Page 2 of 3

Re: Inquirer asking another question about "canonical" churc

Posted: Thu 25 September 2014 3:19 am
by Maria

Our True Orthodox bishops are canonical. They follow the holy canons. However, the World Orthodox bishops do not follow the canons against praying with heretics. Can the WO Bishops be called canonical?


Re: Inquirer asking another question about "canonical" churc

Posted: Sat 27 September 2014 12:56 pm
by Agios_Irineos

If you don't follow the canons, by definition you cannot be canonical!

Unfortunately, the world orthodox jurisdictions have co-opted and corrupted the word canonical and redefined it to represent some sort of seal of approval that they have declared themselves the sole arbiters of who receives this "mark". However, even a cursory reading of church history reveals numerous instances where the "official" or "approved" bishops fell away from the faith and were opposed by pious monks, bishops and faithful who held to the true faith and the canons of the Church. Under today's definition of canonical as offered by the world orthodox, Arians seated on the throne of Constantinople would have been "canonical" except of course, they weren't -- they were heretics. Canonical can only mean following the canons. Any other definition is illegitimate.


Re: Inquirer asking another question about "canonical" churc

Posted: Sat 27 September 2014 11:33 pm
by Barbara

Seekermark, thank you for explaining precisely the twisting of the word "canonical" by World Orthodox
jurisdictions to suit their agendas. I hope all new inquirers will be reading this, so they won't be taken in or
feel pulled to be in a "canonical" jurisdiction. In fact, this could be better described as a "con" operation than a
canonical one !


Re: Inquirer asking another question about "canonical" churc

Posted: Sun 28 September 2014 9:20 pm
by Maria
Barbara wrote:

Seekermark, thank you for explaining precisely the twisting of the word "canonical" by World Orthodox
jurisdictions to suit their agendas. I hope all new inquirers will be reading this, so they won't be taken in or
feel pulled to be in a "canonical" jurisdiction. In fact, this could be better described as a "con" operation than a
canonical one !

Yes, the WO are quick to call themselves "Canonical" while labeling the True Orthdoox who follow the Holy Canons as "uncanonical."

However, remember that the so-called "canonical" churches are not really "canonical" as they do not obey the Holy Canons, especially the ones saying not to pray with heretics. I saw several GOARCH Vesperal Service with Anglicans, Lutherans, and Methodists who refused to call Jesus the SON of God, or refer to Him as LORD and MASTER. Before I converted from Roman Catholicism to Orthodoxy, I remember Catholic men and women in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles who would read the Epistle in church and who would refer to an Apostle (one of the Chosen Twelve) as a "she."


Re: Inquirer asking another question about "canonical" churc

Posted: Mon 29 September 2014 12:52 pm
by Justin Kolodziej

that's terrible!

Anyway, it seems to me that the actions of the world Orthodox hierarchs dishonor, if not outright mock, the Fathers of the various Councils that proclaimed the One Faith.

...which is why I'm here.

That would explain why, when I visited the OCA parish a while back, at that time ready to exit Rome if there was a sign the OCA was in the true church, the liturgy seemed dead with no Spirit...because it was!

Though it doesn't explain why it even seemed worse than the Uniate liturgies I had been going to occasionally and at times even the Roman ones. Probably just a superficial impression, or some deception.

(edit to add): That happened to be the Sunday of Orthodoxy there...but no anathemas were read at all at the Divine Liturgy.


Re: Inquirer asking another question about "canonical" churc

Posted: Mon 29 September 2014 1:23 pm
by Maria

The anathemas are read during Vespers.

If you have not yet been to a Vespers service, you are missing one of our most beautiful Holy Services that recalls the Second Coming of Christ and prepares us to receive Holy Communion at the morning Divine Liturgy.


another question about "canonical" churches

Posted: Mon 29 September 2014 3:16 pm
by KOSTACC

The World Orthodox have Apostolic succession but can't really be called canonical because they don't follow the canons and, or, have changed the spirit of the canons. Likewise, a jurisdiction that calls itself True Orthodox, follows the Church Calendar, and does every other thing correctly, yet is in schism or heresy [...] is not canonical either. Regardless if they follow the canons or have some form of Apostolic succession, they are not truly canonical either. [....]

Please be careful to avoid any mention of polemics.
Polemics can be discussed in World Orthodoxy, Miscellaneous, Politics, and in the Intra-TOC Polemics forums.

Maria,
Administrator