Thanks for the historical perspective and the reply.

Greg

The Orthodox Church can continue to maintain itself as the one Church
with an interest in bringing in those who claim to be Christians but are
not Orthodox. I do accept that the initial participation of the Orthodox
in the Ecumenical movement was well intended, but has drifted from its
goals. The purpose of such an endeavor should have been of making the
others Orthodox, and that goal has failed miserably.

If there was a Protestant group that was conservative but believed all
Churches were equal, this would not be an acceptable position but there
could be a starting point for discussions for a certain amount of time.
If nothing happens, the dialogue could be politely terminated. A case in
point is the Ecumenical Patriarch Jeremias II in the sixteenth century
who held meetings with the Lutherans but when they refused to accept the
Orthodox Church and its claims, he politely terminated the dialogue.

As for the EP wanting to maintain some sort of international presence and
dialogue. The Church of Constantinople’s credibility and authority comes
from the Orthodox belief in Conciliarity. Constantinople must reflect the
interests and perspectives of all local Orthodox Churches. The Phanar cannot
simultaneously claim to be representing Orthodoxy with other confessions
while there are continued crises within Orthodoxy.

The Phanar has to get its own house in order. This means in my opinion that
its attention should be focused on healing the splits within Orthodoxy first
and foremost.

Theodoros

RE The WCC is a left wing organization masquerading as a religious institution. It is incompatible with the Orthodox Church…

Just to clarify. Would the problem then be not with an understanding of what “The Church” is (as I indicated above), but with the liberal leaning of the WCC? Thus, if there was a Protestant group that likewise considered all churches equal – but they held conservative religious opinions – the Orthodox Church should be OK with membership in that group?

RE … Old Calendarists… the Ukrainian Church… Autocephaly to America would be a far more productive effort for Orthodoxy

I understand what you are saying, but it does seem reasonable to me that the EP – as a senior representative of Orthodoxy – would want to maintain some sort of international presence and dialogue.

Greg

The WCC is a left wing organization masquerading as a religious institution.
It is incompatible with the Orthodox Church and the reputation of the
Orthodox suffers by being associated with the WCC. The same can be said
of the National Council of Churches in the United States. I cannot figure
out why the Orthodox Churches continue to remain in such institutions.

It is better in my opinion to concentrate on the problems of Orthodox unity.
The Ecumenical Patriarchate is prepared to pray with Protestants and
Catholics, but ordered the forcible expulsion of traditionalist Monks
from the Esphigmenou Monastery on Mount Athos, and he refuses to
have any contact with Old Calendar Greek Churches.

Better in my view to abandon Ecumenism outright and begin the process
of repairing the damage done by Meletios Metaxakis who changed the
Calendar in the name of Ecumenism and inflicted damaging blows to the
unity of the Church.

Dialogue with the Old Calendarists, an effort to resolve the Ukrainian
Church problem, and granting Autocephaly to America would be a far more
productive effort for Orthodoxy than continuing dialogues with the non
Orthodox that are going nowhere.

Theodoros

It seems to me that since the Orthodox, like the Catholics, believe that they are THE church the Orthodox would opt for some sort of observer status (again like the Catholics) that would allow them to participate in the WCC without being a member “church.” (After all, how can a church that thinks it is THE church be an official part of an organization that lumps all “churches” together?)

Thanks.

Greg