P
- Status
E
EastWest
Guest
I was referring to “here on earth”. And I think you already knew that also.There is one shepherd.
I can tell you his name, if you don’t already know it.
F
frjohnmorris
Guest
Eastern Orthodox would consider that “one shepherd” to be Jesus Christ, who is the head of the Church. One person cannot speak for Eastern Orthodoxy because no one person is infallible, and no leader of the Church should not be accountable to the rest of the Church through a representative system of administration through councils. A Patriarch is accountable to the Holy Synod of His Patriarchate. The members of the Holy Synod are accountable to each other. The Bishops are accountable to the Holy Synod and to the Faithful in matters concerning the financial and temporal affairs of the Church. A Priest is accountable to his Bishop for his spiritual functions, and to the Parish Council which is elected by the people of the parish and controls the financial and temporal affairs of the parish. Our Eastern Orthodox unity is through our Eastern Orthodox Faith, which we all share and which cannot be changed. Even the Ecumenical Councils did not change the Faith.They instead resisted the efforts of certain heretics to change the Faith of the Church.
Archpriest John W. Morris
P
Peter_J
Guest
Well it was a little obvious.
For one thing there was your statement “Let there be one fold and one shepherd” (based on John 10:16, I take it?)
E
EastWest
Guest
Thank you for your response. I’m not questioning the governance of each individual Church. I’m not questioning the faith of any EOC; by no means. I guess I was simply sayng that unity could occur quicker if the various EOCs had one speaker as opposed to so many to have to agree on any one thing. And, yes, it is my understanding that even all the EOCs don’t recognize each other.
Again, please excuse me if my questions and/or comments sound a bit elementary. I’m not a theologian, nor do I profess to be a historian; I’m simply trying to understand.
Thank You
D
dzheremi
Guest
I don’t know where you’re getting this idea. Certainly the Eastern Orthodox would say they are united, as would the Oriental Orthodox, and yet neither have any one bishop to speak for the entire communion. The One who rules over all of us, from the mightiest Pope or Patriarch to the layman, is Jesus Christ, and I am quite sure that when push comes to shove the Roman Catholic Church would agree with this. That the ecclesiology of the East or the Orient did not develop so as to concentrate power into the hands of one man who is unaccountable to his brother bishops, clergy, and laity is to our credit. One does not need to look very far or very hard to see instances of Patriarchs turning their back on the apostolic faith, as happened in Constantinople with the accursed Nestorius or in Rome with the equally impious Honorius.
F
frjohnmorris
Guest
I was not trying to be sarcastic of offensive. I am sorry that you took offense at my response. We have no head on earth. The Ecumenical Patriarch holds a primacy of honor, but not of jurisdiction. Decisions are made by councils. If there is a need for the entire Eastern Orthodox Church to deal with a problem, the Ecumenical Patriarch calls a meeting of the other primates, or their representatives to deal with the problem. For example after the 1991 assembly of the World Council of Churches, the Eastern Orthodox were very upset by several aspects of the meeting which they felt compromised basic Christian principles. The Ecumenical Patriarch called a meeting of the representatives of the autocephalous Churches which met in Greece to discuss the problem and propose several changes future meetings of the WCC to address the Eastern Orthodox concerns. Now before every assembly of the WCC the Ecumenical Patriarch calls a meeting of the Eastern Orthodox to discuss the theme of the assembly and how to participate in the meetings. The Eastern Orthodox also invite representatives of the Oriental Orthodox to participate in these meetings, since we have discovered that we share the same concerns. Now in the WCC, National Council of Churches and the new group Christian Churches Together the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox form a common caucus. There have also been a series of Pan-Orthodox conferences called to discuss Orthodox unity in places like the United States and other countries to which Orthodox have immigrated during the last century and formed separate ethnically based jurisdictions. Here in the United States, we have the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in North and Central America which has formed committees to work on various issues to bring American Eastern Orthodox together. So despite the fact that we do not have one leader, we are still united.
E
EastWest
Guest
My question/comment wasn’t meant to offend anybody; by no means. My ideas come from my thinking. And I don’t really think that concentrating on who offended who, in the past, or who said this and that, will help in any understanding of how to obtain unity today. I’ve spent my entire life trying to bring some understanding amonst my divided family; many who came from the old country. I state again that I’m no theologian or historian; but I would like to think that I have “Christian Charity”. So perhaps just reading the thread & saying nothing would give me a better understanding in “unity”.
