The pertenant quote seems to be this:
Obviously, since there is no need to rebaptize, the sacrament is considered to be "with grace,"
:shock:
The pertenant quote seems to be this:
Obviously, since there is no need to rebaptize, the sacrament is considered to be "with grace,"
:shock:
Submitted for consideration, the following is one (or many) reasons that I hold to the position as stated in my last post. This is from the Decision of the Synod of Bishops (ROCOR) in 1981:
The Synod of Bishops is grieved by the reaction to the article about Archimandrite Tavrion and the hasty conclusions which some zealous believers, and even some clergymen, have drawn. Mutual love and concern for Church unity, which is especially necessary in times of heresy and schism, require from each of us great caution in what we say. If no one is supposed to condemn his neighbor in haste, even more care is demanded where our own primate is concerned. Rash implications about his allegedly unorthodox preaching as well as open criticism in sermons reveal a tendency towards condemnation and division which is unseemly in Christians. The Apostle said, “Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant?” How much more appropriate might it be to say, “Who art thou that judgest thy metropolitan?” Such an attitude, which can easily develop into schism, is strongly censured by the canons of the Church, for it shows willful appropriation by clerics of the “judgement belonging to metropolitans” (Canon XIII of the First-and-Second Council).[4] Everyone must be very careful in his criticism, particularly when expressing it publicly, remembering that “Judgement and justice take hold on thee” (Job 36:17). If, contrary to the apostolic teaching about heirarchical distribution of duties and responsibilities, all the clerics and laymen were to supervise their hierarchs (I Cor. 12:28-30), then instead of being a hierarchical Body of Christ, our Church would turn into a kind of democratic anarchy where the sheep assume the function of the shepherd. A special grace is bestowed upon bishops to help them in their work. Those who seek to control their bishop should be reminded of Canon LXIV of the Sixth Ecumenical Council which quotes the words of St. Gregory the Theologian:
Learning in docility and abounding in cheerfulness, and ministering with alacrity, we shall not all be the tongue which S the more active member, not all of us apostles, not all prophets, nor shall we all interpret and again: Why dost thou make thyself a shepherd when thou art a sheep? Why become a head when thou art a foot? Why dost thou try to be a commander when thou art enrolled in the number of the soldiers?
The canon ends with the following words: “But if anyone be found weakening the present canon, he is to be cut off for 40 days."
The situation of the Church in Russia is without precedent, and no norms can be pre- scribed by any one of us separately. If the position of the Catacomb Church would change relative to its position in past years, any change in our attitude would have td be re- viewed not by individual clergymen or laymen but only by the Council of Bishops, to which all pertinent matters should be submitted.
The Synod of ROCA seem to be saying people can't disagree with them and to do whatever they've said unquestioningly. :shock:
The Synod of ROCA seem to be saying people can't disagree with them and to do whatever they've said unquestioningly.
First, the Synod never said people can't disagree, if you read their documents you will see this. As a matter of fact, quite the opposite is true, and in direct response to criticism of a document issued in 2000, they made explicity clarifying statements the next year. Not only are they allowing their flock to speak, but they are listening and working with them.
Second, the synod is protecting their flock. They are not saying that people cannot study, and learn, and discuss. What they do seem to be saying is that, when it comes down to it, if you disagree with your bishop and/or synod on a matter that is not a matter of heresy, then you should keep your private opinion to yourself and accept what the synod says. That's as Orthodox as you can get. That's patristic. That's biblical. That's what our tradition teaches.
Third, with people now making life and death decisions based on the latest cut-and-pasted websites with no real thinking behind them, the wise warning of caution expressed is more applicable than it was when it was first voiced two decades ago.
From a presentation of Bishop Kallistos Ware to the Orientale Lumen V conference:
"In the seventh century, in Byzantium and the West, very many people fell away in the heresy of Monotheletism. This caused great confusion in the Church. Saint Maximus, who was only a layman, stood firm and did not give way. When he was in exile, emissaries of the emperor came and said: "You are alone. The emperor has agreed to it. The Patriarch has agreed to this. The Pope of Rome has agreed to it. You are outside the Church."
"No," said Saint Maximos,"in that case, I 'am' the Church."
Problem is, we now have hundreds of little "St. Maxiumus'" everywhere, all with different opinions. Hmmm.... it's kind of like that discussion about the basketball player becoming a nun that's happening on the other section of the board. Her quick move to a monastery works for about 1%, the other 99% have to do things in a more traditional and steady way for it to be God's will.
I don't know if this is totally relevant but it wouldn't surprise me if there are some Orthodox priests communicating Latins. I personally haven't met any in a parish, but in Nov. 1999 I witnessed a GOA priest concelebrate the Eucharist with two Greek Catholic priests. I don't believe in posting names on the internet but I can assure you that I know all the parties involved and there was no confusion as to what was going on--especially when both Pope John Paul II and Patriarch Bartholemew were commemorated. I thought this information might be germaine to the topic at hand because while I do not support OOD's agenda to discredit all "World Orthodoxy" priests, I think the truth is ultimately the most important thing we should strive for and this is something I witnessed with my own eyes.