Conference on Ecumenism in Thessaloniki

[Julio]

Dear ones,

Uncut Mountain Press, that remarkable new publisher which already counts among its publishing credits "Apostle to Zaire: The Life and Legacy of Blessed Father Cosma" and "The Truth of Our Faith" by the Archimandrite Cleopa, has included among its monographs for free distribution several of the papers read, and the conclusion reached, at the conference "Ecumenism: Origins -- Expectations -- Disenchantment", held last September at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki.

http://uncutmountain.com/index.php/uncut/pages/C5/

Among the participants in this conference are:

Metropolitan Amfilohije of Montenegro (Church of Serbia)
Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos (Church of Greece)
Bishop Artemije of Raska and Prizren (Church of Serbia)
Bishop Panteleimon of Ghana (Church of Alexandria)
Archimandrite Joseph of Xeropotamos (Mount Athos)
Archimandrite Dimitrios (Vasiliadis) (Church of Jerusalem)
Hieromonk Alexis Karakallinos [Trader] (Mount Athos)
Priest John Reeves (OCA)
Priest Peter Heers (Church of Greece)
Dr Constantine Cavarnos (Ecumenical Patriarchate)

As well as many other pastors and scholars of the Church. I encourage all of you to read these excellent papers, as we all search to "be transformed by the renewal of our minds" (Romans 12:2), that is, to acquire the mind of the Church.

--Julio

[Maximus]

Great link, Julio. I hope everyone will read those articles.

I'm familiar with the one by Fr. John Reeves, but I haven't yet had the chance to read the others.

I'm hoping this thread will remain active so we can discuss the articles once we've all had a chance to read them.

[Rick of Wessex]

Julio,

gracias por el link, hombre. :thumbsup:

Rick

[Emmanuel-A]

I had been searching for information on what has been said at this conference for quite a long time. Thanks for the link.

[Julio]

I'm glad it's been helpful! And yes, maybe we could read and discuss. They're all very meaty ecclesiological papers, and all of us Orthodox need to be in tune with the mind of the Church on this matter -- now more than ever!

[Maximus]

Bump.

[Maximus]

When I get the chance, I'm going to print the articles (I guess that's okay?) and save them for future reference.

It saddens me to see what I think I see developing within Orthodoxy: a parallel between us and the Protestant phenomenon of older, liberal, "mainline" churches and more independent, fundamentalist or conservative evangelical groups.

[Maximus]

Has anyone besides me read the article by Serbian Orthodox Bishop Artemije of Raska and Prizren yet?

It's an eye-opener.

I did not know the Serbian bishops voted to leave the WCC and the ECC in 1997.

What happened is interesting to say the least.

[Maximus]

Bump - In case someone wants to read the excellent articles at the link posted by Julio above.

They are worth discussing.

[Rilian]

I've bookmarked them. I'll try and give all of this a read through after Lent.

[MariaRegina]

Dear Maximus:

I cannot open the files as I don't have Explorer on my system. I use Linux. And they are very difficult to read with that faint type. If we are not allowed to print them here at TAW, could you please send them to me by PM?

Perhaps you can send a PM to the mods: Suzannah or Oblio and ask them if we could post those documents here at TAW.

Yours in Christ,
Elizabeth

[Padraig]

I've only read Fr Reeves' article so that's what I can comment on right now. Perhaps I'll have time to read more later. I think he brings up some good points, especially saying that those who oppose ecumenism have seen it from the other side and have fled the "partner churches," as he calls them. Completely understandable. Looking deeper, however, he's unintentionally betrayed, I think, the real problem with ecumenical dialogue.

