Posted on 10/28/2017, 7:08:35 PM by NRx
The Orthodox Church is a great church of history, older than even the RCC. But we talk of a ‘church’ as a gathering of those who come to hear of Christ, to worship Him, to AGREE with principles and to reform, to repent.
This statement of ‘unity’ is I believe a wise one. Christians are to a great extent already united in faith and belief. It is the administration of the historical teaching and the development of faith where many sects and groups have evolved and developed over the centuries that has created an appearance of division.
The two great Christian Churches, the Roman Catholic and the Eastern Catholic (Orthodox) share a great number of similar teachings and practices in liturgy. The ‘unification’ of these two great Churches rests not so much on uniting their treatment of the Gospel as it does on merging the ‘management’ of the organizations. That is always a problem in general business.
As I read it, the article tells me as a methodist that I don’t fit in yet. That really is no change. I accept any denomination’s right to define itself. Nor do I want any to pursue a union of convenience. I felt the sincerity of the writers when they mentioned a type of union that gathers infrequently and shares a sacrament. I, too, sensed the shallowness of such a thing
My hope is that a serious, deep unity might come about in some way on this side of eternity.
And at the same time I admire Orthodoxy’s insistence on being true to their identity.
I would agree with the above statement but would remove the word “Orthodox” from it.
The article further states, “We are fully aware of deep divergences which separate Christian denominations from each other, in all fields of Christian life and existence, in the understanding of faith, in the shaping of life, in the habits of worship. We are seeking, accordingly, an unanimity in faith, an identity of order, a fellowship in prayer. But for us all the three are organically linked together. Communion in worship is only possible in the unity of faiths. Communion presupposes Unity. Therefore, the term "Intercommunion" seems to us an epitome of that conception which we are compelled to reject. An "intercommunion" presupposes the existence of several separate and separated denominations, which join occasionally in certain common acts or actions. In the true Unity of Christ’s Church there is no room for several "denominations." There is, therefore, no room for "'intercommunion."....“When all are truly united in the Apostolic Faith and Order, there will be all-inclusive Communion and Fellowship in all things.”
My translation of the above statements is, “When all Christians agree with the Orthodox church in doctrine, there will be all-inclusive Communion and Fellowship in all things.”
We have this same posture coming from Roman Catholic and other churches. Orthodox, Roman Catholic and other churches have assigned themselves as being the sole authority over Christ’s body on earth. They can't all be right!!
The Russian Orthodox are being courted by the Bergoglio Vatican. Will they also keep to the narrow road of unity, plainly laid out in history and tradition, just as strictly as the Greek Orthodox, here in this article?
Didn’t an Orthodox prelate take part in the abominable inter-religious Assisi prayers?
I believe so. The ROC has long sought cooperation with the Holy See in areas of mutual interest and where there is no danger of diluting essential points of faith. Examples would include charity, and resistance to the wave of hyper aggressive secularism in Europe as well as responding to the ongoing persecution of Christians around the world. But there has never been any hint of doctrinal compromise and the idea of communio in sacris has never been seriously entertained. At least not by the Orthodox.
I think so, and he was roundly condemned for it. The letter from the monks of Mt. Athos was scathing.
Yet those churches go back to the apostles.
The Orthodox Church is distinguished as the oldest, closest to the Levitical origins. Their history is also distinguished by rejection to any ‘change’ in the divine liturgy, there has been no change in it in nearly 2000 years, hence there has been no other ‘doctrine’ other than the original. In fact, Orthodox scholars will argue there is no ‘doctrine’ other than what was laid down by Saints Paul and Peter, that was, is, and forever will be. This is important as Protestants flee from their churches to Orthodoxy to escape doctrinal changes that they know in their hearts are wrong. The Orthodox Church provides them refuge and helps them to heal before returning to their protestant church with renewed strength. This is a wonderful attribute of the Orthodox Church.
There are though some divisions in Orthodox administrations but such arguments and divisions are of purely human origin, never spilling over into the liturgical customs. Those divine customs are forever the same, never changing, reflecting the Eternal.
For me personally, I am an admirer of the history of the King James Bible. To me, that was a miraculous event in history. However, if I ever become confused, I seek the calming influence of the Orthodox Church.
They never change. They are not granted any means to change, it is impossible.
The Orthodox Church and the RCC have been in talks for decades over matters of unity and unification. This letter clarifies the current state of affairs.
"This letter" is sixty years old.
So? It never changes.
60 years, 90 years, it never changes. Time is irrelevant.
So are Greek & Russian Orthodox equally and strictly traditional? I know Bergoglio has sent his “ecumenical” courtiers to Russia. I bite my nails when they try to influence.
In the 1970s, Russian Orthodox Metropolitan Nikodim of Leningrad temporarily allowed intercommunion with the Roman Catholic Church within the borders of his diocese. The rare and very controversial practice, however, did not become widespread and was eventually terminated.
http://www.orthodoxanswers.org/can-roman-catholics-receive-communion-in-the-eastern-orthodox-church-and-vice-versa/
I think the Orthodox know better than to buy whatever Bergoglio is selling.
Orthodoxy is worldwide, every continent.
Greek and Russian are merely two groups under various Patriarchs. Orthodox organization is not centralized, not vertically arranged in a chain of command. They are all different, independent to a large extent from each other. But what makes them Orthodox are the divine rites and the Divine Liturgy which is always preserved and maintained, never questioned or modified.
