(RISU) - Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople expressed confidence that the long-expected All-Orthodox Council will be held soon. According to him, in the beginning of 2011, the penultimate meeting of the preparatory committee will probably be held in the patriarchal center of the Constantinople Patriarchate in Geneva. "and it will become a great event," stressed Bartholomew I.
"The Faith is alive and Orthodoxy is alive. Orthodoxy will live and the Holy and Great Council, the preparation of which is coming to the end, will be held," stated the Patriarch of Constantinople
Patriarch Bartholomew noted that the All-Orthodox Council is not only long-expected and needed by the world Orthodoxy but also for the relations between Orthodoxy and other Christian Churches and confessions.
Information:
The last, 7th Ecumenical Council was held in Nice in 787, that is 1212 years ago under Empress Irene. It was attended by 367 fathers and is also known as the "Triumph of Orthodoxy."
Thursday, September 2, 2010
All-Orthodox Council update
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Which Royal House will be represented in Geneva? The Greek? The Russian? The Romanian? Do the Bulgarians or Serbians have a Royal House remaining? Will all the Royal Houses attend?
ReplyDeleteWill Pope Benedict XVI be invited as an observer?
Enquiring minds want to know!
Is the usage of penultimate a translator's error?
ReplyDeleteAnd, very interesting, thank you.
Matthew: I expect Rome will get some observers as will the Oriental Orthodox and Armenians.
ReplyDeleteMimi: Nope. It's the next to last meeting. The last one being the meeting itself.
Ah, that makes sense.
ReplyDeleteMatthew,
ReplyDeleteAll of the countries you names still have royal houses. None alas have a reigning Orthodox monarch. Of those named the Serbians are probably the closest to a reigning house. They are held in extremely high regard in Serbia and Crown Prince Alexander is widely seen as the de-facto head of state. There is widespread support for a restoration of the monarchy in Serbia (on a constitutional basis of course).
As for the other countries, they all have their pretenders and monarchist supporters. (In Russia's case there is disagreement over who is the legitimate heir.) But only in Serbia, at least for now, does their appear a reasonable chance of an actual restoration.
In ICXC
John
Note to self: Proofread before posting!
ReplyDeleteThe last council of Oecumenical status was held in the 14th c. -the Palamite Synods are collectively considered Oecumenical.
ReplyDeleteSo it is untrue that the last Orthodox Universal Council was held in 787.
Bradley,
ReplyDeleteWhile I am inclined to credit the Palamite councils (as also the eighth) as OEcumenical, that is not a universally accepted position within Orthodoxy. I think it would be more accurate to say that they were church councils whose decisions have gained more or less universal acceptance. That may be splitting some hairs, but they are important hairs. It's not OEcumenical until the entire Church says it is.
In ICXC
John
John,
ReplyDeleteYou are right...the Church has never on a universal level assigned a particular designator of "8th" or "9th" to the 14th c. Palamite Synods. However, inasmuch as the Sunday of St.Gregory Palamas is celebrated and proclaimed in every Orthodox church in the world during Great Lent (save a few Western Rite churches perhaps), and inasmuch as the Pro-Palamite Essence/Energy decrees & teachings are universally part of the canonical tradition, service books, catechisms, Saints' Lives, etc..., the Pro-Palamite Synod's decrees are universally binding on every Orthodox Christian. The Pro-Palamite Council itself undersood that it was proclaiming something universally binding, and it was received as such by the rest of the Church(as evidenced by the feast celebrated on the 2nd Sunday of Lent and other things).
But you are right in that the Church hasn't officially or universally assigned a particular number to the Council -hence my careful wording: "of OEcumenical status."
That the Pro-Palamite Councils and its decrees are collectively "of OEcumenical status" -I have never heard a bishop or group of bishops openly deny or actively teach against. I have only ever seen them proclaim through their actions and words that the Palamite Essence/Energy distinction (and man's participation in the uncreated energies) is universal dogma. I think it's even part of the long confession of faith that bishop's give just before their consecration.
ReplyDeleteI certainly don't think you'd disagree with my main point, but just to clarify, here's why I think it's important that we Orthodox avoid the misleading statement: that "the last" Ecumenical Council was held in 787...
This tends to be put forward, especially by Roman Church apologists, as meaning that the Orthodox have never spoken authoritatively or on a universal level for over 1200 years. Without doing their homework they tend to think that when we speak of "the great 7 Oecumenical Councils" we are saying that we've had nothing further. A well-known and respected Orthodox priest once told me the following:
We Orthodox reserve a special veneration for the great 7 Trinitarian and Christological Councils of the Church. The liturgical tradition certainly proclaims over and over "the great and holy seven." They hold a special and irreversable place as the "seven pillars of the Church"-the dogmatic foundations of the Church. Of course, the number seven also holds biblical and patristic symbolic importance as well. Thus, we proclaim the "7 Councils" but this does not mean that we don't also recognize the Palamite Synod as Oecumenically binding or as a universal council itself.
I've found that even RC and Western collections of the councils in general also assign a special place for "the first seven"...In patristic and conciliar collections there is usually a volume set aside for the "Seven Ecumenical Councils."
Anyway, I just think that the historical information that often accompanies news of this coming All-Orthodox Council contains misleading wording when it comes to this issue. I do think the proper identifier for the coming council is indeed "All-Orthodox Council" or simply "World-wide Orthodox Council", but some articles will even tell you that "the Orthodox haven't had an 'All-Orthodox' Council since 787..." -this is certainly completely misleading and false.
Brother John, I don't mean to comment so much on this, but it's an issue close to my heart...
ReplyDeleteI've come across multiple Church decrees that seem to confirm what that priest told me as explained in my last comment; and here's the most important one from the "symbolic books":
Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs, 1848, to Pius IX:
(many times we see the four Patriarchs say "the seven great and holy Ecumenical Councils" in the document but we also find references like the following...)
5.xi. "It [the filioque] was subjected to anathema, as a novelty and augmentation of the Creed, by the eighth Ecumenical Council, congregated at Constantinople for the pacification of the Eastern and Western Churches."
and later in the next paragraph:
"...by his letter to the holy Photius at the eighth Ecumenical Council."
-It seems that while they acknowledged that there are "seven great and holy Ecumencial Councils," this did not hinder them from speaking of further Ecumenical Councils in other areas of the document as well. This encyclical was also signed by many members of these patriarchal synods as well.
So it seems perfectly acceptable to speak of "7 Ecumenical Councils" while acknowledging the Oecumenical status of the pro-Palamite Council. But once again, I acknowledge that what the Church has not universally defined is the precise enumeration.