Russian Orthodox Reject Inter-Confessional Worship

  • Thread starter Thread starter Peter_J
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fuerza said:
Not to nitpick, but that is exactly what valid or invalid means. If the sacrament is invalid, it’s not a sacrament.
Click to expand...
Well that might be what it means to you, but what invalid implies is “nice try” or “fake”, and we will not address it that way.

Either it is, or in this case we don’t know anything about it. That’s not same as categorically stating “is not”, and it does not even imply “maybe”.

“Invalid” as a term just does not come into play here, it isn’t used in the context of sacraments or clergy outside of the church in the sense that you might use it.

I see it bandied about on these forums that Orthodox think Catholic orders (or sacraments) are invalid. That is not correct at all.

Orthodox do not know. Orthodox know their own Holy Mysteries are real sacraments, that is as far as it goes.

In fact, there is no such thing as an invalid sacrament, that is oxymoronic.

I also see it bandied about here that Orthodox Holy Mysteries are “valid but illicit”. Again the concept makes no sense whatever.

If it is real it is not only valid but it is licit, no shades of gray…we are talking about the Holy Spirit in action here.
 
Peter_J said:
From the ByzCath and Stetson websites:

**Russian Orthodox Reject Inter-Confessional Worship **

2008-06-12

Moscow Patriarchate Confirms Intention to Refrain From Participation in Joint Services with Non-Orthodox

Portal-credo.ru, 12 May 2008

Once again it has been asserted in the Russian Orthodox church of the Moscow patriarchate that they do not consider it possible for Orthodox persons to perform divine services jointly with representatives of other Christian confessions.

“We wish to affirm once again our intention to refrain from participation in joint worship with persons of other confessions,” a worker in the Secretariat for Inter-Christian Relations of the Department of External Church Relations of the Moscow patriarchate, the priest Alexander Vasiutin, told the “Interfax-Religion” portal.

He said that this matter has acquired new pertinence in the process of preparing for the XIII General Assembly of the Conference of European Churches which is scheduled for July 2009 in Lyons (France).

The news agency’s interlocutor, who also is a member of the assembly’s organizing committee, noted that “the position of the Russian Orthodox church, unfortunately, does not always meet with understanding among representatives of other local Orthodox churches.”

As an example, Fr Alexander told how at a recent session of the organizing committee Metropolitan of Gaul Emmanuel (Constantinople patriarchate) responded to the suggestion of refraining from performing interconfessional worship at the assembly by saying that “the position of representatives of the Moscow patriarchate on this matter reminds one of the behavior of a man who has a wife but doesn’t sleep with her.”

In addition, the representative of Constantinople posed the question, “why do representatives of the Moscow patriarchate always refuse to participate in joint worship with non-Orthodox, while Patriarch Alexis II of Moscow and all-Rus participated in joint worship with Catholic clergy in the Notre Dame cathedral in Paris when he was there?”

“There is no need to repeat the information disseminated by many church and secular news media that in reality an Orthodox prayer service was conducted in the Paris Notre Dame cathedral at which representatives of the Roman Catholic church were merely present, including Archbishop of Paris André Vingt-Trois. But one cannot speak of any joint service or worship in this case,” Fr Alexander stressed. (tr. by PDS, posted 6 June 2008)

Source: stetson.edu/~psteeves/relnews/
Click to expand...
The Apostolic Canons which both the Orthodox and Catholic Churches supposedly still hold say no less.

Canon LXIV

*If any clergyman or layman shall enter into a synagogue of Jews or heretics to pray, let the former be deposed and let the latter be excommunicated. *

I don’t understand what’s the big deal? :confused:

Yours in Christ
Joe
 
Hesychios,

Thank you, I think I understand what you’re saying better now.

But let me ask you this: suppose instead of the Anglicans, we were talking about a group which had never made any effort at apostolic succession, say the Baptists. Wouldn’t you agree that, in that case, we can say positively that they don’t have a valid Eucharist?
 
Hi Peter,
Peter_J said:
Hesychios,

Thank you, I think I understand what you’re saying better now.

But let me ask you this: suppose instead of the Anglicans, we were talking about a group which had never made any effort at apostolic succession, say the Baptists. Wouldn’t you agree that, in that case, we can say positively that they don’t have a valid Eucharist?
Click to expand...
Of this hypothetical people I can only say that they are not Orthodox, and not prepared to partake of the Precious Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ from the hand of an Orthodox Bishop or priest.

If they desire to believe what Holy Orthodoxy teaches, and desire to commune with the church of Christ I feel certain that some way can be found to provide them with a priest. It has happened before.
*
Michael

*unexpectedjoychurch.org/images/DSC_0216.JPG
 
Originally Posted by Hesychios:
Click to expand...
Orthodox know the concept of “is” and “is not”.

If we together visit an art museum and there are two paintings, we would not use the terms a “valid” Rembrandt and an “invalid” Rembrandt to describe them.

Either it is a Rembrandt, or it is not. No in-between.

There is no such thing as an invalid Rembrandt, no such thing as a valid but illicit Rembrandt.

Orthodox know that they have a Rembrandt. Orthodox say no more.
Click to expand...
Check it out: freakingnews.com/Rembrandt-Osama-Pictures-26290.asp

So, the question being, is this a valid though illicit Rembrandt?

Or, is it simply an invalid Rembrandt? 🙂
 
josephdaniel29 said:
The Apostolic Canons which both the Orthodox and Catholic Churches supposedly still hold say no less.

Canon LXIV

If any clergyman or layman shall enter into a synagogue of Jews or heretics to pray, let the former be deposed and let the latter be excommunicated.

I don’t understand what’s the big deal? :confused:

Yours in Christ
Joe
Click to expand...
Maybe it’s just my experience, but it seems that the Latin Church and the Orthodox Church have different approaches to canons. In the Orthodox Church it seems that the ancient canons are still observed and have full effect, regardless of the fact that these canons were formed in some cases almost two thousand years ago. I notice, from my own experience, some Orthodox interpret the canons relative to circumstances (e.g. an Orthodox attending a Catholic wedding does not make the Orthodox person excommunicated"), but whatever the case, these canons still remain in full effect.

When I was in the Latin Church, studying theology, I didn’t get the sense that the earliest canons are viewed as of much importance for the Church today. I think this non-importance may have accelerated when Pius X consolidated the massive number of canons that had accumulated into one Code of Canon Law.

There is the sense that the present canons supersede previous canons as they related to the Latin Church. So, although the Apostolic Canons are accepted (although I understand the Latin Church accepts a different number than the Orthodox Church), the Latin Church sees the most recent Code as more relevant to the Latin Church and the circumstances of her people than the Apostolic Canons, which are seen as relevant to a previous time and different circumstances.
 
Hesychios said:
Hi Peter,
Of this hypothetical people I can only say that they are not Orthodox, and not prepared to partake of the Precious Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ from the hand of an Orthodox Bishop or priest.
Click to expand...
So when Baptists celebrate “the Lord’s Supper”, can we not confidently say “That isn’t a valid Eucharist”?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top