www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Is the Ecumenical Patriarch making a power play?

It will matter a lot! If we compromise our beliefs that does NOT make God happy. While a commemoration of the Pope in an Orthodox liturgy in and of itself is only a sin of disobedience, if one followed through with it and entered communion with the Pope, from an Orthodox point of view that is compromising the faith. There's no other way to look at it from an Orthodox perspective since Orthodox teaching is clear on this. This is why I am so opposed to ecumenism now: I believe that ecumenism has effectively erased any chance of Church unity between Catholics and Orthodox becuase now both think really wild stuff about the other. Catholics think that Orthodox are the same thing as them; Orthodox think Catholics are willing to chuck papal infallibility in some cases, etc. How now can there be dialogue between the two traditions when the traditions themselves have been watered down and people are operating on horribly false assumptions? It is not charitable to compromise the truth.

Whether there will be Latins in heaven or Orthodox in heaven or Muslims in heaven is up to God: but he has revealed us the Truth as Christ and his church, and we have to stick with that.

Correctness in Orthodoxy leads to saintliness and love. If people are rude then they are just falling into sin and not being correct! You must be aware that there are Catholics who fall into this trap: for instance, I just read a website last night claiming that since Ronald Reagan was a Protestant he is in Hell and Pope John Paul II should not have prayed for him! Ha, how's that for charity? There are wackos in every church. That doesn't mean we should start compromising the truth. Truth and love go hand in hand.

I'll let OrthoMan speak for himself, but that's why I asked you what the context of the liturgy was. I can guarantee that if Pope John Paul II was commemorated in the liturgy at SVS, it would be all over the presses within a day or two. I wasn't there either so I can't do anything but believe you heard what you heard. Yet I can definitely say that is not something I have ever heard in my 2 years at SVS.

Sorry if I am rambling.

anastasios

Alice writes:

[I did not hear 'Patriarch' of New Rome.
(As if I don't know what that title is...duh..please don't insult my intelligence.)

My husband is quite theologically astute and educated.

He heard it too.

It was six to seven years ago, I cannot remember any more specifics.]

Alice:

As someone, who with the exception of last year, has attended every 'Education Day' at St Vlad's for the last ten years (including the one six years ago) I can honestly state I have never heard the commemoration of the Pope at any service.

But, since I'm sure you as well as others here, will not take my word for it I decided to go straight to the horses mouth (St Vlad's) and ask. Here is their reply -

------

Dear Bob,
I can assure you that the Pope is not commemorated during liturgical
services at St. Vladimir's Seminary! Either on 'Education Day' or any other time.
I have seen occasions on which
individuals who are not very knowledgeable have attended Presanctified
Liturgies in parishes who, upon hearing in the final blessing the reference
to St. Gregory Dialogos, Pope of Rome, have incorrectly assumed that the
pope was being commemorated -- this, of course, is an example of sheer
nonsense, for St. Gregory, the author of the Presanctified Liturgy, was the
Pope of Rome long before the schism, and to mention him does not constitute
commemorating the current pope -- so perhaps your Greek friend had a similar
experience, or perhaps Education Day that year fell on the feast of a saint
who was a Pope of Rome, but the very notion that the seminary would
commemorate the Pope in the services is a bit far fetched at best.
In Christ,
Father John Matusiak, OCA Communications Department

--------

OrthoMan

-------

Dear Alice,
Happy to have such a lovely occasion to offer you a vote of confidence, and glad you are pleased. Your own invocation of God's blessing for your humble and spiritually needy servant is welcome, appreciated, and necessary.
I would take it for granted that you and your husband would recognized the Liturgy of Presanctified Gifts, and can distinguish the commemoration of a Saint (who is of necessity deceased, since the Church does not canonize people who are still in this world!) from the commemoration of a living hierarch.
But we are again faced with the peculiar logic: "it couldn't have happened so therefore it didn't happen". It would be much simpler and probably accurate, to hypothesize that a guest cleric offered the commemoration for the Pope on the specific occasion when you and your husband were there - who knows; he could even have been a former Greek-Catholic who was taken up with the splendour of the service and offered the commemorations from memory. Or maybe he felt moved to pray for the Pope, or maybe he has a sense of humour. I wasn't there, and I don't know who this was, so I have no basis on which to form an opinion - save the opinion already expressed, which is that I trust your honesty and your astuteness. May God bless you and your husband - and the cleric who offered the commemoration!
your least brother in Christ,
Incognitus

