I was thinking that maybe, just maybe the political/tactical considerations would overide the hubris...nope.
Like I have said, the next REAL "Great and Holy Council" will be identifiable because it will address this anachronistic EPcate (probably by dissolving it, or at least demoting it to it's rightful place as a tiny local church with too many bishops) and other REAL issues.
This interview that Dn John gives in Greek is of interest, as he unpacks some of his thinking on "binding..." a little bit more than in his English-language statements.
"Nowhere in the rules does it say that a church's absence affects the Council's being convened. It is very important to refer to official documents with precision.
The rules say that the Great and Holy Synod may be called by His All-Holiness with the consent of all the Orthodox Churches, which is precisely what happened in Geneva last January, when all the Orthodox Churches were present at the Synaxis of Primates and they reiterated, reaffirmed and jointly decided to hold the Council at the upcoming Feast of Pentecost. [This is factually incorrect; Antioch did not agree to this.]
I am also puzzled at the way that some people are referring to the concept of unanimity. There is no mention in the rules about a Council or its decisions being invalid if a church cannot attend.
In fact, when a certain church [almost certainly Antioch] tried to include this kind of language at the same synaxis, it was met with overwhelming rejection by all the churches, including that of Russia.
The Great and Holy Council can even not have a quorum, but I find it very difficult not to call it "Panorthodox" because in this case it was preceded by a Panorthodox decision to hold the meeting and the Churches' consent to their participation in it.
Unfortunately, for some reason, a few churches have decided at the last minute that they cannot attend. Nevertheless, this does not alter the validity of the Council or of its decisions. Moreover, the Council is certainly a "Great Council" because it is undoubtedly more official than any separate, local council. Honestly, I cannot understand how some people panic when they hear about the binding nature of the Council and of its decisions."
This is sadly part of a very common occurrence in Kosovo. Vandals enter churches, set them on fire, then they urinate and defecate in them. ...
"The World is trying the experiment of attempting to form a civilized but non-Christian mentality. The experiment will fail; but we must be very patient in awaiting its collapse; meanwhile redeeming the time: so that the Faith may be preserved alive through the dark ages before us; to renew and rebuild civilization, and save the World from suicide."
hmm...
ReplyDeleteI was thinking that maybe, just maybe the political/tactical considerations would overide the hubris...nope.
Like I have said, the next REAL "Great and Holy Council" will be identifiable because it will address this anachronistic EPcate (probably by dissolving it, or at least demoting it to it's rightful place as a tiny local church with too many bishops) and other REAL issues.
Well said.
ReplyDeleteThis interview that Dn John gives in Greek is of interest, as he unpacks some of his thinking on "binding..." a little bit more than in his English-language statements.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.romfea.gr/epikairotita-xronika/8905-i-agia-sunodos-tha-einai-i-megaluteri-sugkentrosi-tis-orthodojis-ekklisias
Can you expand for those who aren't Greek speaking?
ReplyDelete"Nowhere in the rules does it say that a church's absence affects the Council's being convened. It is very important to refer to official documents with precision.
ReplyDeleteThe rules say that the Great and Holy Synod may be called by His All-Holiness with the consent of all the Orthodox Churches, which is precisely what happened in Geneva last January, when all the Orthodox Churches were present at the Synaxis of Primates and they reiterated, reaffirmed and jointly decided to hold the Council at the upcoming Feast of Pentecost. [This is factually incorrect; Antioch did not agree to this.]
I am also puzzled at the way that some people are referring to the concept of unanimity. There is no mention in the rules about a Council or its decisions being invalid if a church cannot attend.
In fact, when a certain church [almost certainly Antioch] tried to include this kind of language at the same synaxis, it was met with overwhelming rejection by all the churches, including that of Russia.
The Great and Holy Council can even not have a quorum, but I find it very difficult not to call it "Panorthodox" because in this case it was preceded by a Panorthodox decision to hold the meeting and the Churches' consent to their participation in it.
Unfortunately, for some reason, a few churches have decided at the last minute that they cannot attend. Nevertheless, this does not alter the validity of the Council or of its decisions. Moreover, the Council is certainly a "Great Council" because it is undoubtedly more official than any separate, local council. Honestly, I cannot understand how some people panic when they hear about the binding nature of the Council and of its decisions."
Thank you
ReplyDelete