Is Calvinism a heresy?

[Nagomirov]

Just as a historical footnote the Synod of Dositheus in the late 17th century, which is a local council and not ecumenical, did declare John Calvin an”heresiarch”, despite him not having been a member of the church. The occasion for the synod was the consecration of the Church of the Nativity in Jerusalem but the subject that prompted the bishops to have a synod were letters espousing certain Calvinist ideas allegedly written by the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Cyril Lukaris, who was later martyred by Sultan Murad IV.

Не только Собор в Иерусалиме Досифея, но и Собор в Константинополе, и Собор в Яссах (Ясский Собор), объявил кальвинизм ересью, осудил как ложное учение. Постановления этих Соборов имеют Всеправославный статус, мировое значение для всего православия, авторитет для всех православных, так как были приняты другими православными церквями, были приняты всеми православными церквями, включая Русскую. В греческом православии, осуждение кальвинизма было вызвано исповеданием Кирилла Лукариса, которое содержало в себе кальвинизм. Это потребовало с православной стороны осуждения, потребовало дать ответ. Православная Церковь осудила кальвинизм как ересь, а всех придерживающихся кальвинизма, предала анафеме.

Not only the Council in Jerusalem of Dositheus, but also the Council in Constantinople, and the Council in Iasi (Iasi Council), declared Calvinism a heresy and condemned it as a false teaching. The resolutions of these Councils have Pan-Orthodox status, global significance for all Orthodoxy, authority for all Orthodox, since they were accepted by other Orthodox churches, were accepted by all Orthodox churches, including the Russian. In Greek Orthodoxy, the condemnation of Calvinism was caused by the confession of Cyril Loukaris, which contained Calvinism. This required condemnation from the Orthodox side and demanded an answer. The Orthodox Church condemned Calvinism as a heresy, and anathematized all those who adhered to Calvinism.

 

[Nagomirov]

I agree with the CF.com Statement of Faith concerning the definition of Christianity, so I would not call Calvinism a heresy. Indeed I don’t think the Scriptures alone can either prove or disprove it.

Символические книги Православия осуждают кальвинизм как ересь (Православное Исповедание патриарха Досифея Нотары и Послание Восточных Патриархов). Эти тексты имеют мировое, вселенское значение для всего мирового Православия, так как были приняты всеми православными церквями. Имеют Всеправославный статус. Кальвинизм осужден на следующих Соборах: Константинополь (1633), Яссы (1642 ), Иерусалим (1672). Ясский Собор, проходивший в Яссах с 15 сентября по 27 октября 1642 года, был созван Константинопольским патрирхом Парфением I при поддержке Молдавского господаря Василия Лупу в целях противодействия распространению кальвинизма вследствие публикации «Исповедание веры» Кирилла Лукариса. Сами эти Соборы и их постановления, для всего мирового Православия, для всего вселенского Православия, имеют вероучительный авторитет, так как признаны всеми церквями, всеми патриархами, а в России синодом. Эти Соборы являются авторитетными для всех православных христиан, потому что были всеми приняты, а их документы являются Символическими книгами всего Православия!

The symbolic books of Orthodoxy condemn Calvinism as a heresy (Orthodox Confession of Patriarch Dositheus Notara and the Message of the Eastern Patriarchs). These texts have global, universal significance for the entire world Orthodoxy, since they were accepted by all Orthodox churches. They have Pan-Orthodox status. Calvinism was condemned at the following Councils: Constantinople (1633), Iasi (1642), Jerusalem (1672). The Council of Iasi, held in Iasi from September 15 to October 27, 1642, was convened by the Patriarch of Constantinople Parthenius I with the support of the Moldavian ruler Vasily Lupu in order to counter the spread of Calvinism due to the publication of the “Confession of Faith” by Cyril Lucaris. These Councils themselves and their decisions, for all world Orthodoxy, for all universal Orthodoxy, have doctrinal authority, since they are recognized by all churches, all patriarchs, and in Russia by the synod. These Councils are authoritative for all Orthodox Christians, because they were accepted by everyone, and their documents are Symbolic books of all Orthodoxy!

 

[Nagomirov]

I think there is a need for reconciliation between Calvinists and non-Calvinists, as there are saints in both sides of the divide.

