ABC Welby & EP Bartholomew receive agreed statement on personhood

[graceandpeace]

http://www.anglicannews.org/news/20...reed-theological-statement-on-personhood.aspx

It's nice to see some agreement & work between the two faith communities.

 

[Shane R]

Unfortunately, it is nearly meaningless in a larger Anglican-Orthodox ecumenical context because most Orthodox are very lukewarm if not hostile to the Ecumenical Patriarch. The statements of Pat. Kirill of Moscow or even Pat. John of Antioch carry much more weight among many Orthodox. It's not unlike the way conservative Anglicans view Abp. Welby in comparison to Abp. Okoh or Abp. Wabukala.

 

[Jesus4Madrid]

Unfortunately, it is nearly meaningless in a larger Anglican-Orthodox ecumenical context because most Orthodox are very lukewarm if not hostile to the Ecumenical Patriarch. The statements of Pat. Kirill of Moscow or even Pat. John of Antioch carry much more weight among many Orthodox. It's not unlike the way conservative Anglicans view Abp. Welby in comparison to Abp. Okoh or Abp. Wabukala.

I think Met. Hilarion Alfeyev carries more weight.

 

[graceandpeace]

Unfortunately, it is nearly meaningless in a larger Anglican-Orthodox ecumenical context because most Orthodox are very lukewarm if not hostile to the Ecumenical Patriarch. The statements of Pat. Kirill of Moscow or even Pat. John of Antioch carry much more weight among many Orthodox. It's not unlike the way conservative Anglicans view Abp. Welby in comparison to Abp. Okoh or Abp. Wabukala.

I've heard this about the EP before, I'm curious as to why that is? It's been awhile since I looked at Orthodoxy - time flies!

 

[Shane R]

I've heard this about the EP before, I'm curious as to why that is? It's been awhile since I looked at Orthodoxy - time flies!

As best I can tell, he is viewed as too ecumenical: especially too friendly with Catholics. Also, he is rather modern in his emphasis on 'green' living. He is viewed in some ways as the spawn of Athenagoras I, perhaps the most maligned EP of the 20th century.

 

[everbecoming2007]

As best I can tell, he is viewed as too ecumenical: especially too friendly with Catholics. Also, he is rather modern in his emphasis on 'green' living. He is viewed in some ways as the spawn of Athenagoras I, perhaps the most maligned EP of the 20th century.

What's wrong with green living?

 

[Shane R]

What's wrong with green living?

Nothing in particular but it's not something most of the Orthodox laymen I have met care to have emphasized.

 

[rhartsc]

I would have to say that the most maligned Patriarch of Constantinople in the 20th & 21st centuries and rightly so is Meletius Metaxakis.

 

[rhartsc]

IMHO opinion it is the Patriarchate's incessant need to feel important and its grandiose view of its rather small church within the family of Orthodox Churches. It is their attitude of entitlement and its quest for power. It interferes in the affairs of other churches to everyones' detriment. The Patriarchate stands by and lets outsiders and journalists refer to HAH as the head or leader of the Orthodox Church when in fact he is just 1 out of 15 primates and the other churches would never surrender there sovereignty to Istanbul.

 

[Wgw]

Unfortunately, it is nearly meaningless in a larger Anglican-Orthodox ecumenical context because most Orthodox are very lukewarm if not hostile to the Ecumenical Patriarch. The statements of Pat. Kirill of Moscow or even Pat. John of Antioch carry much more weight among many Orthodox. It's not unlike the way conservative Anglicans view Abp. Welby in comparison to Abp. Okoh or Abp. Wabukala.

This is simply untrue; I know of only a vocal minority who dislike the Ecumenical Patriarch. The minor disagreements over questions relating primarily to Canon 28 of Chalcedon have not even approached the situation that exists wherein the Antiochians have struck the name of Patriarch Theophilus of Jerusalem from the Diptychs due to a perceived intrusion on Antiochian canonical territory. If genuine hostility existed, communion would have been interruoted; the main difference between Orthodoxy and Anglicanism is that the Orthodox reject the latitudinarian, broad church approach; we are what we are in communion with. This is why the Orthodox periodically have internal schisms which are resolved, such as the ROCOR schism over Sergianism, or indeed in the Oriental Orthodox communion between the Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch and the Malankara Syrian Catholicos.