Thank You
Thank You
F
frjohnmorris
Guest
All canonical Eastern Orthodox Churches recognize each other. There are occasional disagreements, but we work through them. There are non-canonical groups calling themselves Eastern Orthodox, such as the Greek Old Calendarists, but they are very small. They are something like the followers of Archbishop Lefebvre are to the Roman Catholic Church.
Through the Ecumenical Patriarchate, we coordinate international ecumenical dialogues such as the International Orthodox Roman Catholic Dialogue. The Orthodox delegation is made up of representatives of the autocephalous Eastern Orthodox Churches. In the United States all ecumenical activities are coordinated through the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of North and Central America and are also made up of representatives of the various Orthodox jurisdictions here in the U.S. Right now, we are only involved in one ecumenical dialogue the North American Orthodox Roman Catholic Dialogue. We had a dialogue with the Lutherans, but the Lutherans pulled out of the dialogue because they realized that we were not willing to compromise our faith to enter into Communion with them. I was part of the Orthodox delegation to this dialogue. We broke off dialogue with the Episcopal Church after they decided to ordain women back in 1976.
Archpriest John W. Morris
E
EastWest
Guest
Thank you very much for your explanation. It was most helpfu & enlightening. Again I apolagize for not being as educated as everybody else on the forum.
Thank You
E
EastWest
Guest
Thank you again; your posts are very helpful and give me a better understanding.
Thank You
T
thequietsinger
Guest
straight-toothed Orthodox, haha, good one
no offense to our wonderful Orthodox members…
Rony
No offense taken! It actually reminds me of one of the homilies my old Priest gave years ago! 
T
thequietsinger
Guest
No, to my knowledge, no Orthodox church is in full union with Rome. I don’t know about all Orthodox churches, but the Greek Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church (Latin Rite) don’t seem to vary too much, except for the Liturgy/Mass, and the way the Sacraments are received. Confession is far different in the GO Church than the CC. There is no Confessional. You and the Priest, from what I know (haven’t done it differently), you and the Priest go alone into the Church, in front of the altar, and you do your Confession. There is no option of being behind a screen. None. And to be honest, I like it better that way. You’ve sinned, God knows you’ve sinned, why hide behind a curtain/fencing? I know it’s hard for some, and I am not, by any means, judging anyone who can only do their confession behind a screen. Also, in the GO Church, we kiss everything, it seems. Icons, blessed items, everything, to the point where, especially around Easter, your lips are burning and chapped from all the kissing! Incense is used at every service, which is fine, unless they change the incense up and you learn you are allergic to it. Of course, the only way you really know is if the censor is right in front of you
Holy Communion is much different in the GO Church. We use leavened bread, which is diced (may be the wrong word to use, but my mind went blank on that) into small chunks, which is then mixed in with the wine. You receive it from a spoon, with a cloth held to your chin to avoid the Eucharist being spilled onto the floor.Ultimately, what separates us is what happened during 1054: The East-West Schism. It’s very sad that it happened, and I know it is much more complex than “it was just an argument,” as I am sure others have already discussed. I haven’t read through all of the posts, so please forgive me if these things have already been posted. Eastern religions and traditions are very beautiful, something few get to experience. I know what my profile says, but still, what I have just said is true. If you would like to know more about the traditions we have or how we practice, feel free to let me know. Much love to you!
D
dzheremi
Guest
Hm? I was not offended. Apologies if my reply seemed defensive in some way. It was not intended to be so. My point was that to concentrate power in the hands of one Patriarch, as has happened in the Roman Catholic Church as a result of its historical development which has apparently made such an ecclesiastical structure seem necessary to the Latin Church, can be no less problematic from the non-Latin viewpoint than the absence of “one leader” to speak for the whole communion seems to be from the Latin viewpoint. And since this lack of an infallible head bishop in the Eastern or Oriental Orthodox churches does not impede their unity (within their respective communions, of course; the issue of their division from one another needn’t concern this supposed lack, in so far as both OO and EO reject the Roman Papal model), to adopt the Latin mode of church governance would seem to sacrifice the safeguards that both churches’ ecclesiologies contain (precisely by not concentrating such power in the hands of one man), in return for essentially nothing (since they would not be more united than they are now).
F
frjohnmorris
Guest
I would like to ask is there a way that the Roman Catholic Church can get rid of a bad Pope? We all know that there have been corrupt Popes such as Pope Alexander VI, one of the Borgia Popes. There have been heretical Popes such as Honorius I. What does the Roman Catholic Church do if the Pope is corrupt or heretical? In our Church, if we have a corrupt, heretical incompetent or mentally ill Patriarch, the Holy Synod of the Patriarchate can depose him. That happened a few years ago in Jerusalem.
