Florida

Post by Edward »

Let's address Bishop Hilarion's editorial first. I know Bishop Hilarion personally. He used to serve at Saint Catherine's Church in Moscow, which is the OCA Representation Church. He was always very pastoral and when I asked him about Ecumenism he said that the Russian Church dialogue with other Christians but did not participate in joint ceremonies. The quote I found interesting in his editorial was as follows:

"The proposed alliance may enable European Catholics and Orthodox to fight together against secularism, liberalism and relativism prevailing in modern Europe, may help them to speak with one voice in addressing secular society, may provide for them an ample space where they will discuss modern issues and come to common positions. The social and ethical teachings of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches are extremely close, in many cases practically identical."

While I, as an Orthodox Christian, have serious theological and spiritual differences with the Latin Church, I must say that we do share many moral and social values. I do not see a problem with Orthodox and Latin Bishops or Theologians issuing joint statements on issues like poverty, same sex marriage, abortion, stem cell research, etc. or working together in charitable causes.

As regards Europe, Western Europe is lost. The Church must be what it is in it's fullness. The Churches of England, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, as well as the Evangelical Lutheran Churches of Germany and Austria took the liberal route to attract young people and those countries have the highest percentage of agnostics and atheists. Western Europe has entered their post-Christian era. Individuals will come to Orthodoxy there but any idea of resurrecting a Christian society there is too idealistic. The sad thing is that pushing Christ out of their lives has weakened them and any complaints made about Christian morality will pale in comparison when Islam dominates them.

As for the Uniate question... This issue has been a sore spot for the Orthodox Church since the Union of Brest. The problem I see with Ukrainian Catholicism as well as the Kiev Patriarchate and the Ukrainian Autocephalous Church is that their focus is on Ukraine and the Ukrainian language, rather than the Gospel. These three groups may one day unite to create the ultimate Ukrainian Nationalist Religion. The Ecumenical Patriarchate has unwisely tried to meddle in this affair, but fortunately other Autocephalous Orthodox Churches have come forward proclaiming that the only Kievan Hierarch they recognize is Metropolitan Vladimir of the Moscow Patriarchate.
Uniatism is a wake up call to the Orthodox of Rome's objective in their dialogue with the Orthodox. It really tickles me when Uniates still claim that they worship just like the Orthodox. Just visit any Byzantine Catholic Church in America and you will see something so watered down that you may then think that a typical Liturgy in a GOArch parish is austere.

User avatar
Kollyvas
Protoposter
Posts: 1811
Joined: Mon 26 September 2005 5:02 pm
Location: Mesa, AZ
Contact:

NOT LISTENING

Post by Kollyvas »

Christ is in our midst!

NO ONE, at least I am not, is claiming that WORLD ORTHODOXY IS GRACELESS. I have made it a POINT TO UNDERSCORE THREE TIMES THAT UNTIL A COUNCIL IS CALLED THAT IS NOT THE CASE. Please keep up with the conversation. RESISTANCE PRESERVES THE CHURCH IN TOTO WHILE THOSE BODIES INFECTED BY CONTAGION GRADUALLY FALL AWAY, AND THEIR STATUS IS DETERMINED BY THE COUNCIL. UNTIL THEN, THEY ARE CHURCHES WITH VALID MYSTERIES. You mention +Metropolitan Hierotheos, PLEASE READ THE ARTICLES I PUT up. He speaks SPECIFICALLY OF SECULARIZED ORTHODOXY as well as the nous diseased by error and heretical teachings. And lastly, to you and Fr. Komarovsky and the Bishops Fyodor Karamazov, I began my excursis by saying THAT THE MP IS A CHURCH, however compromised. Stop trying to obfuscate the issue. The Bishops Hilarion of the MP as well as the Metropolitans Vladimir of St. Petersburg ILLUSTRATE FOR US CLEARLY how the MP is in grave danger due to its ecumenical participation. These unsavoury elements preach ecumenism while the sectarians claim Russian souls. And the fact that there are these unsavoury elements in the MP as well as the morass in THE UKRAINE--REPEAT AFTER ME RUSSIAN SOIL, RUSSKAJA ZEMLJA--is because of the legacy of sergianism. UNDERSTAND that until YOU OPENLY ANATHEMIZE ecumenism, sergianism, renovationism on the steps of Christ the Saviour Cathedral and throughout ALL of Holy Russia and take steps to combat these errors, the MP will be ailing and in grave danger. Do not be lulled by the seductions of the Fr. Komarovsky's of the world: look at the wake of their reign in ROCOR--schism, doctrinal relativism, spiritual compromise, impiety. AWAKE! For it is later than you think.

Orthodoxia I Thanatos!
R M Malleev-Pokrovsky

John Haluska
Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Thu 1 July 2004 6:23 pm

Post by John Haluska »

Edward,

My apologies...perhaps you may not have seen this post.

Prior to any further discussion, would you please answer the question:

What are your thoughts, convictions on the arch-heresy of Ecumenism with respect to the Orthodox Church?