Dear Anastasios,

I suppose that you think that the 'correctness' which Nektarios/Daniel espoused in Orthodoxy displayed love on this forum? Was it his 'love' towards me and many others that got the Administrator to ban him? Nektarios/Daniel is just one example of the cold heartedness towards non-Orthodox the more traditionalist Orthodox project.

I would consider myself a traditionalist except that I cannot abide the triumphalism and ego that go along with the attitude of many who call themselves 'traditionalists'. There are loving and charitable exceptions ofcourse, like our beloved 'Gaudior'.

As for not discussing the important details of unity between East and West, the Greek Orthodox Church has been, and is, increasingly moving forward on exactly these type of talks on an annual basis. The Ecumenical Patriarch is also making great strides.

I know that the OCA is not with us in the GOA on these matters, (not accepting the Balamand Agreement either), but that doesn't prevent the ongoing theological efforts of the Greek Orthodox Church.

Sorry that I have offended you.

I really don't wish to further engage in this matter, because I am increasingly becoming saddened and scandalized.

With love in Christ,
Alice

Perhaps Alice and her husband heard the commemoration of "...Petros, POPE and Patriarch of Alexandria..." in the Dyptichs?

I'm surprised no one had suggested this yet! :-)

Dave

Dear Alice,
Please don't go away, and please don't be either surprised or scandalized. That many people are capable of being close-minded should surprise no one (I venture the opinion that we are all capable of being close-minded, but that each of us has his/her own list of sensitive topics - that's one of the factors that makes life interesting). As for scandal, in the strict sense of the word, that would mean that the discovery that some specific people are close-minded on this particular topic would cause you to go and do likewise, which strikes me as highly improbable and certainly makes no particular sense.
If others hold views which grieve us, we may reflect that perhaps somebody is grieved by our own views, but we can certainly find people to converse with us while leaving their sledgehammers at home. Irini kai agapi sas!
Incognitus

Dear Alice,

I guess you didn't understand my post above. I said that being a rude fanatic is not being a traditional Orthodox. Traditional Orthodoxy inspires love, not hate. The situation with Nektarios/Daniel confirms what I am saying: If you check other websites where he posts, you will see that I was often one of the persons confronting him about his attitude, which was not traditional Orthodox. Even many members of so-called Traditionalist Churches were in opposition to him.


Most traditionalists are loving and would never treat genuinely nice and respectful people like you, Alice, with contempt the way others have here. I only object to traditionalism itself being linked to such rudeness and nice traditionalists being labelled the "exceptions." Online people are usually just ruder in general anyway.


It is my opinion that the Ecumenical Patriarchate is compromising the Orthodox Faith. That doesn't mean I hate him or anyone else. I might even end up in the GOA. I just am bothered by his excessive false-ecumenism which does nothing to bring people together in the truth.

You never offended me, actually.

I'm sorry that that is how you are feeling. It certainly was not my intent which was only to point out that people being rude and obnoxious is not "traditional Orthodoxy". My post was against them, not you. That you would imagine that I would approve of Nektarios/Daniel just shows that you misunderstood what I was trying to say, perhaps due to some weakness in my manner of expression. At any rate I will just reiterate that while we cannot compromise our beliefs, we certainly owe all fellow men and women respect, and the type of rude fanaticism that one finds online is simply not Orthodox traditionalism.

anastasios

Dear Incognitus,

In the word 'scandalized', I mean, according to Miriam-Webster, as a transitive verb: to offend the moral sense of:SHOCK.

Dear Incognitus,

In the word 'scandalized', I meant it as:, according to Miriam-Webster;transitive verb: to offend the moral sense of:SHOCK.

