[aAaBecker]

Dear Nicolaj,


Matthew, you were right and I think it was not your turn to go, but those who sold the Orthodox Church to heretics for 30 silver pieces. Actually they did not sell the Orthodox Church to heretics for 30 silver pieces, that is far to harsh of a conclusion in this matter, rather inaccurate. Had I known that my comments would compel such a conclusion from anyone I would not have shared them for sure. Nobody should go, but rather the tradition of the Orthodox Church is "love one another" all the time, even when there are disagreements.

Should you have some time to read the Apostolic Fathers, Clement of Rome in his first Epistle to the Corinthians comes foremost to my mind here (I was reading it last night again, I'm hoping it will stick good here) you will see how the Church traditionally addresses such matters. Feel free to take advantage of the good works here and access the Epistle via the Patristic Master list at Monachos.

http://www.monachos.net/library/Clem...he_Corinthians

Clement of Rome, First Epistle to the Corinthians

From the writings of the Apostolic Fathers; the authentic first letter of St Clement, bishop of Rome, to the Church in Corinth. One of the earliest post-New Testament texts, St Clement's first epistle addresses the issues of Church ministerial structure; order; humility; the relationship of faith and works; the imitation of Christ; the virtuous examples of the saints; etc.

What can happen and did happen was traditional Orthodox understandings where not being articulated by the very good hearted Priest who is a convert from another tradition. He was expressing opinions that are typical in his former tradition which he served for many years. So such opinions are sometimes not easy to get rid of, but that is a far cry from selling the Orthodox Church to heretics for 30 silver pieces. He would never do that he struggled and gave away much to embrace the Orthodox Church. Nor would those Orthodox Christians at the table ever sell the Church who I know hold the faith very dearly in their hearts. What they will do is listen to the Priest and Bishop who also continues to bring the Chalice to them through the royal doors. Should any Bishop and the Priest introduce liturgical changes in their Church, there would be vehement opposition. The reason why agreeing at a dinner conversation is easy to do is because it is the polite thing to do at such settings, people are relaxed etc. However, I know they would see any liturgical changes as not polite because it differs from the traditions they are used experiencing for many years.

It is written, "he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life."

Yet in the Church in the Kondak from the Sunday of the Cross during Great Lent we hear;

"the fiery sword no longer guards the gate of Eden", but rather through the Cross we hear Christ inviting us to, "return again to Paradise."

Is it not written, "A certain man was preparing a great banquet and invited many guests. At the time of the banquet he sent his servant to tell those who had been invited, 'Come, for everything is now ready" So the more intimate communion than even that of Adam that has been referenced here in the past is found in the Orthodox Church, the Priest, the faithful that I had referenced no doubt are in the Church. We all struggle though, that is a common experience but we should still help one another along the way even in awkward situations that have been going on for around 40 years now since this ecumenism thing showed up.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[ronaldasten]

Dear Matthew,

Please forgive me if in a moment of passion my emotions went on the run with me, leaving ratio far behind.

Nobody should go, but rather the tradition of the Orthodox Church is "love one another" all the time, even when there are disagreements. Well said, but there are certain powers who meet our love with falseness. And this thing called ecumenism is certainly very dangerous, because it meets temporary lifestyle and globalisation in one thing.

Love one another, is sure a fine thing, but my so much adored St. Nicolaj of Myra, slapped Arius in the face, not because he hated him, but because he was disturbed by his attempts to destroy the church and recognizing this himself.

In Christ, Nicolaj

[amberamuletuk]

The reason why agreeing at a dinner conversation is easy to do is because it is the polite thing to do at such settings, people are relaxed etc. However, I know they would see any liturgical changes as not polite because it differs from the traditions they are used experiencing for many years.
In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

Dear Matthew,

I'm not sure I understand the difference between liturgical changes and relaxed-ecumenical conversations at the dinner table. If one can start accepting things at the dinner table, just to be polite, how much longer before one stops noticing that the things one is accepting has become quite heretical? What better way to introduce liturgical changes than starting slow, at the dinner table, insiduously making simple remarks that won't be contradicted out of politeness?

