You are currently browsing the monthly archive for July 2008.
Excerpts from Ecumenism: A Movement for Union or a Syncretistic Heresy?
by Metropolitan Angelos of Avlona
1. “For the Good Estate of the Holy Churches of God and for the Union of All”
Now, when the Faithful are urged by the Deacon to pray “for the good estate of the Holy Churches of God,” are they being urged, in fact, to pray for the Orthodox Church and the different heretical communities, understood together as Holy Churches of God?
Certainly not! Such an interpretation would constitute the most abject impiety.
“Holy Churches” are considered and called by Sacred Tradition the Most Holy local Orthodox Churches
everywhere in the world, which, being in a communion of Faith and perfect love, jointly comprise the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.
St. Cyril of Jerusalem, referring to the geographical meaning of the term, says that the Church “is called Catholic because She extends over all the world, from one end of the earth to the other.”
Metrophanes Kritopoulos, the Patriarch of Alexandria, writes that the Fathers called the Church “catholic”
…on account of the unity of the individual and local Churches scattered everywhere, which all, by the bond of the All-Holy Spirit, constitute the One Catholic Church.
But the local Orthodox Churches are subject to the danger of being shaken by heresies and schisms, and of losing “sound doctrine” and their immovable stability on the foundations of correct Faith, so that the unity between them in faith and love is torn asunder and they fall away from Catholic unity.
Intense and fervent petitions, therefore, should be offered by the pious pleroma of the Faithful for the preservation of unity among the Most Holy local Orthodox Churches—in correct teaching, to be sure, of the word of Truth and of the Apostolic Faith, but also “in the bond of peace” and of love, “which is the bond of perfectness.”
In this regard it has been very correctly observed that this petition recapitulates, in the form of a prayer, the injunction of the Apostle Paul to the Thessalonians: “Stand fast [in the right Faith], and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle [viz., of the Apostles].”
+ + +
Moreover, that the truly compunctionate petition by the Deacon “for the good estate of the Holy Churches of God and for the union of all” cannot include the assemblies of the various heretics and schismatics, which—according to the Holy Fathers—are pseudo-churches and are, strictly speaking, called “churches of evildoers” and “abominable gatherings,” is proved very plainly, also, from the petitions used in the most ancient liturgical practice, as it is preserved for us in the Apostolic Constitutions.
Here are two typical diaconal exhortations:
Let us pray for the Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, which is spread from one end of the earth to the other; that the Lord will preserve and keep Her unshaken and free from the waves of this life, until the end of the world, as founded upon a rock….
Let us pray for every Episcopacy under Heaven, of those that teach aright the word of Thy truth.
+ + +
However—so as to complete the picture—, the second part of this petition, “for the union of all,” is best interpreted by means of the Divine Liturgy of St. Basil the Great.
The union of all is always understood in the context and on the presuppositions of Orthodox ecclesiology; for this reason, this Holy Father beseeches in the marvellous Prayer of the Anaphora, after the sanctification of the Precious Gifts: “…bring back those who have gone astray, and unite them to Thy Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church”; “make the schisms of the Churches to cease”; “speedily destroy the uprisings of heresies by the power of Thy Holy Spirit.”
That is, only through the cessation of schisms, the destruction of heresies, and the return and reunion of the erring to Orthodoxy is the union of all achieved, by the Grace of God.
2. “That They All May Be One”
Let us come now to our Lord’s prayer, “that they all may be one.”
Shortly before His saving Passion, at the conclusion of the Mystical Supper, our Savior Christ prayed to His Heavenly Father for some time concerning His Church.
His Church was already present (the eleven Holy Disciples), and She would increase in the future with new believers.
The Lord prays especially for the unity of His Church, and He reveals the mystery of Her unity.
The unity of the Church not only has the unity of the Son with the Father as its model, but is a result of Her unity with the Holy Trinity.
The nature of Her unity is Triadocentric: the Church is united with the Father through the Holy Spirit in Christ the Savior.
Our Lord preserves and safeguards His Body in unity with the Father; there is, however, the danger that someone may fall away from this unity, as Judas did.
Jesus Christ, therefore, through His prayer does not enjoin that the faithful members of His Body be one with those who have fallen away from Her, nor does He regard the Faithful and those who have fallen away as one. But He beseeches the Father to preserve His Church in the God-given unity which She already experiences in His truth, love, and glory.
In such a way, the world, seeing this wonderful unity of the Church, will come to know and believe in the Divine and redemptive mission of Jesus Christ.