American Orthodox are self-reliant, patriotic, apolitical. These are generalities, the averages.
The Russia Orthodox were split from the Bolshevik revolution. They split into the Russian Orthodox and the Russia Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR) http://www.synod.com/synod/indexeng.htm
ROCOR was the remnant of Russian Orthodox from Tsar Nicholas II who was a true devoted Christian. Tsar Nicholas was the Head of the Orthodox Church including its churches, monasteries, and convents in Jerusalem and throughout Eastern Europe. He inherited the Temple on the Mount, The Garden of Gethsemane, The Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron, numerous other holy sites. So although the Bolsheviks murdered his Christians in Russia, the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia remained strong and vibrant, and importantly a refuge for those fleeing Russian communism and its murderous bloodbath.
The Bolsheviks destroyed most Orthodox Churches in Russia until they realized that the Orthodox faith simply went underground. To spy on who was continuing to adhere to Orthodoxy as a proxy for Tsarist elements, the Bolsheviks developed spies to infiltrate the Church. Communist successors in the KGB managed to turn the Patriarch of Moscow Aleksei to become an informant. Because of this betrayal, the Russian Orthodox Church is still viewed suspiciously by Orthodox outside Russia, although efforts are in play to integrate the Patriarchy of Moscow back into rest of Orthodox Christianity.
These are matters of Church Politics but they in no way affect the Divine Liturgy. The sacred rites are passed from generation to generation unchanged. They are repeated without change.
Inside the Orthodox Churches, there are no pews, there are no priests lecturing or sermonizing what the Gospel means. There are readings that are part of the liturgical rites. All of the scripts are the same as they were nearly two thousand years ago with apologetic recounts by Orthodox Saints.
When inside the Church, one stands and faces the altar, bowing one’s head in continual prayer and making the Orthodox cross when compelled by the spoken prayers and and pleadings of Saints. One is free to wander and visit the icons and stations of the Church, stopping to pray and reflect, to meditate, to inwardly consider one’s own soul in the presence of the Eternal.
After the Divine Liturgy and Sacred Rites are completed, the human element is reentered outside the Church as pertaining to Church affairs, socials, lunches, dinners, projects. The meeting place for the socials may be in the Church basement or in an outside dining hall. The Divine Liturgy is a world apart from the human elements which is why it is never changed. There is no way to change it. There is no provision to amend it or modify it.
The Orthodox Church’s strength stems from its Monks and Nuns. Priests are allowed to marry and are encouraged to have large families to set an example for members of the Parish because many of the offspring become Monastics and so perpetuate the order.
Monks are celibate, highly educated, highly skilled. They live in Monasteries but make visits to Churches. They build each Orthodox Church according to a precise prescription while providing their own labor and skill. They are expected to never take a penny from any parish, instead operating businesses that are blessed by the Church. Some businesses operated by Monks are for example coffee roasting, police dog training, Christmas Card production. Monks are usually very physically strong and quiet. They write scholarly articles and attend to the Churches by ensuring the Divine Liturgy is followed to perfection.
Nuns are likewise self-reliant and are instrumental with Church mothers. They are closer to members of parishes than Monks but are no less important to the strength of the Church. One Orthodox Nun was a granddaughter of Queen Victoria and was considered in line for the Crown. She was also recognized as the most beautiful woman in all of Britain and Europe. She married into Russian nobility and converted of her own free will from Protestantism to Orthodoxy.
https://oca.org/saints/lives/2016/07/18/101915-grand-duchess-elizabeth
As far as the Roman Catholic Pope, it is not possible that Roman Catholicism can influence Christian Orthodoxy as the Orthodox have no means to revise their inherited faith patterns. There is no way, for example, to write a letter or epistle to instruct how the Orthodox Church must treat the remarried, or to view same-sex marriage inside the rites of the Church. Outside the Church, perhaps in its basement, or its offices, or on the porc of its entrance, such questions may be addressed, but never during rites and ceremonies.
The impact of Pope Francis’s emissaries is restricted to greetings, salutations, lunches, agreements to pray together. It is impossible such relationships could produce anything more. The Orthodox Church ‘doctrine’ or ‘dogma’ is enwrapped in its Divine Liturgy which can never be changed. This is what appeals to so may Orthodox and non-Orthodox regarding Orthodox Christianity.
Nikodim of Leningrad during the USSR era was not viewed as Orthodox, rather as a state agent. This was not a change in Orthodoxy. Read #17 to better understand.
I began life in the Catholic Church and some personal experiences made me decide to go the 'agnostic route" from the age of 14 until the age of 50.
Over the years, I tried different churches but it wasn't until I was sitting in a non-denominational church that I clearly heard the message of the love of Jesus and asked Him to be my Lord and Savior.
When I went to a gathering of Christians that "cut to the chase" and spent a LOT more time talking about Jesus than any of the religious churches I had been to, instead of worrying about their own "flavor" of side rules and telling me that me + Jesus = me missing out on Heaven because I really needed some other mortal men to pave the way...yada yada yada.
Ironic that God sent Jesus in the form of a man in order to foster a personal relationship and then we are told by some that relationship doesn't count without the intercession of other mortals....
But as Hebrews Chapter 10 states it is important not to forget the fellowship.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.