Comments on: An Antiochian Perspective on the “Holy and Great Council” [AUDIO]

By: Christopher

Christopher — Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:27:52 +0000

In reply to Misha.

“Finally, on principle, the Cretan Synod cannot succeed because the documents are rife with language drawn from secular or, at best, heterodox Christian, conceptions of the construct of mankind (confusion of nature and person)”

This is well stated. I Read the “Message” that came from this meeting this morning. The points about “dialogue” (i.e. ecumenism) and even the willingness to make the Church a part of the secular panic around the “ecological crises” are strange because the underlying presuppositions are borrowed from secular understanding(s) of man (anthropos). The delegates of this meeting seem completely unaware of this. I used to hold out hope that they were being “wise as serpents” but no longer. Unfortunately the current status quo around this stuff continues on largely as before – a victory for the EPcate and their vision of the Church going forward. Even when the delegates seemed to question the assumptions and lexicon of the secular ideal (such as in point #9), it is apparent the delegates did not really understand the schizophrenia of doing this in the face of their other commitments.

In any case, the next REAL “Great and Holy” council will be recognizable because it will among other things make some sense of (probably by dissolving it) and EPcate which is now a Church of about 2000 souls with too many titular bishops and responsibilities and prerogatives that are based on a long dead Empire…

By: Misha

Misha — Mon, 27 Jun 2016 18:50:52 +0000

I don’t want to stir up a hornets nest, but would Jerusalem relinquish control over Qatar if Antioch returned to the Julian Calendar? It’s just a hunch, but they may not want to hear canonical arguments from Antioch given its calendar situation. Just a humble observation.

By: Gregory Manning

Gregory Manning — Mon, 20 Jun 2016 19:04:05 +0000

On of the benefits of crises such as this is that it forces many of us who are otherwise ignorant of what goes on in sister jurisdictions abroad (out of sight;out of mind) to pay attention. As a member of ROCOR I'm embarrassed to admit I knew little, or bothered to find out anything about the issue between Jerusalem and Antioch. After reading Fr. Patrick's remarks and following up by going to the Notes on Arab Orthodoxy website and reading the documentation in support of their position posted there, I am dumbfounded by the lack of action on the part of the PC. That he believed he could gloss over this very serious issue speaks ill of him; very ill indeed. It's bad enough that I live in a world, and more especially a country, whose leadership will deny the existence of terrorism within a favored religious group! For an Orthodox religious leader to act as if there's nothing to see here vis-a-vis Antioch vs. Jerusalem tells me all I need to know.

By: matt

matt — Mon, 20 Jun 2016 00:35:54 +0000

In reply to Wesley J. Smith. yes. how can there be a council if all the bishops are not invited to attend?

By: Michael Bauman

Michael Bauman — Sun, 19 Jun 2016 17:03:59 +0000

The whole thing is a shame and counter-productive. May the Holy Spirit lead us into all truth

By: Wesley J. Smith

Wesley J. Smith — Sun, 19 Jun 2016 00:22:29 +0000

The OCA is being excluded, even from an observer status. Since much of the Council will deal with the need for unity in the “diaspora,” that seems very counter productive.

By: Marko Tesla

Marko Tesla — Sat, 18 Jun 2016 23:24:57 +0000

Father, I think a small correction is needed in your article about the Serbian Orthodox Church (the SOC) attendance. I understand that Pravimir reported that the SOC was not going to attend, but the SOC never said that at all. The letters the SOC synod sent have been up on the Serbian Church website this entire time, please see for yourself.

At the time of the Pravimir article, I believe around june 6th, the SOC sent a letter saying
“Church feels it difficult to participate in the summoned Holy and Great Synod, and proposes that it be postponed for a certain time: while our pending gathering at Crete, with the help of God, would be regarded as a pre-Synodal inter-Orthodox consultation with the aim of additionally preparing the Synod and improving its texts, or, at the most, as the inaugural phase of the whole synodal process, which is to be completed in subsequent continuation, in the next phase, when all disagreements are removed in favor of unity of mind and consensus of Churches.”

The letters that have followed have been further clarifications. It’s a shame that people did not read the primary source and relied on Pravimir and others, as it has led to confusion.

http://www.spc.rs/eng