In the 13th paragraph, he talks about the Antiochian Archodiocese and the OCA, which he refers to as a Russian Metropolia. Herein lies the proof of our real problem. It is our lack of canonical unity that has held us back from presenting a stronger witness to the NCC. He mentioned several items which Orthodox have kept the NCC from doing, though he sees this as a negative. I think it's a positive that we've kept the organization from plummeting into the depths of hell. The problem, though, in the "ineffectiveness" of the Orthodox witness is due in large part to a lack of unity in this country. For political reasons, the canonical granting of autocephaly by the MP to the Russian Greek Orthodox Church of America (i.e. OCA) has not been recognized by the EP (A title which the Patriarch has claimed for himself, not one granted him by an ecumenical council), or others under that influence. Why? Money. We have a jurisdiction (ROCOR) that wants to be another world-wide jurisdiction and will not submit to an already established autocephalous Church in countries where they now reside. Why? Power. We have Old Calendarist sects who claim that they are the "true" Church. Why? Arrogance.

As Orthodox, there is no consensus on a host of issues that the NCC and WCC are currently debating. How can we have an effective witness if we ourselves don't agree on what's what? This is the danger. It is not ecumenical dialogue. It is our own hubris.

In light of this, perhaps it is best to withdraw from organized dialogue. At least until we get our own affairs in order. Perhaps then, we can present Christ to the world. Perhaps we can approach the NCC and WCC with humility. This will not be possible, however, until we get over ourselves. I repeat, the danger facing the Church is not from the outside. It is not a watering down of the faith due to participation in ecumenical dialogue. It is a self destructive attitude, it is internal. We do not have our liturgical, or canonical, life in order. Until we can have another church-wide council, this may not ever get solved.

It is our failures that are causing problems. It is our lack of staying true to the history of our Church that breeds these issues. It is our lack of unity that causes our witness to be "ineffective." We have to stop blaming others and take responsibility for ourselves. Perhaps we should indeed withdraw from organized ecumenical dialogue for the time being. Not because the dialogue has an adverse effect, but because we can't even dialogue with each other. How can we witness to the world? The Church is salvation, and it's time we start living what we pray. We pray for humility. We pray that our bishops may rightly divide the word of God's truth. We pray for unity. We pray for the welfare of the holy churches of God. But we do not act like it. There could be unity in this country if the heirarchs wanted it.

They don't. Many of us on this forum don't. There will never be an evangelizing of the world until we do. Because Christ is the unifier. Christ has established the Church. It is bigger than man. It is not contained within the world of time and space. It itself contains time and space; the entire created order is found within the Church. The Church itself is the New Creation. Do we act like it? Do we really want the welfare of the holy churches of God, and the union of all? Or is that something to simply be said? Do we really want to love one another that with one mind we may confess Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the Trinity One in essence and unidivided?

Let's start looking at the real problems here. Ecumenism is a false problem, a nonissue. Let us deal with our own affairs before looking outside for the root of our troubles.

padraig

[Rilian]

The Ottoman Empire is gone and Communism is dead. That means the fetters are off, and the fact is we need to come together and stop acting like a group of particular churches. Whether it’s Estonia, America, FYROM, Ukraine, Northern Greece or the multiple internal schisms; the signs are not good in this regard.

I would agree this fight is a symptom and not a cause. I also agree we need to get our act together before we engage anybody else.

Well said Padraig.

[Maximus]

I've only read Fr Reeves' article so that's what I can comment on right now. Perhaps I'll have time to read more later. I think he brings up some good points, especially saying that those who oppose ecumenism have seen it from the other side and have fled the "partner churches," as he calls them. Completely understandable.

Thanks for that.

Looking deeper, however, he's unintentionally betrayed, I think, the real problem with ecumenical dialogue.

In the 13th paragraph, he talks about the Antiochian Archodiocese and the OCA, which he refers to as a Russian Metropolia.

Since Fr. John Reeves is an OCA priest, I think his reference to the Russian Metropolia was necessary because he was addressing an audience in Thessaloniki, Greece. That is how the OCA is known outside of this country.

A reference to the "Orthodox Church in America" would have been confusing.

Herein lies the proof of our real problem. It is our lack of canonical unity that has held us back from presenting a stronger witness to the NCC.

I am sorry that we always seem to disagree, Padraig, but it can't be helped.

Canonical unity - by which I think you mean unity of polity - is not our problem at all. In fact, I think the lack of it may have been a blessing in disguise, especially when it comes to ecumenism.