Archpriest John W. Morris
D
dzheremi
Guest
I assume that question was not meant for me just because I was quoted, right Father? I have wondered the same thing, and even asked it here before, some time ago. I hope that you’ll receive more satisfactory answers than I did.
I remember the deposition of the Jerusalem Patriarch. Sad days, but good to see, as it was necessary for the EO church. The most recent deposition of a Coptic Orthodox Pope befell Pope Yusab II in 1956, as a result of the aged Pope’s inability to govern properly. In the illness of his waning days he had become the target of opportunistic cadres, resulting in widespread simony and other corruption that threatened the Church. He was deposed by the Holy Synod and retired to a monastery, dying shortly afterwards.
I remember the deposition of the Jerusalem Patriarch. Sad days, but good to see, as it was necessary for the EO church. The most recent deposition of a Coptic Orthodox Pope befell Pope Yusab II in 1956, as a result of the aged Pope’s inability to govern properly. In the illness of his waning days he had become the target of opportunistic cadres, resulting in widespread simony and other corruption that threatened the Church. He was deposed by the Holy Synod and retired to a monastery, dying shortly afterwards.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Oddly enough, this question makes me think of a question that some Catholics are very keen to ask Orthodox: namely, how they would hold an ecumenical council. But maybe that’s just me.
Regardless, I believe the best answer to your question is that we would cross that bridge when we come to it.
F
frjohnmorris
Guest
Every major decision is made by council in the Eastern Orthodox Church. The Eastern Orthodox has had many councils that are equivalent to Ecumenical Councils. Out of honor to the special authority of the 7 Ecumenical Councils, we have adopted the habit of calling international Eastern Orthodox councils Pan-Orthodox Councils. For example, in 1672 the Council of Jerusalem Bethlehem met to discuss the Orthodox response to the Protestant Reformation after Patriarch Cyril Loukaris wrote a catechism that showed strong Protestant influence. The Council wrote a detailed condemnation of Protestantism, especially Calvinism. In 1923 a Pan-Orthodox council authorized the adoption of the Revised Julian Calendar, which at least until 2800 is identical with the Gregorian Calendar. Some Orthodox Churches including the Ecumenical Patriarchate, and most Orthodox in the US adopted the new calendar, while others like Moscow rejected it. An Ecumenical Council becomes an Ecumenical Council after its decisions are ratified by the whole Church and the council is recognized as an Ecumenical Council. If you look at the acts of the 7 Ecumenical Councils, they always open with a statement listing the previous Councils it recognizes as Ecumenical Councils. ccel.org/fathers.html The Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers Series II vol. XIV contains the text of the proceedings and canons of the Ecumenical Councils and the local councils recognized as having ecumenical authority.
To me your answer to the second question is unspecific and lacking. A corrupt, incompetent, heretical, or mentally ill Patriarch, can be removed by the Holy Synod. It can and does happen. The most recent case was in Jerusalem in 2005 the Holy Synod of Jerusalem removed Patriarch Irenalos for corruption. He appealed to the Ecumenical Patriarch who called a Pan-Orthodox Synod that studied the situation and ratified the decision of the Holy Synod. That Rome gives so much power to one man that he is unaccountable to no one else, is one of the problems that I find with Roman Catholicism. Any historian will tell you that Rome has had corrupt and incompetent Popes. Alexander VI was hardly virtuous. Look at this site en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sexually_active_popes I believe that every person in authority including the Pope must be accountable to another authority and liable to removal.
Archpriest John W. Morris
S
SyroMalankara
Guest
He is accountable to someone else, the entire Church and Christ… and also Holy Tradition. No one denied the incompetent and corrupt Popes, but none of these changed dogma - they were too busy sleeping around and cavorting to care - thank God! The rule of “Ecumenical Council” is no less tyranny if one wishes to take it to an illogical extreme.
F
frjohnmorris
Guest
That is not quite true, because no council is considered an Ecumenical Council until it is accepted by the Church. If you read the acts of the Ecumenical Councils, they all open with a statement listing which Councils it recognizes. The Robber Council of Ephesus of 449 is an example of a council that had all the outward marks of an Ecumenical Council, but was not accepted by the Church.
Archpriest John W. Morris
- Status