Who wants to pray for the MP with me?

[Rowan]

Moscow patriarchate rejects Catholic-Orthodox statement on papal primacy http://www.byzcath.org/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=2420 http://www.byzcath.org/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2420&pop=1&page=0&Itemid=49 2008-05-20 Moscow, May. 20, 2008 (CWNews.com) - The Russian Orthodox Church has officially rejected a doctrinal statement approved by a joint Catholic-Orthodox theological commission at a meeting in Ravenna, Italy last October.

The Ravenna meeting reached agreement that the Bishop of Rome traditionally enjoyed primacy among all the world's bishops, of both the Eastern and Western churches. While Vatican officials hailed the agreement as an important ecumenical landmark, they cautioned that the Catholic and Orthodox churches have a different understanding of primacy. Indeed the Ravenna document noted "differences of understanding with regard to the manner in which it is to be exercised, and also with regard to its scriptural and theological foundations."

The Russian Orthodox rejection of the Ravenna statement is not a surprise, since representatives of the Moscow patriarchate were critical of the document when it first appeared. Russian prelates said that the Ravenna agreement implied that the Patriarch of Constantinople was the leader of the Orthodox world, just as the Pope is the leader of the Catholic Church. The Moscow patriarchate, which has often contested Constantinople's leadership, rejected that idea.

In January, Patriarch Alexei of Moscow charged that the Ravenna meeting had been "deliberately orchestrated to exclude the Moscow patriarchate." In fact, Russian Orthodox representatives walked out of the meeting before discussions began, protesting the seating of a delegation from the Estonian Orthodox Church, which Moscow does not recognize.



http://www.byzcath.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2420&Itemid=49

I was pretty sure this was coming, but still...

I respect the MP for standing up for Orthodoxy, but from the outside, it looks more like an earthly power struggle than a defense of the Faith.

What's up with what I bolded above? Is this true, or did the authors of the article put their own spin there?

 

[Michael G]

Constantinople is NOT the leader of the Worlds Orthodox Christians. Constantinople holds the seat of honor at an Ecumenical Council, and that is it. The Ecumenical Patriarch does not speak for Orthodoxy, nor does he have any more authority than any other bishop when speaking on matters of faith and morals. I applaud the Moscow Patriarch Alexie for standing up to the EP and rejecting such attempts to be falsely ecumenical! I will pray for Moscow. I will pray God grants him many years and the ability to continuously defend the Orthodox faith!

 

[Kolya]

I applaud the Moscow Patriarch Alexie for standing up to the EP and rejecting such attempts to be falsely ecumenical! I will pray for Moscow. I will pray God grants him many years and the ability to continuously defend the Orthodox faith!

Thank you Michael. We need your prayers!

When I read that Byzantine Catholic site and some of the comments left there I just saw red!!!! I'm mad as hell. Who do they think they are!

Patriarch Alexei does not seek the First among Equals position - he is trying very hard to preserve the true faith, and I would love nothing less than Constantinople be kicked out the door if it wants to join hands with Rome!

Please pray for us, we're going to need it!

 

[Rowan]

Constantinople is NOT the leader of the Worlds Orthodox Christians. Constantinople holds the seat of honor at an Ecumenical Council, and that is it. The Ecumenical Patriarch does not speak for Orthodoxy, nor does he have any more authority than any other bishop when speaking on matters of faith and morals. I applaud the Moscow Patriarch Alexie for standing up to the EP and rejecting such attempts to be falsely ecumenical! I will pray for Moscow. I will pray God grants him many years and the ability to continuously defend the Orthodox faith!

The MP is correct about the EP's true position in Orthodoxy. My question was about how the article implied that the EP thought differently of his own office which the MP corrects. Following the EP's activities on Orthodox-Catholic dialogue and environmental issues, there doesn't seem to be anything to indicate to me that the EP has deviated from his historical position. He's just an influential man who just happened to be the EP; I don't think his actions would be different if he was in any other Patriarchate. I don't understand what the MP and other critics of the EP are talking about.