Thanks for your kindness. It means alot to me.

The only thing I can surmise from that incident, which WE ARE SURE of, (my husband had much Orthodox religious education in Europe), and quite frankly, the speculation as to what people THINK I heard is insulting to my and my husband's religious acumen) is that the timing seems to have been around the time that the E.P. and the Pope were literally a split hair's length away from establishing inter-communion. Supposed problem w/ churches in Ukraine, if I remember correctly put an end to that almost blessed moment.

In Christ our Lord,
Alice

Dear Alice,
Assuming that your chronological recollection is accurate, that puts the matter into the mid-to-late nineteen-eighties.
Incognitus

Dear Alice,

I was wondering who told you that the E.P. and the Pope were literally a split hair's length away from establishing inter-communion or what has lead you to think that to be true?

I had lunch with an Orthodox Hierarch last week who has and continues to participate in much of the dialog between the Latin's and the Orthodox Church and has spent quite a bit of time at the Vatican discussing matters and who certainly at this point in time did not share in your conclusion, quite the contrary was expressed.

I must say that the "supposed" problem churches in Ukraine is such a "supposed" problem that in and during the theological dialogue with the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church which took place in Baltimore in the year 2000 the Orthodox and Latins could not even come to agreement on what word should be used or applied to refer to uniatism. Some uniates include the filoque in the creed some don't, it seems to be a matter of random choice. This sort of freedom of expression is not an Orthodox position because it is also a departure from Orthodoxy. So what is their theology relative to the creed for instance?

St Irenaeus of Lyons tells us that the heretics are proved to be disciples not of the Apostles, but of their own wicked notions. To this cause also are due the various opinions that exist among them, inasmuch as each one adopts error in whatever manner it presents itself to him. But the Church throughout all the world, having its origin firm from the Apostles, perseveres in one and the same opinion with regard to God and His Son.

In fact, it was the Roman Catholic Cardinal who walked out of the meeting. Only after the Orthodox objected to his leaving without the consideration or even consultation for dismissal by the Orthodox did he return to no avail as articulated by him. You seem to be quite comfortable dismissing the real concerns of the Orthodox and Roman Catholics as well. It seems the uniates are a problem for both the Orthodox and the Latin's as well even in committees simply trying to defining them in discussions. However your perception of reality is not the same as the Orthodox or Roman Catholic Hierarchs whom the faithful of both are either wise to listen to or not so wise to listen and be subject to.

I might further add that there is theological unity in the Orthodox Church relative to all Orthodox theology. Certainly, had the unia never been imposed and established many problems would not exist today as they do. Many of the slavs in the unia are my blood brother's and sisters and it is only because of Rome and her behavior once again that has caused much suffering. Because the Orthodox Church is true to her Patristic teachings and the Latin's have developed and understanding that is different, the only way any real progress will be made is when the Latin's disregard much of what they now believe and return to the truth which remains in and is and will always be steadfast in the Orthodox Church. Since they like developing why not develop towards Orthodoxy?

There are schisms caused by the governments, Godless communist etc. suffice it to say it is terrible however the reality is that the 25,000 heretical schismatic "churches" in existence today are the result of the reformation and Christians opposing Rome with often very legitimate reasons. I often hear the untrue notion that there is not unity in Orthodoxy when I know that there is. I often also hear of the unity of Rome which there is as well it is a different sort of understanding and mindset. Among Orthodox Christianity and the Orthodox Church the reasoning for non-commemoration of the Bishop of Rome is legitimate because it is a position of the truthful Orthodox Church. If you think it is not then you are being untrue to Orthodoxy and opposing what the Orthodox Church believes and correctly practices liturgically.

St Ignatius of Antioch tells us that all who belong to God and Jesus Christ are with the bishop; and all who repent [of schism] and come into the unity of the Church will also belong to God, that they may be living according to Jesus Christ. Make no mistake, my brothers. If anyone follows a man who causes a schism, he 'does not inherit the Kingdom of God'. And any man who goes in for strange doctrine disassociates himself from the Passion.