I think the reconciliation lies in a mutual acknowledgement of God’s omniscience and His infinite love.

Надо отделять святых от их ошибок и следовать общему пониманию, в нашем с вами случае - православному пониманию. Следовать общему консенсусу Православия. Что касается Августина, его можно понимать через православное прочтение Ремигием Лионским. Ремигий Лионский защищал православное учение от уклона последователей крайнего августинизма. Ну и повторюсь, что святых надо отделять от их ошибок. Ведь мы не признаем же апокатастасис Григория Нисского. Так и с Августином должно быть. Кроме того, многие воспринимают почему то Августина через призму Жанра Кальвина, но почему то не воспринимают через призму: Проспера Аквинтанского, Ремигия Лионского, Фульгенция Руспийского, Фавста Регийского. Они смягчали радикальный августинизм.

We must separate the saints from their mistakes and follow the common understanding, in our case - the Orthodox understanding. Follow the general consensus of Orthodoxy. As for Augustine, he can be understood through the Orthodox reading by Remigius of Lyons. Remigius of Lyon defended Orthodox teaching from the deviation of followers of extreme Augustinianism. Well, I repeat that the saints must be separated from their mistakes. After all, we do not recognize the apokatastasis of Gregory of Nyssa. So it must be with Augustine. In addition, for some reason many perceive Augustine through the prism of the Genre of Calvin, but for some reason they do not perceive through the prism of: Prosper of Aquintanus, Remigius of Lyons, Fulgentius of Ruspia, Faustus of Regius. They softened radical Augustinianism.

 

[Nagomirov]

Филарет Черниговский († 1866) говорит, что учение Фульгентия о благодати и предопределении является адекватной с точки зрения православного учения интерпретацией августинизма.

Philaret of Chernigov († 1866) says that Fulgentius’s teaching on grace and predestination is an adequate interpretation of Augustinianism from the point of view of Orthodox teaching.

 

[Nagomirov]

Анафематизмы святого Фавста Регийского на Арльском Соборе против предестинационизма:

Из послания св. Фавста Регийского пресвитеру Люциду. Послание, помимо автора, подписано девятью епископами-участниками Арелатского (Арльского) собора (состоялся в Орле между 470 и 475 годами):

Анафема тому, кто утверждает, что человек, который торжественно принял крещение с верным исповеданием и провозгласил кафолическую веру, а после через различные услаждения и искушения мира сего пал, погибает в адамовом и первородном грехе.

Анафема тому, кто скажет, что через предвидение Божие человек приклоняется к смерти (per day praescientia hominem deprimi in mortem dixerit).

Анафема говорящему, что тот, кто погиб, не получил того, чем он мог спастись.

Анафема тому, кто скажет, что сосуд гнева не может возвыситься до сосуда чести.

Анафема тому, кто скажет, что Христос умер не за всех, и что Он не хочет, чтобы были спасены все люди.

Отрывок из послания св. Фавста пресвитеру Люциду, следующий за анафематизмами, в котором он говорит о соотношении благодати и свободной воли:

«Мы же, через просвещение Христово, правдиво и уверенно утверждаем, что тот, кто погиб через преступление, мог бы спастись через благодать, если бы не отверг послушание этой благодати, состоящее в труде раба [Господнего], а также утверждаем, что тот, кто через благодать путём послушания пришёл к благому завершению жизни, может пасть через праздность и погибнуть через преступление (ср. Евр. 3: 6,14; 2 Пет. 2: 20, – Р.Б.). Итак, идя средним путём под водительством Христовым, мы утверждаем после благодати, без которой мы ничто, необходимость упорного труда. Но мы полностью исключаем высокомерие и самонадеянность дел и, хотя и прилагаем все усилия к тому, чтобы благодать Его в нас не была напрасной (ср. 1 Кор. 15:10, – Р.Б.), всё, что мы получили от руки Господней, объявляем даром, а не вознаграждением, зная, что плод самого труда - [наша] обязанность, говоря вместе с евангелистом: "Мы рабы ничего не стоящие, потому что сделали, что должны были сделать" (Лк.17:10)».

