Possible 8th Ecumenical Council 2013

[Apophatic80]

What do you think, gang? This is a buzz maker!

2013: Date of East-West “ecumenical” council? « Divine Life – A Blog by Eric Sammons

 

[Sothron]

I think it would be wonderful if we could have a conclave with ecumenical powers with the RCC again but I wonder if it is possible for it to amount to anything substantial to heal the rift between us. Of course that is what prayer is for.

 

[Apophatic80]

Absolutely, Pat! Pray hard...

 

[HandmaidenOfGod]

I think that's all it is; a "buzz" maker.

It's not an Ecumenical Council as it's not being called by the Ecumenical Patriarch. Also, how can it be an Ecumenical Council when we're no longer in communion with Rome?

It's just a meeting. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[ArmyMatt]

it's just a meeting. this won't do anything to heal the Schism.

 

[Tonks]

It's not an Ecumenical Council as it's not being called by the Ecumenical Patriarch.

that isn't really a requirement for a council to be called "ecumenical"

 

[Tonks]

also...yet another meeting/breakthrough/whatever that Catholics are all excited about, it seems.

 

[TheCunctator]

If there really is one that'd be fantastic.

 

[HandmaidenOfGod]

that isn't really a requirement for a council to be called "ecumenical"

Correct, but it's one of many requirements. And actually, a council is not considered "Ecumenical" until years after the fact.

 

[Tonks]

Correct, but it's one of many requirements.

no, it isn't. heck, the first council was called by constantine the great.

it is currently the EC's prerogative to call a council (notwithstanding the aging issue your second sentence speaks to) but that is irrelevant to the early councils - which is what i was speaking to but probably didn't make terribly clear.

as for the see of rome...likewise irrelevant by my read...if only because the idea makes an argument that the Church, currently, is not one, holy, catholic, apostolic etc etc.

 

[jckstraw72]

i agree, you cant call an Ecumenical Council. you can call a council which might eventually prove to be Ecumenical. And Rome is not a member of the Church, its presence is not required. similarly, we dont need Canterbury or Ethiopia to show up for it to be Ecumenical.

Rome just needs to accept that there will be union when it returns to the true faith.

 

[Andrew21091]

Rome just needs to accept that there will be union when it returns to the true faith.

I just hope our bishops remember that.

 

[Blackknight]

I just hope our bishops remember that.

Same here, cause if they don't it will lead to more schisms.

 

[Macarius]

Aren't the two Photian councils considered by some to be the 8th council (as they ratified the 7th) - but we just don't call them that yet because not other ecumenical council has been called that has ratified them?

I might even extend the Palamite councils as the 9th council.

I wonder, at times, why we stick so strongly to this number 7 for our councils. That seems to imply that we stopped thinking we could govern the Church in the 700's AD, which just isn't true.

 

[HandmaidenOfGod]

I wonder, at times, why we stick so strongly to this number 7 for our councils. That seems to imply that we stopped thinking we could govern the Church in the 700's AD, which just isn't true.

The Councils were established to refute heresy and establish Church doctrine. As no "new" heresies have become a threat to the Church, and no new doctrine needs to be established, the need for a council is not needed.

 

[buzuxi02]

There was a 1900 year anniversary celebration for the writing of Revelation held in Patmos, the 2000th year jubilee of Christmas at Jerusalem. 1000th year anniversary of the baptism of Holy Rus. It meant nothing and this wont mean anything. And it wont take place in either Greece or Serbia because the protests over a papal visit would be to costly.
Once again papists are hoping to rescue their demoralized continent from the wolves, too little to late.

 

[ikonographics]

Aren't the two Photian councils considered by some to be the 8th council (as they ratified the 7th) - but we just don't call them that yet because not other ecumenical council has been called that has ratified them?

I might even extend the Palamite councils as the 9th council.

I wonder, at times, why we stick so strongly to this number 7 for our councils. That seems to imply that we stopped thinking we could govern the Church in the 700's AD, which just isn't true.

Exactly! You beat me to it. For those who are scratching their heads:
OODE

 

[Apophatic80]

I was feeling enthusiastic as maybe Rome will renounce the doctrines that make us choke. I can feel optimistic, right?

 

[TheCunctator]

I was feeling enthusiastic as maybe Rome will renounce the doctrines that make us choke. I can feel optimistic, right?

You can feel whatever you want. You can even dream.

But it's not going to happen unless both the Orthodox and the Catholics walk into that council with a spirit of humility.

If the Orthodox Church truly has the fullness of the faith, than there is no point for attempting to think that some compromise can be found with Catholicism. It's wasted time.

But we all know that in such a council, both sides will come in feeling that they have the truth. So it will inevitably result in nothing.

 

[prodromos]

I wonder, at times, why we stick so strongly to this number 7 for our councils.

The number seven has some pretty potent symbolism. Just read through Revelations

John