Why then are you not in communion with/part of GOC-K (I think that's the abbreviation) under Metropolitan Demetrios? Seems odd to be part of a different Synod if you believe the same things.
Hello NCY,
First, welcome to the E-Cafe. I am not sure how much you know about Old Calendarist groups and their history. Florinite as I commonly use it denotes the source of apostolic succession more so than any theological position. Indeed, if one were to try to parse of the theology of Mathewites versus Florinites, I think the differences would really be more about ecclesiology than theology (and yes, there is some overlap there). But the World Orthodox patriarchs of Jerusalem and Antioch has gone out of communion over matters of ecclesiology as well, so this is not a GOC specific trait.
The history of the various GOC groups, of all derivations, is one of persecution by the state church. The result is a weakened, disjointed assemblage of bishops separated by matters of administration, personality, and to some extent theology. Things are getting better, slowly, and there are union talks, often informal in nature, on a regular basis. These things will resolve in God's time, not mine. The separation of the GOC bishops is lamentable, and definitely impacts their witness to the faithful. We must pray for the unity of the faith. I know many fine GOC-K priests, some of whom I consider mentors, and would welcome the day we can concelebrate, should the bishops decide this is meet and right. But as Justice mentioned above, there a issues resulting from the last union to be resolved.
Thanks for the welcome! Admittedly I only know the general details, primarily through things Fr. Seraphim Rose spoke about.
Frankly I don't understand why the things Justice referred to would be reason enough to join a separate synod. I get the concept, sure, but even men like St. John of San Francisco had a different approach to different situations. (He brought in Fr. Seraphim Rose - a former Protestant - through chrismation, for example.) ROCOR also had some parishes on the Revised Julian calendar for a time. Even Metropolitan Philaret of New York - a saint in your jurisdiction I believe, unless your group doesn't accept his canonization for some reason - he did not think it was for him to say whether or not us New Calendarists were without grace or not, until a Major/Ecumenical Synod could take place. (Justice also mentioned pews in another post - to be frank, that sounds like something only a hardline Old Believer would split over, because even Old Believers have parishes with pews in Romania.) I could be mistaken regarding Metropolitan Philaret though.
Welcome back NCY! it's very simple to understand if you think about it, if one part of the church adds anything to the style of worship or makes various ecumenical statements, then that church can't be called Orthodox anymore. I know that St John did things differently, but the case has always been in the Eastern Orthodox church if a jurisdiction develops a new belief contrary to the church teaching, then the jurisdiction would be outside the church. Also regarding the pews, standing in the Orthodox church goes back to the mosaic times and is part of holy tradition. Though I am surprised to hear about pews in the Old Beliver Churches, doesn't seem to fit their personality.
Welcome back NCY! it's very simple to understand if you think about it, if one part of the church adds anything to the style of worship or makes various ecumenical statements, then that church can't be called Orthodox anymore. I know that St John did things differently, but the case has always been in the Eastern Orthodox church if a jurisdiction develops a new belief contrary to the church teaching, then the jurisdiction would be outside the church. Also regarding the pews, standing in the Orthodox church goes back to the mosaic times and is part of holy tradition. Though I am surprised to hear about pews in the Old Beliver Churches, doesn't seem to fit their personality.
Thanks for the welcome! Though I never left, I only just recently joined.
I guess what I'm saying that I don't see how GOC-K, or some of their bishops anyway, are espousing ecumenism. Most of the ROCOR's greats seem to me to have held similar views. That makes it difficult for me to see why you guys would view their position as being un-Orthodox and worth leaving GOC-K over, when it is thanks to ROCOR that Old Calendarism exists today at all (I mean no offense by the term Old Calendarism; I am just using it as an overall descriptor).
I have split your post above into two topics: The one on Ecumenism, which is now in Intra-TOC Polemics, and the other on Old-Believers (now in World Orthodoxy). See: http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/vi ... 12&t=12156
I have also granted you permission to view and post in Intra-TOC Polemics since you seem very interested in this subject.
In Christ,
Maria
Administrator
p.s. Please try to keep on topic and post any polemical posts like this into Intra-TOC Polemics.