Отрывок из ответного послания пресвитера Люцида отцам собора, в котором он пересказывает содержание шести анафематизмов:

«Осуждаю вместе с вами мнение, что после падения первого человека свобода воли полностью иссякла (умерла, угасла) (post primi hominis lapsum ex toto arbitrium voluntatis extinctum). Осуждаю вместе с вами мнение, что Христос и Спаситель наш принял смерть не ради спасения всех (non pro omnium salute). Осуждаю вместе с вами мнение, что предвидение Божие насильственно доводит человека до смерти, или что те, кто погибают, погибают по воле Божией. Осуждаю вместе с вами мнение, что все, кто согрешили после законно принятого крещения, умирают в Адаме. Осуждаю вместе с вами мнение, что есть одни, предназначенные к смерти, и есть другие, предопределённые к жизни (alios deputatos ad mortem, alios ad vitam praedestinatos)».

 

[Nagomirov]

Anathematisms of Saint Faustus of Regia at the Council of Arles against pre-destinationism:

From the message of St. Faustus of Rhegia to the presbyter Lucidus. The message, in addition to the author, was signed by nine bishops participating in the Council of Arelat (Arles) (held in Orel between 470 and 475):

Anathema to the one who claims that a person who solemnly accepted baptism with a faithful confession and proclaimed the Catholic faith, and then fell through various pleasures and temptations of this world, perishes in Adamic and original sin.

Anathema to the one who says that through the foreknowledge of God man bows to death (per day praescientia hominem deprimi in mortem dixerit).

Anathema to the one who says that the one who died did not receive what he could have saved.

Anathema to the one who says that a vessel of wrath cannot rise to a vessel of honor.

Anathema to the one who says that Christ did not die for everyone, and that He does not want all people to be saved.

An excerpt from the message of St. Faustus to the presbyter Lucidus, following the anathematisms, in which he speaks of the relationship between grace and free will:

“But we, through the enlightenment of Christ, truthfully and confidently affirm that he who perished through a crime could have been saved through grace, if he had not rejected the obedience of this grace, which consists in the work of a servant [of the Lord], and we also affirm that he whoever through grace and obedience has come to a good end of life can fall through idleness and perish through crime (cf. Heb. 3:6,14; 2 Pet. 2:20, - R.B.). So, walking the middle path under the leadership of Christ, we affirm, after grace, without which we are nothing, the need for hard work. But we completely exclude arrogance and presumption of works and, although we make every effort to ensure that His grace in us is not in vain (cf. 1 Cor. 15:10, - R.B.), everything that we have received from His hand The Lord, we declare it a gift, and not a reward, knowing that the fruit of the labor itself is [our] duty, saying with the evangelist: “We are worthless servants, because we have done what we had to do” (Luke 17:10).”

An excerpt from the response letter of Presbyter Lucid to the fathers of the council, in which he retells the content of the six anathematisms:

“I condemn with you the opinion that after the fall of the first man free will completely dried up (died, faded away) (post primi hominis lapsum ex toto arbitrium voluntatis extinctum). I condemn with you the opinion that Christ and our Savior did not die for the salvation of all (non pro omnium salute). I condemn with you the opinion that God’s foreknowledge forcibly brings a person to death, or that those who perish perish by the will of God. I condemn with you the opinion that all who sin after lawfully received baptism die in Adam. I condemn with you the opinion that there are some destined for death and others predestined for life (alios deputatos ad mortem, alios ad vitam praedestinatos).”

Сохраненные
Предложить перевод

 

[Nagomirov]

Just as a historical footnote the Synod of Dositheus in the late 17th century, which is a local council and not ecumenical, did declare John Calvin an”heresiarch”, despite him not having been a member of the church. The occasion for the synod was the consecration of the Church of the Nativity in Jerusalem but the subject that prompted the bishops to have a synod were letters espousing certain Calvinist ideas allegedly written by the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Cyril Lukaris, who was later martyred by Sultan Murad IV.

Эти Соборы стали называться Всеправославными, для православных христиан, они имеют статус равный Вселенским Соборам. Кроме того они были всеми приняты.

These Councils began to be called Pan-Orthodox; for Orthodox Christians, they have a status equal to the Ecumenical Councils. Moreover, they were accepted by everyone.

