MP-EP updates?

[ArmyMatt]

Why is Russia in schism? So not being in communion with Constantinople means you are a schismatic? Just like with Rome?

no, it just means the break is between Moscow and Constantinople, and from Moscow's side.

 

[☦Marius☦]

MP was the one who broke communion, not EP. For blatantly political reasons, too.
Antioch is in Russia-occupied Syria; both Antioch and JP see major cash flows from Russia. Still, they didn't break communion with EP when Kirill did. "Mental corruption"?

Ahh yes, all patriarchs are corrupt except St. Bartholomew. The synod of Greece wouldn't even back the EP's actions in Ukraine. Weird how the Russian and Antiochian Church's are thriving while everything under the EP is falling into spiritual chaos.

 

[StanU]

Why is Russia in schism? So not being in communion with Constantinople means you are a schismatic? Just like with Rome?

"Schism" literally means breaking communion. MP and EP are in partial schism, and entity that did the deed was the MP. Really, this is not that complicated.

 

[☦Marius☦]

no, it just means the break is between Moscow and Constantinople, and from Moscow's side.

I think his intent was sarcasm against the blatant Latin-esque behavior of the EP

 

[☦Marius☦]

"Schism" literally means breaking communion. MP and EP are in partial schism, and entity that did the deed was the MP. Really, this is not that complicated.

Thats not the same as schism away from Orthodoxy as you are implying.

 

[StanU]

The synod of Greece wouldn't even back the EP's actions in Ukraine.

They did, actually. They decided, literally, that yes, EP has the canonical right to do what he did.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I think his intent was sarcasm against the blatant Latin-esque behavior of the EP

you're prolly right, but I just to be clear for the sake of the lurkers

 

[☦Marius☦]

They did, actually. They decided, literally, that yes, EP has the canonical right to do what he did.

No. They reaffirmed that the EP had the right to grant autocephaly in general, not that he had the right to do so in the Ukraine. In fact the specifically stated that they wouldn't touch the issue as a whole. Sure many Greek Bishops back Bartholomew, but not enough. Not to mention the Elders of Mt. Athos rejecting him.

 

[StanU]

Thats not the same as schism away from Orthodoxy as you are implying.

Well, then I agree that MP did not schism away from Orthodoxy. Yet. Nevertheless, breaking from EP is schismatic activity - incidentally, what they accused Filaret of.

 

[☦Marius☦]

Nevertheless, breaking from EP is schismatic activity

No it isn't. The EP isn't over the MP. First among equals, this isn't the Latin Church.

 

[StanU]

you're prolly right, but I just to be clear for the sake of the lurkers

I think it was honest confusion.
For the lurkers, EP and MP are both in communion with Orthodoxy. In case of MP, in partial communion - just like OCU is.

 

[☦Marius☦]

I think it was honest confusion.
For the lurkers, EP and MP are both in communion with Orthodoxy. In case of MP, in partial communion - just like OCU is.

Patriarch Bartholomew: The gift of the relics is a crucial step - Vatican News

Pope Francis meets with Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew - Vatican News

Apparently the EP wants to be in communion with Rome as well.

 

[StanU]

No it isn't. The EP isn't over the MP. First among equals, this isn't the Latin Church.

If EP broke with MP over politics, that would be schismatic activity. They didn't.

How would you justify prohibiting the faithful to take communion in another Orthodox Church, for the sake of willing an argument? It's schismatic, and bargaining with souls of flock.

 

[ArmyMatt]

They did, actually. They decided, literally, that yes, EP has the canonical right to do what he did.

not in this specific instance. they did agree that the EP has the has the right to grant autocephaly, but they did not affirm the OCU, at least not yet.

 

[☦Marius☦]

If EP broke with MP over politics, that would be schismatic activity. They didn't.

How would you justify prohibiting the faithful to take communion in another Orthodox Church, for the sake of willing an argument? It's schismatic, and bargaining with souls of flock.

I would describle the MP breaking communion with the EP's actions as disciplinary and a vocal protest. If one part of the root becomes rotten, you cease to support and eventually cut off it. If this comes to full schism the majority of the Church will follow the MP.

 

[StanU]

Patriarch Bartholomew: The gift of the relics is a crucial step - Vatican News

Pope Francis meets with Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew - Vatican News

Apparently the EP wants to be in communion with Rome as well.

Wanting to heal a schism is correct theology. What would be wrong is to deny dogma for this purpose; this didn't happen. For tin-foil enthusiasts, there are always Old Calendarists.

 

[StanU]

not in this specific instance. they did agree that the EP has the has the right to grant autocephaly, but they did not affirm the OCU, at least not yet.

Yeah; they confirmed their Primate's right to do that.
Seriously, this is grasping straws, and for what? To keep a territory across the Ocean in fold of the Empire, also across the ocean, by Church proxy?

 

[☦Marius☦]

Wanting to heal a schism is correct theology. What would be wrong is to deny dogma for this purpose; this didn't happen. For tin-foil enthusiasts, there are always Old Calendarists.

Another schismatic group, though their original outcry might have been legitimate. It is never correct to schism from Orthodoxy. Which is exactly why the Ukrainian Church needs to repent before given Autocephaly.

I do believe that the MP should have given the Ukrainian Church under the MP (the legitimate church) autocephely to help calm this issue. However their lack of decision to do so doesn't give another patriarch the right to grant schismatics their own Church without first repenting of their racism, and anti-christ attitudes.

 

[☦Marius☦]

Yeah; they confirmed their Primate's right to do that.
Seriously, this is grasping straws, and for what? To keep a territory across the Ocean in fold of the Empire, also across the ocean, by Church proxy?

Ukraine having its own church isn't even the issue here, it is the legitimization of a Schismatic group without having them repent. But sure, we are the ones politically biased.

 

[StanU]

Why is Russia in schism? So not being in communion with Constantinople means you are a schismatic? Just like with Rome?

Schism is an act. Breaking communion for insufficient reason is schismatic. Exactly what they accused Filaret of (even though he never denied communion to MP, it was the other way around).