We Orthodox have been guilty of “losing our first love.” What is our first love? I can tell you what it is not: concerns of the Old World patriarchates and their lackeys here in the “diaspora” regarding seat-placement, primacy, nostalgia, etc. In North America, there was only one primate concerned with “making America Orthodox,” and that was +Philip. However, this past year has been a retrenchment due to ethnic backlash and his own on regrettable missteps. The Lord has been merciful and sent us another primate. Let us pray that we not fail Him this time.

+Jonah however cannot do it alone. For this to happen, all Orthodox bishops in America (especially those that represent the ethnic exarchates) must repent of this lapse, otherwise the Holy Spirit will depart. He is long-suffering and merciful, but as with the Israelites of old, He did not hesitate to leave them to their devices.

Yes. Apostosle means “sent.” If a Church is not evengelizing all nations as commmanded by the One Head, then it is not sent by the Lord, and is NOT Apostolic. No matter what it has preserved in the attic and the basement.

I am not suggesting (as does ROCOR) that one should not talk. I am suggesting that the EP’s view of Rome is not in accord with the teaching of Mark of Ephesus and most other Orthodox. See how Pope Benedict put it in his address: “Our growing friendship and mutual respect, and our willingness to encounter one another and to recognize one another as brothers in Christ, should not be hindered by those who remain bound to the remembrance of historical differences, which impedes their openness to the Holy Spirit who guides the Church and is able to transform all human failings into opportunities for good.” See whole address at: http://www.spc.rs/eng/pope_greets_ecumenical_patriarch_feast_saint_andrew_first_called

The bottom line is that Rome is full of heresy. Sweeping heresy under the rug in the guise of calling it “chance addition or alteration” or “historical differences” is a lie against Truth. One definition of blashpemy is irreverance towards a belief. Brushing heresy aside under the guise of “chance addition or alteration” or “historical differences” is therefore blasphemy against Truth. The consequences can have grave results: Matthew 12:31.

Good assumption to start with, but the ‘dialog’ that has been attempted over the centuries has always been on RC terms largely due to the political instability of the east. That hasn’t changed. Pope Benedict, in one of his ,early statements after becoming Pope, clearly stated that the way to RC-Orthodox unity was simple, we must submit to the authority of the Papacy.

The Orthodox historical position has always been that the institution of the Papacy is heretical and schismatic. That position is clearly reflected in the ROCOR statement. Rome offically considers us schismatics.

Four choices: 1. We submit to the Pope; 2. The Pope submits to the Church; 3. We choose to have nothing to do with each other; 4. Half measures are employed that dishonor the theology, history and witness of both the RC and we Orthodox. In the meantime while all of the political posturing is going on precious oppoprtunities to actually preach the Gospel are squandered, especially here in the United States.

The whole hierarchical approach to unity is a farce and only leads to emasculation as the passion for ‘unity’ overwhelms all else. As I stated, real unity is a personal, intimate work powered by the Holy Spirit.

This inveterate shunning of dialogue continues to be a mystery to me.

Clearly, entering into communion with Rome while the Pope is proclaiming his infallibility; the filioque, etc. is a bad idea. The same with the indviudual papacy and legalistic reductionism of many Protestants. Any hierarch who does so should be anathametized. There is no good reason for union with Rome, let Rome go. She made the decision to leave long ago and has done nothing to return.

However, that should not, IMO, prevent us from acknowledging truth were it is and then telling the rest of the story. That is the approach the missionaries to Alaska used with great success. Real unity lies in calling to those who really do seek union with God to come home, not in marco-ecclesial power plays. We must seek those who are lost in the wilderness in a personal and intimate manner. Salvation is always personal.

The EP no longer seems to remember the personal dimension of union with Christ that is the fundamental reality of the Church which is after all a communion of persons because she reflects the Holy Trinity. The Church is incarntate presence because she is the Body of Christ. The Holy Mysteries are what allows us to be in His Body and ultimately in His Kingdom. To throw the doors wide-open is to deny everything the Church is; to deny the sacrifice of the marytrs and the testimony of the saints.

If those who love God and seek union with Him who are currently outside the Church are going to hell, where does that leave us who refuse to evangelize and share the truth with them–will we not share the fate of the rich man. I have seen nothing from ROCOR that indicates they care about evangelizing the United States. My impression is that they simply want to maintain the purity of the faith. Laudable to a point, but inadequate.

If union with Jesus Christ is salvation, that is what we must practice, teach and help form in others. Anything else is futile.

It sounds like the EP has accepted the two-lung theory and/or the branch theory. A careful read indicates that he is referring in the past to the first millenium. ROCOR in 1983 described these theories as follows:

“Those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christ’s Church is divided into so-called “branches” which differ in doctrine and way of life, or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future when all “branches” or sects or denominations, and even religions will be united into one body; and who do not distinguish the priesthood and mysteries of the Church from those of the heretics, but say that the baptism and eucharist of heretics is effectual for salvation; therefore, to those who knowingly have communion with these aforementioned heretics or who advocate, disseminate, or defend their new heresy of Ecumenism under the pretext of brotherly love or the supposed unification of separated Christians, Anathema!”

It would seem that ROCOR’s position comports with St. Cyprian of Carthage and all others of the first millenia.

Chance addition or alteration? So, the EP now views all of the heresies promulgated by Rome to be “chance additions or alterations”.

Little accidents rather than concious choices. Rather than Rome repenting, we just need them to do a little tweaking. Let’s tweak Vatican I a little: “The Pope is infallabile”. Oops! Forgot. Tweak. Tweak. Ah! “The Pope and EP are infallible”.

Let’s tweak Filioque: “We will not alter the creed and insert it. But we will profess a belief in the double procession”. Nice compromise. New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia: “The Councils of Lyons and Florence did not require the Greeks to insert the Filioque into the Creed, but only to accept the Catholic doctrine of the double Procession of the Holy Ghost.” Big job: how do they plan on tweaking Mark of Ephesus?

When the time comes, who wants to join me in nailing Mark’s letters to the door of the EP?