Thank you Michael. We need your prayers!

When I read that Byzantine Catholic site and some of the comments left there I just saw red!!!! I'm mad as hell. Who do they think they are!

Charity in all things.

Patriarch Alexei does not seek the First among Equals position - he is trying very hard to preserve the true faith, and I would love nothing less than Constantinople be kicked out the door if it wants to join hands with Rome!

Please pray for us, we're going to need it!

I think it's wise for the EP to not rush into things prematurely to prevent any more schisms. I think he's being prudent about it, all things considered.

BTW all, apparently, this was an important Orthodox-Catholic relations week (I was too caught up in physics class to even notice!). Apparently, meetings with the EP went on, the Pope delivered a message to the MP, and a meeting between the Pope and the MP is being arranged.

Busy, busy, busy.

 

[Khaleas]

That meeting has been planned for many years...
I do pray for the MP, for strenght to stand up to the ecumenical brouhaha... unity would be good but it doesn't mean we're supposed to roll over and give up.

 

[Rowan]

I agree, but has anyone rolled?

It's these kinds of statements I don't understand. Honestly.

 

[Xpycoctomos]

I'll pray specifically about that. I do think in mattes of ecumenism the MP has approaches the issue with less haste and more clarity.

Xpy

 

[Xpycoctomos]

Well, the fact is that COnstantinople does not have a leadership position. It's not even in a place to do so. Many don't believe that the EP has exercised good judgemnt in representing the CHurch with his title in ecumenical issues. I do personally think the MP is in more of a position to exercise leadership (not authority in any way, but a kind of representative leadership similar to how the Queen of England might do so... as a representative, but NOT has leader in the typical undertanding.,.. in that MP would have no actual powere).

I ahve to go.

Xpy

 

[Michael G]

The MP is correct about the EP's true position in Orthodoxy. My question was about how the article implied that the EP thought differently of his own office which the MP corrects. Following the EP's activities on Orthodox-Catholic dialogue and environmental issues, there doesn't seem to be anything to indicate to me that the EP has deviated from his historical position. He's just an influential man who just happened to be the EP; I don't think his actions would be different if he was in any other Patriarchate. I don't understand what the MP and other critics of the EP are talking about.



Charity in all things.



I think it's wise for the EP to not rush into things prematurely to prevent any more schisms. I think he's being prudent about it, all things considered.

BTW all, apparently, this was an important Orthodox-Catholic relations week (I was too caught up in physics class to even notice!). Apparently, meetings with the EP went on, the Pope delivered a message to the MP, and a meeting between the Pope and the MP is being arranged.

Busy, busy, busy.

The EP has no ability to rush into anything. HE DOES NOT SPEAK FOR THE ORTHODOX CHURCH!!! The EP is not a Pope. He is first among equals, and nothing else. The only canonical way to arrange such a meeting is to do so via an Ecumenical Synod which would then approve for a meeting with Rome. Anything less than this is an abuse of power and inherently unOrthodox.

 

[Rowan]

Thanks for taking time to respond before you left, John.

I guess my problem is that I've been around for all the vague EP criticism, but happened to missed the well-documented, supported reasons as to why people criticize him. I say "well-documented" because citations keep facts seperated from emotionally-charged gossip.

 

[Rowan]

The EP has no ability to rush into anything. HE DOES NOT SPEAK FOR THE ORTHODOX CHURCH!!! The EP is not a Pope. He is first among equals, and nothing else. The only canonical way to arrange such a meeting is to do so via an Ecumenical Synod which would then approve for a meeting with Rome. Anything less than this is an abuse of power and inherently unOrthodox.

Thanks for voicing a specific concern.

Which meeting (or nature of a meeting) are you referring to, for the sake of clarity? Is there a canon that supports what you say? If so, has there ever been a time in history where such canon was not followed?

What of the meeting between the Pope and the MP that is being arranged? Does it have to be approved in the same way?