 

[Nagomirov]

Just as a historical footnote the Synod of Dositheus in the late 17th century, which is a local council and not ecumenical, did declare John Calvin an”heresiarch”, despite him not having been a member of the church. The occasion for the synod was the consecration of the Church of the Nativity in Jerusalem but the subject that prompted the bishops to have a synod were letters espousing certain Calvinist ideas allegedly written by the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Cyril Lukaris, who was later martyred by Sultan Murad IV.

Православная Энциклопедия сообщает:

Так, Кирилл Лукарис порицается за то, что хранил молчание после публикации «Исповедания веры», несмотря на те волнения, которые оно произвело в Церкви, и многочисленные просьбы дать письменное опровержение. Поэтому он не свободен от обвинений в церковном обмане и предательстве, и Собор не порицает решение Константинопольского Собора 1638 г., анафематствовавшего самого Кирилла Лукариса, а не только его «Исповедание веры».

Уверенность в тайном кальвинизме Кирилла Лукариса демонстрировал впоследствии и патриарх Досифей Нотара, автор текста актов Иерусалимского Собора 1672 г., в своих поздних сочинениях (например, «Меч на Иоанна Кариофилла»). Патриарх Досифей пишет, что, хотя Кирилл Лукарис и умер православным в общении с Церковью, «он был тайным еретиком, что ясно из множества сокрытых и неофициальных свидетельств».

Переписка Кирилла Лукариса, в которой он подтверждал свое авторство «Исповедания веры», и сличение автографа «Исповедания веры» с его письмами не оставили сомнения в том, что подлинным автором является сам Кирилл Лукарис. Однако вплоть до XX века подавляющая часть греческих и русских ученых отрицала подлинность «Исповедания» (напр.: Малышевский. 1872. Т. 1. С. 569-571; Арсений (Брянцев). 1881. С. 204-206; Малахов В. Я. Пресуществление Святых Даров в таинстве Евхаристии // БВ. 1898. Т. 2. No 6. С. 315; исключением является А.. Лебедев, который был знаком с зап. научной лит-рой, см.: Лебедев. 2004. Т. 2. С. 211-220; см. также: Михаэлидис Г.. Греческая православная позиция по поводу исповедания Кирилла Лукариса // История Церкви. 1943. Т. 12(2). P. 118-129), следствием чего стала канонизация Кирилла Лукариса в 2009 г. Александрийским Патриархатом.

The Orthodox Encyclopedia reports:

Thus, Cyril Lukaris is condemned for remaining silent after the publication of the Confession of Faith, despite the unrest that it caused in the Church and numerous requests for a written refutation. Therefore, he is not free from accusations of church deception and betrayal, and the Council does not condemn the decision of the Council of Constantinople in 1638, which anathematized Cyril Lucaris himself, and not just his Confession of Faith.

Confidence in the secret Calvinism of Cyril Lucaris was subsequently demonstrated by Patriarch Dositheos Notara, the author of the text of the acts of the Jerusalem Council of 1672, in his later works (for example, “The Sword on John Caryophyllus”). Patriarch Dosifei writes that although Cyril Loukaris died Orthodox in communion with the Church, “he was a secret heretic, which is clear from many hidden and unofficial evidence.”

The correspondence of Kirill Lukaris, in which he confirmed his authorship of the Confession of Faith, and the comparison of the autograph of the Confession of Faith with his letters left no doubt that the true author is Kirill Loukaris himself. However, until the 20th century, the overwhelming majority of Greek and Russian scientists denied the authenticity of the “Confession” (for example: Malyshevsky. 1872. T. 1. P. 569-571; Arseny (Bryantsev). 1881. P. 204-206; Malakhov V. I. Transubstantiation of the Holy Gifts in the Sacrament of the Eucharist // BV. 1898. T. 2. No. 6. P. 315; the exception is A. Lebedev, who was familiar with Western scientific literature, see: Lebedev. 2004. T. 2. P. 211-220; see also: Michaelides G.. The Greek Orthodox position regarding the confession of Cyril Loukaris // History of the Church. 1943. T. 12(2). P. 118-129, the consequence of which was canonization of Kirill Loukaris in 2009 by the Patriarchate of Alexandria.