I may be wrong. But, I feel, around the dinner table, everyone is equal. No one is serving liturgy anymore. And if my priest starts saying things that are contrary to what he teaches during liturgy, I think, I have every right to question him and disagree with him, and ask for a proper explaination. I'm not just going to be polite and swallow everything anyone says, just because they're older and wiser and have been orthodox longer than I have, etc etc. If I hear something that doens't sit well with my conscience, what is wrong with asking for a proper explaination? I didn't enter orthodoxy without questioning everything that was taught, and I didn't stop questioning till I was convinced in my intellect, and till God convinced me in my heart. Why should I become dumb now and stop seeking to understand?

In Christ,
Mary.

[soonahonsefalh]

I didn't stop questioning till I was convinced in my intellect, and till God convinced me in my heart. Forgive me, Mary, but perhaps you meant that the other way round: that when God convinced you in your heart, your intellect became convinced.

[amberamuletuk]

Forgive me, Mary, but perhaps you meant that the other way round: that when God convinced you in your heart, your intellect became convinced.

I suppose, everyone is convinced in different ways, by different things. I always gave more weight to my intellect than to my heart. I thought I knew something well if I could articulate it and out-argue everyone else. It was my curiosity that drew me to orthodoxy, so all my questionings were purely intellectual at first, comparing one to the other, applying the same 'test questions' to both, to see with stood the test of logic. My final test was the test of my heart, which for me, was beyond logic, because I was stepping into the unknown, and all of a sudden, I didn't know if I could trust my own reasonings anymore. My own previous logic had crumbled under my own diligent questioning. Freaky as it may seem, the sermons that my previous pastor was preaching around that time, pushed me towards making my choice, not because he was speaking heresy, but because he was speaking the truth!

One night, he spoke on Moses/burning bush, and he marveled at how God had used Moses' curiosity to draw him closer to Himself. Then, there was his sermon about Trust/Faith. He said, our trust in God is based on our experiences with God, how God has helped us, guided us, etc, in the past, which is, in a way, how we get to know God. But faith, is stepping into the unknown, based on my trust, and what I know of God. So, I looked back on my life, saw that God had never abandoned me, even during the times of my life when pleasing Him was the farthest thing from my mind, and I looked ahead, into Orthodoxy, knowing that it was a drastic decision, from which I could not turn back, not knowing with absolute certainty (because of my newfound lack of confidence in my intellect), whether it was 'just another denomination' or Truly the True Church... and I took the plunge, that was based more on trust/faith, than on logic.

So, according to my awareness, my intellect was convinced first, and then my heart. But of course, in spiritual reality, it could've been the other way round, and there's no way I can know.

In Christ,
Mary.

PS - I just realized, the 'unknown' factors are now known, and in that case, you're right, God convinced my heart first, and my intellect followed. So I Know with absolute certainty, that the Orthodox Church is the True Church, and there's no amount of logic or reasoning that can convince me otherwise.

[aAaBecker]

What better way to introduce liturgical changes than starting slow, at the dinner table, insiduously making simple remarks that won't be contradicted out of politeness? Dear Mary,

At the dinner table when the belly is being filled and the flesh is being served people can be polite in agreeing with other things as well. All of us can be distracted. However after the belly is full and things settle down and guests leave that which used to be politely agreeable did not settle well. The pious become more alert after reflecting on things a bit, so their explanation comes from within. Yet in this situation the beautiful thing is that that message and the real messenger are rejected while the Orthodox Priest is still beloved. When the other guests are telephoned latter and the matter is discussed the imported authoritative approach has no authority as it is rendered traditionally unacceptable. Ecumenical minded ways are avoided because all do not want any Church disagreements, the fruits of the awkward conversation nobody wanted. The older Priest is tired of such things and so are the faithful. The Priest and the faithful agree and just want to go to Church and pray, build the Church and keep the Orthodox traditions. So happy birthday will not be sung instead of God grant you many years and the Priest who really is a sweetheart I must say uses the Orthodox study bible for bible study classes an evening every week. There should be more patristic comments though in the foot notes.