 

[Michael G]

(not authority in any way, but a kind of representative leadership similar to how the Queen of England might do so... as a representative, but NOT has leader in the typical undertanding.,.. in that MP would have no actual powere).

I ahve to go.

Xpy

You almost sound like Dennis in Monty Python and the Holy Grail explaining to Arthur King the type of government that rules over Dennis' commune!

 

[Kolya]

I have no problem with Patriarch Alexei II meeting Pope Benedict in the Vatican, the way Putin met with JP II. But I would have a problem with His Holiness setting foot in 'Holy Russia' at this stage. The time is not yet right.
As for the EP - the less said, the better. He does not speak for all Orthodoxy.

 

[Michael G]

I have no problem with Patriarch Alexei II meeting Pope Benedict in the Vatican, the way Putin met with JP II. But I would have a problem with His Holiness setting foot in 'Holy Russia' at this stage. The time is not yet right.
As for the EP - the less said, the better. He does not speak for all Orthodoxy.

The Pope has no business being in Russia, not with all of the prostelytization that the Catholics have done in Russia and the Ukraine over the past 400 years.

 

[rusmeister]

I ahve to go.

I ahve to go, too.
This is totally stupid, but is that where that hymn "ahve Maria?" comes from? (kinda like the "Got milk?" commercials)

 

[katherine2001]

Constantinople



is NOT the leader of the Worlds Orthodox Christians. Constantinople holds the seat of honor at an Ecumenical Council, and that is it. The Ecumenical Patriarch does not speak for Orthodoxy, nor does he have any more authority than any other bishop when speaking on matters of faith and morals. I applaud the Moscow Patriarch Alexie for standing up to the EP and rejecting such attempts to be falsely ecumenical! I will pray for Moscow. I will pray God grants him many years and the ability to continuously defend the Orthodox faith!

I agree with Michael. Just as the Pope did not have a primacy of power when it was part of the Orthodox Church, neither does the Patriarch of Constantinople. It was exactly this kind of thing that caused the schism in 1054. As Michael said, everything is supposed to be decided by council, not by one person. As far as I am concerned, the EP has no authority over me at all. Only my patriarch does. Good for Patriarch Alexei for standing up and reminding the EP that he is not the universal head of the Orthodox Church. I also applaud him for rejecting the Statement. When the RC's come back to Orthodoxy and fully accept the Church's without any additions, I will be among the first to welcome her back home.

 

[Vasileios]

I will once again have to be the one to defend the EP.

I truly understand all the concerns but so far I haven't seen anything that justifies the attacks to the EP. Meeting with the Pope obviously needs no approval by any council, any bishop can meet with anyone he wants.

As far as the document goes, its content is something I can basically agree to. It is saying nothing that we didn't know and it of course does not say anything about the EP, the way MOscow implies. Quite the contrary, while recognizing primacy it contains the phrase that the Orthodox do not recognise primacy in the manner of jurisdiction.

Moscow and Constantinople have a lot of things to talk about, both sides with their faults and merits. I think it would be best for us laymen to not take sides in this. And please do remember that Constantinople is the very heart of Greek Orthodoxy, and it is being openly persecuted. When I say Greek, I really do not mean that in a nationalistic sense but as a carrier of culture, language, musi and ethos of the Church for more than a millenia. It is precious and should be guarded.

Moscow hasn't helped in that respect at all and neither has Greece I am ashamed to say, although this seems to be changing with the new archbishop.

In any case, this is Church politics and let us all be careful not to speak ill of a patriarch of the Church because of something we have heard and repeated.

 

[cassc]

Vasileios- thank you for putting it much better than I could have!

Rowen- I will pray, thank you for posting- Lord Have Mercy!

 

[Thekla]

thank-you, Rowen, for this

I will join in, and note that until an official statement is issued by the EP on this matter we should withhold judgment. Thus far, the only statement I have seen is from Rome, and I have yet to see any list of EO signatories.

 

[ikonographics]

I've got to agree with Vasileios on this one.