If we have a problem, it is the crisis in unity of faith produced by the liberal, ecumenist element in the Orthodox Church, who are signing on to joint statements with the heterodox that compromise and even betray the historic Orthodox faith.

He mentioned several items which Orthodox have kept the NCC from doing, though he sees this as a negative. I think it's a positive that we've kept the organization from plummeting into the depths of hell.

We have not kept the NCC from "plummeting into the depths of hell". We've merely stopped them from making their de facto positions de jure.

The fact that we've had to stop the NCC from issuing official statements endorsing the ordination of women and homosexuals, abortion, and homosexual "marriage" is proof that the NCC is an organization of apostates with whom we have absolutely no business associating.

As long as we remain in the NCC and the WCC, we lend those organizations legitimacy and make their member bodies appear as if they were actually churches.

The problem, though, in the "ineffectiveness" of the Orthodox witness is due in large part to a lack of unity in this country. For political reasons, the canonical granting of autocephaly by the MP to the Russian Greek Orthodox Church of America (i.e. OCA) has not been recognized by the EP (A title which the Patriarch has claimed for himself, not one granted him by an ecumenical council), or others under that influence. Why? Money.

I agree with you on this to a certain extent.

My solution would probably look a little different than yours, however.

We have a jurisdiction (ROCOR) that wants to be another world-wide jurisdiction and will not submit to an already established autocephalous Church in countries where they now reside. Why? Power.

Since I have known many ROCOR folks and have read some of their history and arguments, I don't think the answer is that simple or that they have done what they have done for so base a reason.

We have Old Calendarist sects who claim that they are the "true" Church. Why? Arrogance.

Undoubtedly there are vagante and semi-vagante sects that claim that their tiny membership comprises the true Church.

It would be a tremendous mistake, however, to marginalize the Calendar controversy by chalking it up to mere arrogance and to label all Old Calendarists - who form the majority of the Orthodox, especially outside the USA - as fanatics.

As Orthodox, there is no consensus on a host of issues that the NCC and WCC are currently debating.

It would help if you had been a bit more specific here.

Just the same, I think the reason there is no consensus is because the ecumenists among the Orthodox tend to go along with the other members of the NCC and WCC, and many other Orthodox Christians oppose them.

Why is that?

It's because the joint statements issued by the committees and consulting groups of the NCC and the WCC are not Orthodox.

How could we sign on to or agree with them?

Just take a look at this from the WCC's famous BEM (Baptism, Eucharist, Ministry) statement of 1982, which urges all member churches to recognize each other's baptisms:

Through baptism, Christians are brought into union with Christ, with each other and with the Church at every time and place. Our common baptism, which unites us to Christ in faith, is thus a basic bond of unity. We are one people and are called to confess and serve one Lord in each place and in all the world.

How could the Orthodox Church sign on to such a statement (and that is only a small part of it)? It would amount to a denial that the Orthodox Church is the one and only Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

The fairly recent doctrine of "baptismal unity" is right out of Vatican II. It may have found its way into Latin theology by way of the backdoor of what began as Protestant ecumenism.

How can we have an effective witness if we ourselves don't agree on what's what? This is the danger. It is not ecumenical dialogue. It is our own hubris.

Hubris is what inspires some Orthodox theologians and hierarchs to engage in second-guessing the Fathers and compromising the faith by agreeing to these sorts of ecumencial joint statements.

In light of this, perhaps it is best to withdraw from organized dialogue.

I agree but for different reasons than the ones you give.

At least until we get our own affairs in order. Perhaps then, we can present Christ to the world.

The Orthodox Church presents Christ to the world by being true to the faith He imparted to His Apostles and they, through their successors, imparted to us.

The ecumenical movement is not about presenting Christ to the world.

Perhaps we can approach the NCC and WCC with humility.

We should approach the NCC and the WCC, if at all, with the knowledge that they are apostate organizations.

We should approach them from the outside with the message of repentance and faith.