So when you say, "I think, I have every right to question him and disagree with him, and ask for a proper explanation. I'm not just going to be polite and swallow everything anyone says," you would have been in the other room with me, so I agree. I'm sure it would have been a lively conversation! We are to keep the traditions of the Orthodox Church and asking for a proper explanation is among them. When an explanation goes against the traditions of the Orthodox Church a counter explanation of why that is so can be very helpful even when it is uncomfortable.

Recently I spoke with a Priest whom I've known since my youth and he mentioned that ecumenism is not anywhere near as prevalent as it used to be, it is being rejected by many nowadays. Back in the 60's he said it was just terrible, in short he said things are much better now so that's good to know. It is precisely by asking for a proper explanations that things are getting better. Many of the cradle Orthodox would just listen to the Priests or Bishops since that trust is woven into their souls, that was a problem when some started out along the ecumenical movement path. Many of us did not read as much as those that convert to the faith, we would go to Church listen to the Priest etc. and continue on with what we learned from our parents and grandparents, don't move icons, paint them this way not your own way who do you think you are to change those traditions, sing this way not that way, don't disagree with the Priest about Church matters what do we know etc. So your understanding Mary of "I have every right to question" is not easy for others to follow that really are very pious because they are used to being obedient to what the Orthodox Bishops and Priests say. But they are with you very often more strongly than we might think.

Interesting enough the Antiochians with many converts who are well read are against Ecumenism thanks be to God for them and thanks be to God for those that we have learned much from like many of the participants here on Monachos.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[ronaldasten]

Dear Matthew, dear Brethren,

Coming home from the Akathistos prayer, where I had to think a lot about being nice to brethren in the Orthodox Church, who tempt to change the Church from the inside, and loving those without faith or having another confession, who try to change the Church from the outside and what to do, how to react.

You said Love one another, but does love not also imply that I should tell my brother where he leaves the Church?(he leaves it because his ideas and wishes are not compatible with the teachings of the Church) That I must tell him so, because I love him and don't want him to get lost?!

When I go with my kin somewhere and I see how one falls in a river should I try to pull him out or should I let him drown? Which deed proves the better love? Which deed proves the True Love? The Love that went upon the cross, and gave his life for the Church!

Being a convert myself, I laid off my old ideas, my old views, and let my tell you why: Because I found this pearl! This precious pearl, more beautiful as everything I had ever seen before, giving more to my life as everything before and filling my heart and my senses better than everything and every religion I have been, better and more beautiful so that I only long to see the Heaven and to see Him as He is!

I gave up a lot for this, I had to give up the name which my parents had given me, but it was all a little sacrifice for what I received. And therefore I can not understand that this convert you are talking about and who became a priest in the Church brings up such ideas as you told us. It can be that he still has much of his former tradition in his luggage. And I really can understand why you are sad about these things happened at the dinner table. But real love is not present by going away, but by standing and defending the Church, which you and I are also!

All who belong to God and Jesus Christ are with the bishop; and all who repent [of schism] and come into the unity of the Church will also belong to God, that they may be living according to Jesus Christ. Make no mistake, my brothers. If anyone follows a man who causes a schism, he 'does not inherit the Kingdom of God'. And any man who goes in for strange doctrine disassociates himself from the Passion.
- St Ignatius of Antioch Christos voskrese! Nicolaj

[aAaBecker]

But real love is not present by going away, but by standing and defending the Church, which you and I are also! I think going away sometimes is also an expression of love and much can be accomplished. In this matter it was difficult for me to listen. Nevertheless when I went away the conversation ceased so that's good and things worked out. So we can love or attempt to love even by going away sometimes.

Once there was a Church board meeting and tempers got out of control over some issues. The pious bishop got up in the middle of the heated discussion and started praying in his usual evening prayer manner. People became quiet, the bishop continued to pray for a few minutes and then sat down when he was finished. the meeting went on with a different tone being set. So the bishop did what he was used to doing and in my situation I went into the other room and scratched my head as usual, I don't recall if I made the sign of the cross in the room but after the dinner I think we all did and things worked out in the end, so that's good.