I am not interested in the thoughts, convictions of others; rather I am interested in yours, as you live in Moscow and your insight would be most appreciated.

Thank you in advance,

John Haluska

Topic: ROCOR and MOSCOW PATRIARCH

Forum: World Orthodoxy
Posted: Fri 7 October 2005 2:07 pm
Subject: ROCOR and MOSCOW PATRIARCH

Edward,

What are your thoughts, convictions on the arch-heresy of Ecumenism with respect to the Orthodox Church?

John Haluska

Edward
Jr Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri 30 September 2005 10:02 am
Location: Fort Myers, Florida

Post by Edward »

Mr.Malleev-Pokrovsky takes the ecclesiological position of Metropolitan Cyprian of Oropos and Fili. This was also the ecclesiology of ROCOR, but they are now in the process of ending their walling off. This is not the ecclesiology of other Old Calendar groups.

Now for Ukraine, it was part of Rus'. The connections are clear. Kiev was the first capital of Rus', but over the years of historical development, Ukraine has come to see itself as an independent nation. This is due in part to Uniatism and Latin Missionary work. This is also due to aftermath of World War I in which Lenin gave Ukraine to the Germans for peace and the Germans then gave Ukraine independence. During Stalin's reign, the Ukrainians were starved by his policies, which is why many of them supported the Germans during the Second World War. Today, Ukraine is a sovereign state, independent of the Russian Federation. I admit the connections are strong, they really are one people (narod), just now different politcal states (gosudarstvo).

Now, for Ecumenism.....

Ecumenism is not a heresy. Now I am sure some of you have just screamed or at least your temperature rose a few degrees. Forgive me! Ecumenism is not a doctrine nor a dogma, therefore it cannot be heretical. I believe the Branch Theory to be heretical, which is the guiding principle of the Protestants involved in Ecumenism. In principle, there is nothing wrong with the Orthodox dialoguing with other Christians or other religious groups. However, it has often manifested itself with "joint statements" that fail to remain faithful to Orthodox Christian principles and would leave us to believe the our own Orthodox representatives do not fully believe the Orthodox Church to be the sole Body of Christ. We can see this in statements especially by Patriarch Athenagoras. However, this has not always been the case. Men like Father George Florovsky and Father John Romanides always held to Orthodox teachings regarding the nature of the Church during any Ecumenical (whether inter-Christian or inter-religious) dialogues. In the end, Orthodox involvement in the Ecumenical Movement, particularly in the WCC and NCC, has lead to a compromise in Orthodox principles. I personally believe that the Orthodox Churches should withdraw from the WCC and from the Ecumenical Movement because the manner of our participation in this movement has compromised our witness to unbelievers. Fortunately, we have seen the Jerusalem Patriarchate, the Churches of Georgia and Bulgaria do so. We have seen statements by the Moscow Patriarchate denouncing the Branch Theory and Religious Syncretism. We have seen the Antiochian Archdiocese of America withdraw from the National Council of Church. The OCA is considering similar actions. I think the Orthodox are waking up to the reality that our involvement in Ecumenism has not brought other Christian bodies closer to Orthodoxy but has led to compromise in our own spiritual principles and confession of faith.

So to put in shortly, yes I am against ecumenism and Orthodox involvement in it.

Edward
geh8988@gmail.com

User avatar
Nikodemus
Member
Posts: 223
Joined: Thu 7 April 2005 7:28 am
Location: Stockholm

Post by Nikodemus »

It would be better if we speak the language of the fathers instead of introducing our own concepts on theological issues.

Ecumenism is in the orthodox belief the intecommunion between christians who share the same faith and same baptism. Communion is the eucharistic participation in Christ. We become THE CHURCH when we receive COMMUNION. The church is not outside COMMUNION...we are members (parts of a body) through Christ body, His flesh and blood.

Heretics dont have the eucharist, they dont have the communion and are therefore outside the church for this simple reason. God does not give mysteries to an heresiarch.

Those who therefore believe that the Church is with confessors of filioque, papal infability, papolatry etc have a heretical opinon about the Church...and this is a true heresy as any because they dont share the orthodox belief in the Nicene Creed...I also believe in One CHurch...and the orthodox interpretation of this oneness...

They therefore are outside the church themselves

Exact science must presently fall upon its own keen sword...from Skepsis there is a path to "second religiousness," which is the sequel and not the preface of the Culture.

Oswald Spengler

User avatar
pjhatala
Member
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed 26 January 2005 11:07 pm
Location: New York

Post by pjhatala »

Edward wrote:

This is also due to aftermath of World War I in which Lenin gave Ukraine to the Germans for peace and the Germans then gave Ukraine independence.

Not very important, but just a historical side note about this. Right before the signing of the treaty of Brest-Litovsk, the Germans signed a separate deal with Ukraine's Rada, recognizing the Ukrainian National Republic. The new republic was sovereign, but at the same time something of a protectorate of Germany. Lenin didn't give it away- the Ukrainians themselves decided it was time to form their own independent nation.

Post Reply