Welcome back NCY! it's very simple to understand if you think about it, if one part of the church adds anything to the style of worship or makes various ecumenical statements, then that church can't be called Orthodox anymore. I know that St John did things differently, but the case has always been in the Eastern Orthodox church if a jurisdiction develops a new belief contrary to the church teaching, then the jurisdiction would be outside the church. Also regarding the pews, standing in the Orthodox church goes back to the mosaic times and is part of holy tradition. Though I am surprised to hear about pews in the Old Beliver Churches, doesn't seem to fit their personality.
Thanks for the welcome! Though I never left, I only just recently joined.
I guess what I'm saying that I don't see how GOC-K, or some of their bishops anyway, are espousing ecumenism. Most of the ROCOR's greats seem to me to have held similar views. That makes it difficult for me to see why you guys would view their position as being un-Orthodox and worth leaving GOC-K over, when it is thanks to ROCOR that Old Calendarism exists today at all (I mean no offense by the term Old Calendarism; I am just using it as an overall descriptor).
Cyprianism never espoused ecumenism it condemned it though they believed the World Orthodox still had grace which is heretical in the eyes of the Traditional Orthodox. Only in the years 2012-2014 was the GOC-K interested in dialogue. Before the merge, the Cyprianites made lots of very great documentaries regarding ecumenism with Roman Catholics, Protestants etc. If your interested I'll give the link to two of them.
Welcome back NCY! it's very simple to understand if you think about it, if one part of the church adds anything to the style of worship or makes various ecumenical statements, then that church can't be called Orthodox anymore. I know that St John did things differently, but the case has always been in the Eastern Orthodox church if a jurisdiction develops a new belief contrary to the church teaching, then the jurisdiction would be outside the church. Also regarding the pews, standing in the Orthodox church goes back to the mosaic times and is part of holy tradition. Though I am surprised to hear about pews in the Old Beliver Churches, doesn't seem to fit their personality.
Thanks for the welcome! Though I never left, I only just recently joined.
I guess what I'm saying that I don't see how GOC-K, or some of their bishops anyway, are espousing ecumenism. Most of the ROCOR's greats seem to me to have held similar views. That makes it difficult for me to see why you guys would view their position as being un-Orthodox and worth leaving GOC-K over, when it is thanks to ROCOR that Old Calendarism exists today at all (I mean no offense by the term Old Calendarism; I am just using it as an overall descriptor).
Cyprianism never espoused ecumenism it condemned it though they believed the World Orthodox still had grace which is heretical in the eyes of the Traditional Orthodox. Only in the years 2012-2014 was the GOC-K interested in dialogue. Before the merge, the Cyprianites made lots of very great documentaries regarding ecumenism with Roman Catholics, Protestants etc. If your interested I'll give the link to two of them.
Link:
Link:
...So you don't think that GOC-K is ecumenistic? Your only problem is that a few of their bishops believe grace might exist at some level among those jurisdiction on the Revised Julian calendar (or in communion with those who are)? That definitely sounds like a non-issue to me, because ROCOR fully supported that idea (even when Fr. Seraphim Rose was still alive they backed this idea).
Regarding those documentaries, I have seen them. They're well made. I also saw (long) round-table discussion posted by Greek Orthodox Television, which I enjoyed for the most part.
Having come from the OCA myself, I am certain all this sounds like a non-issue to you. But it is not a non-issue. You say a few bishops. How do you know this? Can you state the position of each? These are things that time and dialogue will sort out. The
If you want to demand perfect canonical order of a group that has been persecuted for almost 100 years now, I reject that as being a reasonable expectation. You didn't see it in Russia under communism. You don't even see it among your world orthodox here in North America where there has been no persecution. Though I find the division among Old Calendar jurisdictions sad, I do pray for and respect all the bishops within and without my particular synod, for persevering in the struggle to maintain the faith. God will order His Church in His time.
And the GOC-A did not leave the GOC-K over the union with the Synod in Resistance. I don't know where you got that idea, but it is incorrect.