Can you please tell us what Orthodox Father teaches us to embrace the understandings of the non-Orthodox or heretics for the sake of unity or reckless love. I say reckless because had an Orthodox Church commemorated the Bishop of Rome it would have indeed not gone without notice or necessary attention since it was noticed by you and your spouse and supposed to have been said liturgically. It would not have been referred to as blessed moment because the Orthodox Church believes that the bishop of Rome and his successors have fallen into the error of heresy and have chosen to remain there.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

Matthew
Interesting post. But you know I could have written the same thing except, I could have substituted the word Orthodox with Catholic.
And I am sure there are many that consider the Orthodox to have departed from Apostolic praxis.
Stephanos I

Alice,
Dont let them bully you! Stand frim in your faith.
Christ is the Victor.

[Can you please tell us what Orthodox Father teaches us to embrace the understandings of the non-Orthodox or heretics for the sake of unity or reckless love. I say reckless because had an Orthodox Church commemorated the Bishop of Rome it would have indeed not gone without notice or necessary attention since it was noticed by you and your spouse and supposed to have been said liturgically. It would not have been referred to as blessed moment because the Orthodox Church believes that the bishop of Rome and his successors have fallen into the error of heresy and have chosen to remain there.]

Exactly! Which is the point that we have been trying to make to Alice all along.!

Alice: You claim to have a sufficient knowledge of Orthodoxy and your husband is even more educated in the faith. If that were true, then you wouldn't have to be reminded that if the event you claim to have witnessed had taken place then it would have been, according to what Orthodox believe, an act of apostatizing the Orthodox faith! And St Vladimir's would have been henceforth considered as Uniate!

[I was wondering who told you that the E.P. and the Pope were literally a split hair's length away from establishing inter-communion or what has lead you to think that to be true?]

I would be interested in hearing the answer to that myself.

OrthoMan

I refuse to respond to OrthoMan or to Matthew.

Dear StephanosI

Please bless Father!

Thank you. I am being called a liar by my so called fellow Orthodox 'Christians', and that hurts. Please pray for me.

I will not qualify myself to them.

In reference to all that they are saying, in defense, suffice it to say that my husband had been involved in church administration and Archdiocese conferences...He knew Archdiocese politics well enough to know and experience that even some clergy will fudge the truth according to the wind. St. John Chrysostom didn't say his famous phrase about the skulls on the roads of hell for no reason. May God have mercy on the sins of those who are held in high accountability.

I also have unfortunately been witness to much sin and duplicity.

My husband and I are also quite good friends of a certain prelate and priests who were around these dialogues. This truth is apparently so distasteful to my Orthodox 'brethren' that they feel that they have to discredit and undermine me to maintain their sanity. I don't care, if that is what they really want in their heart of hearts, their sin is before them and God. I am in no position to judge.

I know what I know, and we have enough acquaintances in high places of the GOA and E.P. to know what almost was. (intercommunion) (I didn't want to disclose who I know and don't know, and sound haughty...please forgive me for having to say these things in defense to my 'Orthodox brethren'.)

Dear Incognitus,

The Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew did not take the throne until 1991...As the years go on our chronologocial recollection goes off a few years, so I am not sure of how soon after his enthronement this almost inter-communion actually was. My chronology for my controversial visit to St. Vlad's may be more than I initially thought. Oh how the years are starting to blur!!! :rolleyes:

To every one else,

Please stop bullying me. I am seeing so much bullying and brow beating in Orthodox circles lately that I am starting to wonder if we have morphed into a cult. Think about what you are doing, how you are speaking to a fellow faithful member of your faith because she doesn't 'hate the Latins', and how you are projecting our faith. If only you knew how much the rhetoric from hardliner/fundamentalist/extreme traditionalist Orthodox faithful discredits our beautiful faith... Kyrie Eleison!

Lord Jesus Christ, son of God, have mercy on me a sinner, and on all those in your Church.

Most Holy Mother of God save us!

Alice

As for my 'outlandish' comment on near union, I have also seen it documented, but I am not going to allow you to bully me into spending time looking for it.