With the creation of the Orthodox Church in Ukraine by the Ecumenical Patriarch...
 |
- Patriarch Kirill of Moscow does not commemorate the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople
- Met. Epiphaniy of Kyiv does not commemorate Patriarch Kirill of Moscow
- Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople commemorates Met. Epiphaniy of Kyiv in Constantinople and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow
Posts
And remember, Moscow creating Orthodox Church in America good regardless of the EP's opposition while EP creating Orthodox Church in Ukraine despite Moscow's opposition bad.
ReplyDeleteRemember, too, it' important to damn the majority of Orthodox in Ukraine because they are nasty nationalistic heretics (and gay Uniate Nazis, too!) who won't submit.
It's funny you bring up OCA. One of the main objections to the OCA's autocephaly, coming from the EP, was that granting autocephaly to any church affects the entire communion, so it must be done in close consultation with the other churches and can only be finally approved at an ecumenical council.
DeleteThe OCA is hardly the same thing. The OCA is considered an Autonomous part of the Russian Church by most Orthodox Churches (that is those that do not recognize the Autocephaly). The OCA was also not formed out of schism and in fact approached the EP but was told to reconcile with Moscow which she did. Oh, and no one was running around in the pre OCA calling themselves a Patriarch, but I digress.
DeleteThe adventure in the Ukraine is a disaster.
If Moscow granted autocephaly to the GOA, you might have an analogy.
Delete:)
DeleteInteresting no one is addressing the supposed ina ccuracy of the EP's claims it never ceded formal responsibility for Ukraine. "It's Russia's", is simply asserted, "it's obvious, and unqueationable!" I think that's telling.
DeleteBecause conveniently finding a loophole to claim take-backsies after a couple centuries is on the face of it silly. It's also one of the factors that will make other churches very hesitant to recognize the new entity- no one wants this to become precedent.
DeleteIf a bishop concelebrates with a heretic they get deposed...same applies to schismatics, so when EPB concelebrates with Epiphaniy in a bit here, we’re going to be due for a council to do some deposing; but with EPB and Moscow not talking to each other, not sure how you get anyone to agree to show up...not good for anyone.
ReplyDeleteWell, the Ecumenical Patriarch has concelebrated with the Pope in the past. They stopped short of communing together, but nonetheless it was a service. I don't recall Moscow or anybody else protesting that. Yet we slam the Greek Old Calendarists as being outside the church. But the Pope apparently isn't.
DeleteThey havn’t concelebrated to my knowledge in the past, just attended each others church services and given eachother the kiss of peace. But you are definately right that EPB is getting way too close for comfort with the Pope of Rome.
DeleteYou're in schism! No, you're in schism! You broke the canons! Nu-uh, you did!
ReplyDeleteIt's like they are trying to prove the need for a pope, prove they are simply pawns of imperial states (existing or past), or prove they are simply culturally contingent, historically interesting religious bodies with no real claim to universality.
No, it proves the need of a monarch to tell the bishops to get their act together. If President Poroshenko were in fact an anointed Tsar, it would be not only his right, but his duty to see after uniting the church. But he isn't, and he should have stayed out of it.
Delete@BorisJojicj...
DeleteWell said.
@BorisJojicj & @John (Ad Orientem)
DeleteBut (but but), one of @123 points is that there is no monarch over the Church (and has not been for 1000 years, since the collapse of the Roman Empire). With the rise of nation states as the de facto polity of almost the entire world, there is no imminent return of the monarch on the horizon.
Sooo, part of the west's "solution" was the conception of a "pope" who had the monarch's authority (practical AND spiritual) to bring about a real catholicity/universality, at least within ecclesiology.
The Church of the East went with the more ambiguous solution of "conciliarity", which in theory has always been more attractive than in practice. Yes, a dogmatic universality has been (somewhat remarkably) been almost perfectly maintained. Yet, a de facto national church ecclesiology has taken hold - a real "culturally contingency".
Yet, contra 123 the only thing the Roman Catholic "pope" model has "proved" is that administrative unity does not bring dogmatic and spiritual unity, as they are in reality more fractured than the Orthodox.
Sooooo, I continue to take our culturally contingent ecclesiology over theirs... ;)
what happened to all of those people in the USA who are against the state interfering with the church's affairs??
ReplyDeleteThanks to President Poroshenko and the EP families in THE Ukraine will be split.. Too many lies in the Western press about THE Ukraine.
Too many Western Ukrainians, most of them, Greek Catholics, interfering in Orthodox affairs , and invariably supporting the schematics. Since the Pope and EP Bartholomew are buddies, I suppose they see this new church as a win-win situation.
DeleteMet Tikhon served liturgy today at St Nicks Patriarchal Cathedral on East 97th St in Manhattan. Old calendar patronal feast. No diptychs were done contrary to usual practice. At Great Entrance MT mentioned Pat Kirill and Bp Matthew the cocelebrant by name. He stated generally all Orthodox patriarchs etc. but not Bart or Epiphanios of Kiev. FYI.
ReplyDelete