 

[Nagomirov]

I do believe that Calvinism is a human made doctrine due to missing the big picture of what the Bible is trying to say. It's full of holes, but I don't consider that heretic though, as heresy to me means twisting the biblical meaning such that those who believe the doctrine won't be able to be saved. If Calvinsim is heretic, Calvinists won't be saved, which I disagree.

Кальвинизм делает Бога автором грехопадения, потому что согласно кальвинизму, Бог постановил свершиться грехопадению, это Его декрет. Не на основе предвидения свободной воли людей, а на основе суверенной Своей воли, Бог постановляет происходить вещам, постановляет декреты. Так учит кальвинизм.

Calvinism makes God the author of the fall, because according to Calvinism, God decreed the fall to happen, this is His decree. Not on the basis of the foresight of the free will of people, but on the basis of His sovereign will, God decides things to happen, decides decrees. That's what Calvinism teaches.

 

[Nagomirov]

In Greek Orthodoxy, the doctrine of free will is built on the Eastern Fathers: Macarius of Egypt, John Chrysostom, the Great Cappadocians, Proclus of Constantinople, John of Damascus, Maximus the Confessor. But we must take into account that Greek Orthodoxy teaches prevenient grace, which is also called calling, enlightening.

In Greek Orthodoxy, the doctrine of free will is based on the Eastern Fathers: Macarius of Egypt, John Chrysostom, the Great Cappadocians, Proclus of Constantinople, John of Damascus, Maximus the Confessor. But we must take into account that Greek Orthodoxy teaches anticipatory grace, it is also called inviting, enlightening.

 

[Nagomirov]

"It should be borne in mind that God foresees everything, but does not predetermine everything. Thus, He foresees what is in our power, but does not predetermine it; for He does not want vice to appear, but He does not force us to virtue. Thus, predestination is a matter of Divine command based on foreknowledge".

Saint John of Damascus. An accurate statement of the Orthodox faith

 

[The Liturgist]

Надо отделять святых от их ошибок и следовать общему пониманию, в нашем с вами случае - православному пониманию. Следовать общему консенсусу Православия. Что касается Августина, его можно понимать через православное прочтение Ремигием Лионским. Ремигий Лионский защищал православное учение от уклона последователей крайнего августинизма. Ну и повторюсь, что святых надо отделять от их ошибок. Ведь мы не признаем же апокатастасис Григория Нисского. Так и с Августином должно быть. Кроме того, многие воспринимают почему то Августина через призму Жанра Кальвина, но почему то не воспринимают через призму: Проспера Аквинтанского, Ремигия Лионского, Фульгенция Руспийского, Фавста Регийского. Они смягчали радикальный августинизм.

We must separate the saints from their mistakes and follow the common understanding, in our case - the Orthodox understanding. Follow the general consensus of Orthodoxy. As for Augustine, he can be understood through the Orthodox reading by Remigius of Lyons. Remigius of Lyon defended Orthodox teaching from the deviation of followers of extreme Augustinianism. Well, I repeat that the saints must be separated from their mistakes. After all, we do not recognize the apokatastasis of Gregory of Nyssa. So it must be with Augustine. In addition, for some reason many perceive Augustine through the prism of the Genre of Calvin, but for some reason they do not perceive through the prism of: Prosper of Aquintanus, Remigius of Lyons, Fulgentius of Ruspia, Faustus of Regius. They softened radical Augustinianism.

Indeed, and I do believe St. Augustine should be venerated. Its mainly extreme Old Calendarist schismatics who are opposed to it in my experience.

 

[The Liturgist]

"It should be borne in mind that God foresees everything, but does not predetermine everything. Thus, He foresees what is in our power, but does not predetermine it; for He does not want vice to appear, but He does not force us to virtue. Thus, predestination is a matter of Divine command based on foreknowledge".

Saint John of Damascus. An accurate statement of the Orthodox faith

Indeed, and this is my faith as well. Unfortunately, some Calvinists go from this to predestination, to the extent that they make God responsible for sin, which is the danger of monergism.

 

[The Liturgist]

Православная Энциклопедия сообщает:

Так, Кирилл Лукарис порицается за то, что хранил молчание после публикации «Исповедания веры», несмотря на те волнения, которые оно произвело в Церкви, и многочисленные просьбы дать письменное опровержение. Поэтому он не свободен от обвинений в церковном обмане и предательстве, и Собор не порицает решение Константинопольского Собора 1638 г., анафематствовавшего самого Кирилла Лукариса, а не только его «Исповедание веры».

