True Church

[Revelation]

///

[Sean]

I thought I understood what your motives were and where you were coming from until I read the last lines of your post. Are you saying that millions of western and World Orthodox Christians coming over to the True Orthodox Church would be a good thing, or are you relativising the ecclesiology of the Church? If your questions are sincere, then they are quite valid, and deserve an answer.

The Church was not, is not, and has never been divided. She is not a man made organization as many Protestants falsely assume, but is a Theandric (Divine-Human) organism, and is the Body of Our Lord. Her mysteries and saving doctrines have not changed one iota from apostolic times. This is the Church that was "Once, and for all time, delivered unto the Saints," by Our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ.

It would be easy for an outsider to make the assumptions made in your post that the Church is fragmented, and "Who do I trust?" It is important to realize that there is a difference between "churches," and jurisdictions within the Church. Because of sin, and the intrigues of Her enemies, there are administrative divisions among the various jurisdictions of the persecuted Church.

The criterion with which one must determine that they are in the Church is

1. Does their jurisdiction/bishop remain faithful to the Canons of the Church (by this I mean ones which pertain to the faith, and not juridical observance of discipline)?

2. Does their jurisdiction/bishop remain faithful to the teachings of the Patristic witness (the writings of the Fathers)?

The Catholics and Protestants are automatically eliminated when applying this criterion, since the Papists have added many novelties to Church doctrine, and see the Patristic era as a development which was replaced by Scholasticism, and in turn succeeded by modernism. They teach many heresies in direct opposition to the teachings of the Fathers, such as papal infallibility and created grace. The Protestants exist in an historical vacuum where anyone can create his own "church," based on his own interpretation of Holy Scriptures.

The World Orthodox violate the Canons of the Church which pertain to the faith on a daily basis, when they pray with heretics and speak of heterodox bodies such as the Catholics as "Sister Churches." The Monophysistes teach the soul-destroying heresy of one united Nature in the person of Christ: the human part of this Nature they say was a person and not a Nature that was taken from the Virgin to be united in Christ.

The True Orthodox jurisdictions, however, share a common faith, for which they are willing to sacrifice everything, including the approval of the world and a unity and love without Truth. Their divisions are again only administrative, and in many cases only apply to the concelebration of clergy. I know many instances where True Orthodox laity have received confession and Communion at the parish of another True Orthodox jurisdiction.

My question to you is, are you an Orthodox Christian or a sincere seeker, looking for clarification on these matters? Or do you have an ulterior motive? Are you a Protestant looking for an angle to poach for Orthodox souls? Are you a Papist looking for an angle to propagate Latinism or Ecumenism? I sincerely wish to know this, and I am not accusing you.

Often on these forums, when truth is presented to posters in a very direct and plain way, it still does no good because most people don't like to be told that they are wrong, and will only waste bandwidth trying to save face. Their arguments often begin with the phrases "I think," or some sentimental catch phrase that appeals to one's emotions, forgetting that love without truth is not love at all.

In the end it doesn't matter what anyone within or without the Church of Christ personally thinks about the Truth. It matters what the Fathers of the Church teach, inspired by the Holy Spirit, Who is the life of the One Church. Any straying from this, and you have sectarianism.

[Revelation]

///

[Suaidan]

Hi Euthymios.

[GOCTheophan]

The Church was not, is not, and has never been divided. She is not a man made organization as many Protestants falsely assume, but is a Theandric (Divine-Human) organism, and is the Body of Our Lord. Her mysteries and saving doctrines have not changed one iota from apostolic times. This is the Church that was "Once, and for all time, delivered unto the Saints," by Our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Sean,

I think you are simplifying things here.

For instances I would say that most posters on this forum do not recognise "Archbishop" Gregory and his Synod. I hope Romanos will be able to clarify whether he does or not. Certainly Gregory rejects the 1935 confession which the Lamians to their credit dont.

There are also Dogmatic matters seperating those who can be loosely called True Orthodox such as the Icon of the Anticient of Days as just one example (for instance GOC-CII Temples in Greece almost MUST have one copy of this Icon and the Lamians are also strong in condemning neo-Iconoclasm while the Kyprianites and some Matthewites reject them).

Though I think that rejection of these Icons is impious and a serious error I am beginning to wonder if it is a heresy in the full sense of the word. I have been wrong before and would welcome anybody showing me that it is a heresy with a capital "H".

Theophan.

[L.M.P.]

Hi Euthymios.

Hi Euthimios ghhmm.... I mean Revelation

[Sean]

The Church was not, is not, and has never been divided. She is not a man made organization as many Protestants falsely assume, but is a Theandric (Divine-Human) organism, and is the Body of Our Lord. Her mysteries and saving doctrines have not changed one iota from apostolic times. This is the Church that was "Once, and for all time, delivered unto the Saints," by Our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ.

Sean,

I think you are simplifying things here.

For instances I would say that most posters on this forum do not recognise "Archbishop" Gregory and his Synod. I hope Romanos will be able to clarify whether he does or not. Certainly Gregory rejects the 1935 confession which the Lamians to their credit dont.

There are also Dogmatic matters seperating those who can be loosely called True Orthodox such as the Icon of the Anticient of Days as just one example (for instance GOC-CII Temples in Greece almost MUST have one copy of this Icon and the Lamians are also strong in condemning neo-Iconoclasm while the Kyprianites and some Matthewites reject them).

Though I think that rejection of these Icons is impious and a serious error I am beginning to wonder if it is a heresy in the full sense of the word. I have been wrong before and would welcome anybody showing me that it is a heresy with a capital "H".

Theophan.

How can that particular excerpt from my reply be interpreted as an over-simplification? This is the ecclesiology of the Church. I didn't just make this up. Perhaps you were referring to my later statement that the divisions in the True Orthodox Church of Greece are for the most part administrative in nature.

As far as the the deposed Abp. Gregory goes, we're not talking about vagantes. He was so desperate for another bishop that he single-handedly performed chierothesia on a vagante bishop, and in so doing became just another Melchizedek of Nebraska. That's not what we're talking about here. Because of the intrigues of the ecumenists, the True Orthodox Church of Greece is administratively fragmented. The T.O.C. is a Catacomb Church, and many of the canonical norms observed for the right administration of the Church during times when She is not being persecuted cannot be maintained when the enemies of God divide us.

As far as the Ancient of Days icon goes, it seems to be a primarily Greek controversy. The icon is quite prevalent in the Russian Church. If it is understood to be an actual icon of God the Father, then yes it is heretical, as the Father is the unknowable Essence of the Godhead.This is the ancient heresy known as Anthropomorphism. However, the Church teaches us that the Ancient of Days is Christ as He appeared to the prophets of Old Israel. Jehovah has always been understood to be the Son and not the Father. Yet, the Ancient of Days is a symbol of God the Father, just as the dove is a symbol of the Holy Spirit. We don't believe that the Third Person of the Holy Trinity is a bird. We also don't believe that the unknowable, unapproachable Essence of the Godhead, Whom we will never know, is an old man with a white beard.

As long as the Ancient of Days icon is venerated with an Orthodox understanding, it is not heretical.