+ + +
Although ecumenists appeal to this passage, it can be completely turned against them, because in essence it exposes the nature of their ecclesiological heresy. They always use this text with the presupposition that the heterodox communities are in a schismatic situation vis-a-vis the Orthodox, but are certainly within the boundaries of the One Church; that is, there exists an “invisible” or “mystical” ecclesiastical unity, which must become “visible.”
a. We have a clear expression of this heresy, when Orthodox ecumenists proclaim, as did the former Archbishop Iakovos of America, that the unity of the Church has clearly been split, and that in the context of the WCC the ecumenists “should bring the ageold division of the Church to a propitious end.”
b. Indeed, in this regard, it was recently stated at an official level, in a Memorandum of the Patriarchate of Constantinople to the WCC, that
…the Council, and the ecumenical movement more generally, contribute and render service to the ecclesiological conception of unity, to the extent that they have as their primary objective and raison dtre precisely the restoration of unity in the Church.
c. Metropolitan Damaskinos of Switzerland, in a discussion about ecumenical dialogue, the prospects for unity, and the “stable framework for the journey towards church unity,” concludes with the observation that “only within this framework will the Holy Spirit heal the wounds of the tragic split in the body of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.”
d. A wholly academic expression and a very clear perversion of the meaning of our Lord’s Prayer can be found in the views of the late University of Athens Professor, John Karmiris, who maintained that
‘…the divided Christian Churches, confessions, and communities’ have ‘a bounden duty’ to work for ‘the restoration of ecclesiastical peace, concord, love, and immaculate unity in the Church, thereby responding to the Divine demand for unity in the high-priestly prayer of the Lord (St. John 17:1213); for the mutual separation and alienation of the members of the single and undivided body of the Church, stemming from earthly things and the aforementioned causes, certainly cannot destroy the internal unity of the Theanthropic Body of Christ, which is the Church, enjoined from above by its one Divine Head; in her essence, therefore, in her origin, and in the will of her Divine Founder, she is one and unique!
e. This misinterpretation of our Lord’s words was unfortunately given collective and synodal expression by ecumenists at the “Third Pre-Synodal Pan-Orthodox Consultation” (Chambesy, October 28-November 6, 1986), in the final text that they approved, “Relations Between the Orthodox Church and the Rest of the Christian World”; in this text they state that ‘
…the Orthodox Church’ ‘recognizes the actual existence of all Christian Churches and Confessions,’ and Her ‘dialogue’ with them ‘is not based only on the human capacities of those who conduct dialogues, but receives supervision from the Holy Spirit by the Grace of the Lord, Who prayed that they all may be one (St. John 17:21)!
In conclusion, if we have to invoke the passage “that they all may be one,” we should do this in order to highlight for the heterodox the essence and the glory of the unity of the One and only Church, that is, Orthodoxy, and to call them into this unity, for only then will they be united with the Father through the Holy Spirit in Christ
Pp. 19-21, 24-28. Footnotes within the text have been omitted for Internet posting by OCIC at orthodoxinfo.com
Abp Luka, Metr. Evloghios, Metr. Angelo
The Metropolia of Milan and Aquileia wants to make clear that in regards to Greece,
The Holy Synod of Milan are in communion only with the Metropolia of Aulonos and its head,
His Eminence Metropolitan Anghelos of Avlona.
Blogged with the Flock Browser
by Rev. Fr. Stavrophoremonk Symeon
In an ecumenical ceremony a new agreement has been signed in Magdeburg, Germany between German Protestant denominations, Roman Catholic, Anglicans, Oriental “Orthodox” and Eastern Orthodox churches. And for what were they celebrating? The document these church representatives had signed their agreement is for a mutual recognition of one another’s baptism. This was done also in the Summer of 2004 in Australia then again in Germany in September 2004. In the latter declaration of agreement, we know that the Metropolitan Augustinos of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in talks with German Lutherans arrived at the same conclusion of mutual recognition.
What, then, is the meaning of these mutual recognitions in terms of converts to Orthodoxy when, in the 2004 declaration, they state, “we each regard the other’s members as being baptized and in the case of a change of confession we reject undertaking a new baptism.”
So now Orthodox Canons directing the clergy to baptize with three immersions in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit means nothing? We can simply dispense with the Mystery of Orthodox Baptism because that of the heterodox is sufficient? This goes beyond the limits of economia! Yet, in the current milieu of ecumenical syncretism who will stand up for the True Faith of our Orthodox Holy Fathers and declare such recognition of heterodox baptisms as Heretical? And then there are those who wonder why the Autonomous Metropolia of Western Europe & the Americas (“Milan Synod”) stand by themselves! The Milan Synod is the last canonically established standard bearer remaining from the history of the Genuine Orthodox Church of Greece (Auxentian Synod). While She extends an openness to all Orthodox peoples She cannot condone the watering down of the Faith by those who will incrementally elevate the non-Orthodox to the level of The Mystical Body of Christ.