Note that I am not claiming the Orthodox approach is superior to the Anglican approach that prefers unity; I am merely pointing out that since the majority of Eastern Orthodox are in communion with the Ecumenical Patriarch, this definitively proves that the majority of those people in turn (all of those correctly catechized who are not concealing a certain sinful loathing) do not regard him in a lukewarm or hostile manner. They may disagree with him on some points, but this disagreement has not reached a meaningful point where communion mist be severed, for example, the dispute between Antioch and Jerusalem.

 

[Wgw]

IMHO opinion it is the Patriarchate's incessant need to feel important and its grandiose view of its rather small church within the family of Orthodox Churches. It is their attitude of entitlement and its quest for power. It interferes in the affairs of other churches to everyones' detriment. The Patriarchate stands by and lets outsiders and journalists refer to HAH as the head or leader of the Orthodox Church when in fact he is just 1 out of 15 primates and the other churches would never surrender there sovereignty to Istanbul.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate is somewhat large when one factors in the Greek Orthodox parishes in Europe, North America and elsewhere, ACROD, the Russian Orthodox Metropolis of Sourozh in the UK, and others. In the US the EP is the largest jurisdiction by far. Their own "native" jurisdiction is somewhat reduced due to the genocide of Pontic Greeks (along eith other Christisns such as Syriacs, Assyrians and Most notably Armenians) in 1915, and the subsequent postwar population exchange between Greece and Turkey, however, the EP does control Thessalonika and several other areas not under the jurisdiction of the Church of Greece, and also controls Mount Athos, which is actually rather important.

I am reasonably certain that the EP has in what is left of its historic territory substantially more parishioners than in the Jerusalem Patriarchate, or in the historic territory of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria (which is now quite large owing mainly to the fact that the rest of Africa falls under Alexandrian jurisdiction).

 

[rhartsc]

Yes, Greek Archdiocese in the US is by far the largest by counting members with a whopping 300,000 members but it has a smaller footprint. Add on another 15K for its other dioceses such as ACROD, UOC, etc Lets add in every greek in the entire world regardless of whether they are EP, JP, AP, CoG, and you would still come in at under 15 million. Now lets compare that to the Russian Church with 150 million members, or the Church of Romania with 17 million, Bulgaria with 10 million. Clearly they only represent a small portion of the church and do not speak for everyone.

 

[Wgw]

Yes, Greek Archdiocese in the US is by far the largest by counting members with a whopping 300,000 members but it has a smaller footprint. Add on another 15K for its other dioceses such as ACROD, UOC, etc Lets add in every greek in the entire world regardless of whether they are EP, JP, AP, CoG, and you would still come in at under 15 million. Now lets compare that to the Russian Church with 150 million members, or the Church of Romania with 17 million, Bulgaria with 10 million. Clearly they only represent a small portion of the church and do not speak for everyone.

The Ecumenical Patriarch has more influence than a comparatively sized church due to Canon 28, Mount Athos and other factors. In particular, the importance of the Hagiorites to Eastern Orthodoxy cannot be overstated; those 1,800 monks have a disproportionate influence on all Orthodox churches.

 

[rhartsc]

We will have to agree to disagree. The EP's novel interpretation of canon 28 has yet to be accepted by anyone but has been refuted by Russia. The EP has absolutely no authority outside of Turkey and the New Lands, and the New Lands should really be under the CoG for canonical order as well as Athos. Though I think you are overstating Mount Athos's importance in comparison other important monastic communities. If I am a Russian I am not looking to Athos even though there is a Russian Monastery there and I am not looking to the Archbishop of Istanbul with his 1,000 adherents which are dying out. I look to my Patriarch and to our famous monasteries like Valaam or the Holy Trinity Lavra.

 

[Wgw]

We will have to agree to disagree. The EP's novel interpretation of canon 28 has yet to be accepted by anyone but has been refuted by Russia. The EP has absolutely no authority outside of Turkey and the New Lands, and the New Lands should really be under the CoG for canonical order as well as Athos. Though I think you are overstating Mount Athos's importance in comparison other important monastic communities. If I am a Russian I am not looking to Athos even though there is a Russian Monastery there and I am not looking to the Archbishop of Istanbul with his 1,000 adherents which are dying out. I look to my Patriarch and to our famous monasteries like Valaam or the Holy Trinity Lavra.

None of this however means that the majority of Orthodox look upon the Ecumenica Patriarchate with hostility or are lukewarm to it. Where actual hostility or profound disagreement exists, the Orthodox way is to break communion.