Уверенность в тайном кальвинизме Кирилла Лукариса демонстрировал впоследствии и патриарх Досифей Нотара, автор текста актов Иерусалимского Собора 1672 г., в своих поздних сочинениях (например, «Меч на Иоанна Кариофилла»). Патриарх Досифей пишет, что, хотя Кирилл Лукарис и умер православным в общении с Церковью, «он был тайным еретиком, что ясно из множества сокрытых и неофициальных свидетельств».

Переписка Кирилла Лукариса, в которой он подтверждал свое авторство «Исповедания веры», и сличение автографа «Исповедания веры» с его письмами не оставили сомнения в том, что подлинным автором является сам Кирилл Лукарис. Однако вплоть до XX века подавляющая часть греческих и русских ученых отрицала подлинность «Исповедания» (напр.: Малышевский. 1872. Т. 1. С. 569-571; Арсений (Брянцев). 1881. С. 204-206; Малахов В. Я. Пресуществление Святых Даров в таинстве Евхаристии // БВ. 1898. Т. 2. No 6. С. 315; исключением является А.. Лебедев, который был знаком с зап. научной лит-рой, см.: Лебедев. 2004. Т. 2. С. 211-220; см. также: Михаэлидис Г.. Греческая православная позиция по поводу исповедания Кирилла Лукариса // История Церкви. 1943. Т. 12(2). P. 118-129), следствием чего стала канонизация Кирилла Лукариса в 2009 г. Александрийским Патриархатом.

The Orthodox Encyclopedia reports:

Thus, Cyril Lukaris is condemned for remaining silent after the publication of the Confession of Faith, despite the unrest that it caused in the Church and numerous requests for a written refutation. Therefore, he is not free from accusations of church deception and betrayal, and the Council does not condemn the decision of the Council of Constantinople in 1638, which anathematized Cyril Lucaris himself, and not just his Confession of Faith.

Confidence in the secret Calvinism of Cyril Lucaris was subsequently demonstrated by Patriarch Dositheos Notara, the author of the text of the acts of the Jerusalem Council of 1672, in his later works (for example, “The Sword on John Caryophyllus”). Patriarch Dosifei writes that although Cyril Loukaris died Orthodox in communion with the Church, “he was a secret heretic, which is clear from many hidden and unofficial evidence.”

The correspondence of Kirill Lukaris, in which he confirmed his authorship of the Confession of Faith, and the comparison of the autograph of the Confession of Faith with his letters left no doubt that the true author is Kirill Loukaris himself. However, until the 20th century, the overwhelming majority of Greek and Russian scientists denied the authenticity of the “Confession” (for example: Malyshevsky. 1872. T. 1. P. 569-571; Arseny (Bryantsev). 1881. P. 204-206; Malakhov V. I. Transubstantiation of the Holy Gifts in the Sacrament of the Eucharist // BV. 1898. T. 2. No. 6. P. 315; the exception is A. Lebedev, who was familiar with Western scientific literature, see: Lebedev. 2004. T. 2. P. 211-220; see also: Michaelides G.. The Greek Orthodox position regarding the confession of Cyril Loukaris // History of the Church. 1943. T. 12(2). P. 118-129, the consequence of which was canonization of Kirill Loukaris in 2009 by the Patriarchate of Alexandria.

Which Orthodox Encyclopedia? We have to be careful not to make the mistakes made by those who quote the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia as though it were an official dogmatic statement of the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[Nagomirov]

Which Orthodox Encyclopedia? We have to be careful not to make the mistakes made by those who quote the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia as though it were an official dogmatic statement of the Roman Catholic Church.

Orthodox Encyclopedia - Wikipedia

 

[Nagomirov]

Which Orthodox Encyclopedia? We have to be careful not to make the mistakes made by those who quote the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia as though it were an official dogmatic statement of the Roman Catholic Church.