This will not be possible, however, until we get over ourselves. I repeat, the danger facing the Church is not from the outside. It is not a watering down of the faith due to participation in ecumenical dialogue.

Oh, I very much disagree.

Ecumenists among the Orthodox do attempt to water down the faith in order to achieve a minimalist creed that offends no one and is acceptable to all.

Once again I have run out of time before I have said all I wanted to say.

Maybe later.

Anyway, read all of those articles. It's definitely worthwhile.

[Maximus]

It is our failures that are causing problems. It is our lack of staying true to the history of our Church that breeds these issues.

Although I think you mean something different by that than what I mean, I agree.

By continuing to participate in a movement founded on ecclesiological heresy, we have failed to present a clear witness to the world.

Our participation in the institutionalized ecumenical movement has led only to confusion and division.

It is our lack of unity that causes our witness to be "ineffective." We have to stop blaming others and take responsibility for ourselves. Perhaps we should indeed withdraw from organized ecumenical dialogue for the time being.

Our witness is not ineffective. The heterodox are being converted to Orthodoxy, but not through ecumenism.

Ecumenism is an ineffective force for good. Its effects have largely been evil.

We should get out of it.

Not because the dialogue has an adverse effect, but because we can't even dialogue with each other. How can we witness to the world?

Ecumenism is not about the kind of dialogue in which the Fathers engaged. They presented the unadulterated Gospel to the world without compromise and in no uncertain terms.

The Church is salvation, and it's time we start living what we pray. We pray for humility. We pray that our bishops may rightly divide the word of God's truth. We pray for unity. We pray for the welfare of the holy churches of God. But we do not act like it. There could be unity in this country if the heirarchs wanted it.

Bishops aren't the only ones who need to rightly divide the word of truth.

When we pray for the welfare of the holy churches of God, we are talking about Orthodox churches, which are the only real churches.

When we pray for unity, we are praying for the authentic unity of faith.

As St. John Chrysostom said, "When all believe alike, then unity exists" (Homily on Ephesians, 11.3, PG 62-85).

They don't. Many of us on this forum don't.

If you are talking about unity among the Orthodox, that is what we all want.

If you are talking about unity with Non-Chalcedonians and Latins that is not based upon their repentance and conversion to Orthodoxy, then you're right. We don't want it. We should not want it. It's not what our Lord would want.

There will never be an evangelizing of the world until we do. Because Christ is the unifier.

Christ is the unifier of those who have been truly baptized into Him, those who share the true and holy faith of His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

But our Lord is also the divider. He separates the true from the false, the sheep from the goats, the believers from the non-believers.

His cross stood between two other crosses. To His right hung the repentant thief. To His left, another thief reviled and mocked Him.

34"Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. 35For I have come to "set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law'; 36and "a man's enemies will be those of his own household.' 37He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. 38And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. 39He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it.(Matthew 10:34-39).

Christ has established the Church. It is bigger than man. It is not contained within the world of time and space. It itself contains time and space; the entire created order is found within the Church. The Church itself is the New Creation. Do we act like it? Do we really want the welfare of the holy churches of God, and the union of all? Or is that something to simply be said? Do we really want to love one another that with one mind we may confess Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the Trinity One in essence and unidivided?

Based on some of what you have posted in the past, Padraig, I think you mean something else by "the holy churches of God" and "the union of all" than some of the rest of us mean when we pray.

We pray for the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church when we say those things.

We pray that those outside of her will repent and be baptized for the remission of sins and into Christ and His Church. We don't pray that they remain in their heterodox sects until we negotiate a "union" based on something other than a common faith.

Let's start looking at the real problems here. Ecumenism is a false problem, a nonissue. Let us deal with our own affairs before looking outside for the root of our troubles.

Ecumenism is a real problem, not a "non-issue."

It has already caused confusion and division among the Orthodox. It gives heterodox Christians a false sense of security instead of letting them know their need of the one true faith.

The modern ecumenical movement was founded and continues to operate based upon an ecclesiological heresy.

We should have nothing to do with it.