The good folks at Uncut Mountain Press has something to say about these ecumenical agreements on their blog. Uncut Mountain Journal
Blogged with the Flock Browser
St. Raphael on Anglicanism
This is a fascinating chapter in the history of Western Rite Orthodoxy and Antiochian Orthodox jurisdiction. St. Raphael of Brooklyn, the Arab hierarch who served in America under the Russian Orthodox Church (originally the only recognised jurisdiction in this land), had allowed isolated Orthodox to receive ministrations (apparently including the sacraments) from Episcopalian clergy. He made these provisions (operational only under extraordinary circumstances) because a number of high-church Anglican clergy had represented to him how they were essentially the same as the Eastern Orthodox.
In this fascinating missive, St. Raphael says he changed his mind after a deep study of the liturgy found in the Book of Common Prayer. That, and increased study of Anglican history and dogma, convinced him that the church was little different from other Protestant denominations. Subsequently, he reversed his decision and forbade any Orthodox to receive Episcopalian ministrations.
A standing committee of the Russian Orthodox Church’s Holy Synod decided, in 1904, that the Anglican liturgy was unsuitable for Orthodox usage. Now we have an Antiochian hierarch, St. Raphael, saying that his study of the Book of Common Prayer eucharistic service led him to the conclusion that Orthodox people should not attend such services, nor receive ministrations from Anglican clergy.
The Roman rite, on the other hand, has never fallen under such strictures or reprobation, seeing that it was put together not by haters of Orthodoxy but by Saints of Orthodoxy. Therein lies a great distinction.
By the way, I saw that there was a celebration, in Australia, in 2007, of the 100th Anniversary of the Approval of the Book of Common Prayer Rite by the Russian Orthodox Church. We know that in 1904 the church committee decided that rite was unsuited for use by Orthodox Christians because it was so written as to be “bland and colourless” (were, I think, the words used) in its confessional contents, that is, to be acceptable in its bare content both to historic Christian belief and to Protestant belief.
by Monk Aidan of Austin from Occidentalis Yahoo! Group Post No. 12111
Does this mean that the Antiochian Western Rite Vicarite possesses some hidden wisdom over that of the learned, repentant and holy Saint Raphael Hawaweeny (commemorated by the Church of Antioch on the 1st Saturday in November)? Since there are plenty of constructive criticisms found on the Occidentalis and OrthodoxWest forums and of late on the Not Quite Rite and Western Rite Critic blogs about the ill-adoption of a clearly Heterodox liturgical form, I will save our readers from any rehashed rewrites about this.
But what I don’t understand is: If these “converts” in the AWRV are Orthodox why do so many of them (who maintain online publications) always have a long list of links to various Anglican (duh!) and Monophysite (read: Orthodox heresy) websites? One of the leading AWRV champions maintains the Western Orthodoxy blog. Take a look at his links, then look at his friends’ links on their pages. Makes one wonder who is more credible: these good people in “Official” Orthodoxy or the sincere Orthodox people they themselves criticize?
Anyway! Here we have the words of the saintly hierarch from among the Antiochians while serving under the Russian (and only) Archdiocese in America. Is the “Self-Ruled” Antiochian Church so desperate for an increase of its numbers that their local Synod would tolerate an Anglican sect within her Church? Having ignored their own saintly hierarch’s words, She has introduced a disease that will either and eventually do great harm to her or She will be forced someday to purify Herself of this American Western Rite Vileness. The AWRV has done nothing to advance a genuine Western Orthodox Witness and is an embarrassment to those of us who care more about Orthodoxy and its authentic Western Rite for the salvation of souls no matter how few they may be!
Read the Epistle of St. Raphael:
St. Raphael on Anglicanism
-Monk Symeon di Siracusa
Blogged with the Flock Browser
The False Notion of Jurisidictional Union
July 23, 2008 in Commentary | Leave a comment
It is true that today there are people who speak of the union of the Churches. But this term is worthless theologically. We cannot speak of union, but of a unity of faith. We cannot speak of Churches which are separated and struggling to reach the truth and union, but about the Church which is always united with Christ and has never lost the truth, and about people who have broken away from it.
Some people who speak of union of the Churches use to satiety Christ’s archpriestly prayer, which is in the Gospel according to John, and especially the point where Christ asks the Father that the disciples “may be one” and “that they all may be one” (John 17, 20-22). But if anyone reads the whole text attentively, he will discover that Christ is not referring to a union of the Churches which will come about in the future, but to the union of the Disciples which will come about on the day of Pentecost, when they will receive the Holy Spirit. This text speaks of the glorification of the Apostles which took place at Pentecost. Actually, at Pentecost the Apostles became members of the Body of Christ, they saw the glory of God, they reached deification, and so attained unity together in the single Body of Christ. Anyone who experiences Pentecost in his personal life attains this unity. The Apostle Paul, although he was not present with the Apostles on the day of Pentecost, is portrayed by the Church in the icon of Pentecost, because he too reached the vision of Christ and therefore has unity with the other Apostles.
Metr. Hierotheos of Nafpaktos, The Mind of the Orthodox Church, Chapter II