We have our own Orthodox Encyclopedia published in Russia by the Moscow Patriarchate, many volumes, and in electronic form there is a website for the Orthodox Encyclopedia. I know a person who is the author of some articles in this encyclopedia, he has two higher educations - the first is in classical philology (ancient Greek, Latin), he graduated from Lomonosov Moscow State University. And the second education is theological. Now he is defending his Ph.D. thesis and is a teacher at the Orthodox St. Tikhon's University for the Humanities.

 

[Nagomirov]

Which Orthodox Encyclopedia? We have to be careful not to make the mistakes made by those who quote the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia as though it were an official dogmatic statement of the Roman Catholic Church.

Patriarch Dositheus Notara wrote in his later writings that Cyril Loukaris was a secret heretic. The solution for us is that the Council of Jerusalem, chaired by Dositheus, will help us resolve this issue. This Council dropped the charges against Lucaris. They did this so as not to disgrace the honor of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, in order to protect the honor of the patriarchal throne. But Dositheus Notara does not deny the fact that Lucarius was a secret heretic. Dosifei writes about this in his later works. We can calm down because the Church dropped the charges against him, but she did this for the honor of the patriarchal throne, so that there would be no shame, and not because Lucaris was not a heretic.

 

[The Liturgist]

Orthodox Encyclopedia - Wikipedia

Well I wish they would translate that into English. Right now the most encyclopedic works we have are certain books on liturgical theology by Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev of Budapest, the former director of External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, and also Orthodox Dogmatic Theology by the late Protopresbyter Michael Pomazansky of ROCOR, which was translated into English by blessed Fr. Seraphim Rose. And then providing a very general overview of the history of the Orthodox Church is The Orthodox Church by Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, memory eternal.

By the way, I do not speak Russian or Church Slavonic, although I can understand a fair amount of Church Slavonic used in the liturgy, such as “Gospodi Pomuli” (which is rather obvious, but you get my point, I hope); you recently made some posts in Russian that you did not translate, and I was hoping you might do that for me.

The free version of Chat GPT, ChatGPT 3.5, does translate from Russian and Church Slavonic, but it really helps if you have at least some knowledge of the language you are translating into as occasionally it makes a mistake.

 

[The Liturgist]

Patriarch Dositheus Notara wrote in his later writings that Cyril Loukaris was a secret heretic. The solution for us is that the Council of Jerusalem, chaired by Dositheus, will help us resolve this issue. This Council dropped the charges against Lucaris. They did this so as not to disgrace the honor of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, in order to protect the honor of the patriarchal throne. But Dositheus Notara does not deny the fact that Lucarius was a secret heretic. Dosifei writes about this in his later works. We can calm down because the Church dropped the charges against him, but she did this for the honor of the patriarchal throne, so that there would be no shame, and not because Lucaris was not a heretic.

That is useful to know.

 

[Nagomirov]

Well I wish they would translate that into English. Right now the most encyclopedic works we have are certain books on liturgical theology by Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev of Budapest, the former director of External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, and also Orthodox Dogmatic Theology by the late Protopresbyter Michael Pomazansky of ROCOR, which was translated into English by blessed Fr. Seraphim Rose. And then providing a very general overview of the history of the Orthodox Church is The Orthodox Church by Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, memory eternal.

By the way, I do not speak Russian or Church Slavonic, although I can understand a fair amount of Church Slavonic used in the liturgy, such as “Gospodi Pomuli” (which is rather obvious, but you get my point, I hope); you recently made some posts in Russian that you did not translate, and I was hoping you might do that for me.

The free version of Chat GPT, ChatGPT 3.5, does translate from Russian and Church Slavonic, but it really helps if you have at least some knowledge of the language you are translating into as occasionally it makes a mistake.

You will not be mistaken if you find in bookstores the works of the Holy Fathers in English, including the Eastern ones; Their works, by the way, are especially worth purchasing. You can also find the Acts of the Ecumenical Councils in English with the commentary of Nicodemus (Milash) or with the interpretation of Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain. Find at least the Acts of the Ecumenical Councils with interpretations: Balsamon, Zonaras, Aristan. As for dogmatic theology, find the book of Metropolitan Macarius (Bulgakov), the complete catechism of Philaret (Drozdov). I don’t know English either, but my Windows operating system is automatically translated into Russian, and it translates perfectly.