I guess what I'm trying to say Nicolaj is how we handle matters matter as well, faithful prayers like the bishop seem to be the best way to go and things can work out.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[ronaldasten]

Yes Matthew, often prayers are all we can add. And heated discussions are most never a basis for something fruit baring. And bringing something positive is more often better understood the next day or the next discussion round as at the moment.

Remaining silent is no solution on the long term, but it may suit for the moment. Therefore the monks came out of the desert to contribute their part to discussions, although they adore silence. So there are days to be quiet and days to stand up. Hopefully God helps us to find which day is.

In Christ, Nicolaj

[amberamuletuk]

Dear Matthew,

Thanks for explaining yourself. It took me a while to understand what you were saying, but over the course of the afternoon, as I thought about it, I think I understood. I suppose, you're just trying to differentiate between the difference in a meal-time discussions, and more serious, teaching/doctrinal discussions.

If so, I agree. Serious discussions are best left for a different time, when there's no food around. A meal time, is more for getting to know each other as persons, and not primarily a time for teaching. Its a time for being yourself, good, bad and ugly, and for loving and being loved for your peculiar habits that make you who you are.

We were at my second cousin's & her family's yesterday. First time meeting them. I'd heard that she'd married a jewish man. But I was left confused, for many of them were wearing crosses (family members of the 'Jewish man' who'd married my second cousin). However, I didn't ask them about it. I didn't want to know, unless the conversations took a 'theological' direction. I had so much fun getting to know them, watching how they interacted with each other, and seeing how much they loved each other... in fact, I fell in love with them to such a degree that I left, wishing I was more directly related to them! I think I'll be terribly disappointed if I don't see them again next Christmas.

But, if instead of just being ordinary people, if we'd just had theological discussions, it would've made for many awkward conversations, or none at all. A time, and place for every kind of conversation, eh? =)

In Christ,
Mary

[w4HPpbSW]

Yes Matthew, often prayers are all we can add. And heated discussions are most never a basis for something fruit baring. And bringing something positive is more often better understood the next day or the next discussion round as at the moment.

Remaining silent is no solution on the long term, but it may suit for the moment. Therefore the monks came out of the desert to contribute their part to discussions, although they adore silence. So there are days to be quiet and days to stand up. Hopefully God helps us to find which day is.

In Christ, Nicolaj

Dear All:

As the initiator of this thread I feel that I have opened a Pandora's Box. t was never my intention to create any division in The Church. I really wanted to understand why our hierarchies "seem" to disagree so vehemently over issues that seem so very important to me. I am not sure that I will find my answer. As a simple man, I just want us all to be on the same page! Apparently, at this particular juncture of time, it's impossible! To me there appears to be major disagreement on the praxis of our faith. I refer to the chrismation ("only") of converts to the church. I see a tremendous danger in ecumenism one that threatens the very fabric of Orthodoxy. There is disagreement between the monastics and hierarchies on issues that seem apocalyptic in nature. It seems that at some level, the church has gone underground! Does this sound real? I could site a number of issues here but most of you seem aware of current events. I have prayed diligently over this issue and have read the fathers of the church searching for answers and have learned a few things. I guess for me it is a matter of trust. Not trust in the fathers or in the church militant but in individuals whom I see as on the edge of heresy. As these individuals are in positions of authority I am faced with a decision as to wether to obey or to follow my conscience. I have heard it said that to obey the heirarchs, even if they are wrong, is the right thing to do. This leaves me with ambivalence. I really don't want this in my heart! There has always been confusion in the church as to the proper way to treat the heterodox. These relationships have never been easy. It seems to me that even in light of the attachment to ecumenical fellowship, and because of such difficulties, the meeting with them, and communication through honest dialogue, plus any willingness to help them is hindered. It is not uncommon to find the use of unfriendly expressions, humiliating adjectives and insulting words against the unorthodox. I know that this leads to their isolation and total alienation from our communion. All of this results in irritating and hostile feelings. One could rightly ask, where is our charity? Is it right in the light of such divergence to say that they are not still children of God? made in His image? There is truly no justification for an unfriendly stand. But can we (or should we call them brothers?) The fathers declare that they do not hate sinners or heretics, but only sin and heresies. They seem to be charitable and indulgent towards the weak and erring, encouraging contacts and efforts towards honest dialogue and final reconciliation. A main characteristic of saintly persons seems to be pervaded by mildness and gentleness. At the same time there are many admonitions, even by Christ himself, I refer to Mt 10:11, 15 and especially to TiT 3: 9, 11 The excommunication implyed here is implicitly clear! so..... I have come to the conclusion that there is definitely error in the church, it makes me mad! It makes me sad, it drives me to prayer, it brings tears to my eyes and a real ache in my heart! Many don't even seem to see it! God help me I do. I earnestly pray for our leadership, I can't judge their hearts, they cause me real concern and disappointment. I hope they have Love as their motivation, I know Christ will not abandon us as He promised to be with us to the end. God help us all.

INXC,
Seraphim

[aAaBecker]

Post deleted.

[MP+4]

The protestants are not branches of Orthodoxy in any way, they may be branches of roman catholicism but not of Orthodoxy.
There is no such thing as Orthodoxy being the root and those of other dogmas being branches. Protestantism are not churches they are heresies and are cast off from the vine (or should we say there mother the RC was). The branch theory is heresy and what the said bishop of the OP claimed fits the bill. Any departure from Orthodoxy withers and dies. The entire tree is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church which is the Orthodox Church and there is only a falling away from that tree, a cutting off (anathemas).
The Body of Christ is not fragmented in any way. The ecumenists may have confused many into their error, but the Gospel does not lie. Not a bone of Him was broken.The Church is not fragmented, broke into parts, or severed into sections. Likewise Christ was not beheaded like the Baptist, the Head is not severed from the One Body of Christ. It is one unified hypostasis not 33,000.

[amberamuletuk]

I have come to the conclusion that there is definitely error in the church, it makes me mad! It makes me sad, it drives me to prayer, it brings tears to my eyes and a real ache in my heart! Many don't even seem to see it! God help me I do. I earnestly pray for our leadership, I can't judge their hearts, they cause me real concern and disappointment. I hope they have Love as their motivation, I know Christ will not abandon us as He promised to be with us to the end. God help us all.

INXC,
Seraphim

Dear Seraphim (or should I call you Elijah?), You ain't the only one! There's at least 7000 others.
Then a voice said to him, "What are you doing here, Elijah?"

He replied, "I have been very zealous for the LORD God Almighty. The Israelites have rejected your covenant, broken down your altars, and put your prophets to death with the sword. I am the only one left, and now they are trying to kill me too." The LORD said to him, "Go back the way you came, and go to the Desert of Damascus.... Yet I reserve seven thousand in Israel—all whose knees have not bowed down to Baal and all whose mouths have not kissed him." (1 Kings 19) I understand how you're feeling. In fact, I sent Fr Raphael an almost identical pm some days ago. His reply to me was like medicine to my soul, so, I hope you won't mind if I share it with you:

We have to keep our heads down as it were, not to promote ignorance in ourselves, but rather to not be distracted by sights that in our eyes do not have their true shape in the larger context of the Church. This is very important, otherwise some occurrence, which is truly distressing in itself, is not seen in its proper way.

To see properly though we must strive to see with the eyes of Christ. This means first to not trust our own assessment of things and then to drive mistrust from our hearts. Then surely Christ in His own will show us where the truth of things is.

Which doesn't mean there are not trials or difficult things- but it does mean these things take on a completely different look inasmuch as we see them through the eyes of Christ. Indeed when you think of it this is how the Church is never overcome by our sin. It is continually overcoming it through its life in Christ.

In Christ- Fr Raphael I get bogged down by details, and forget the larger picture. The larger picture starts way back at the time of the Apostles and continues to this day. Isn't it mind boggling to thing that all of our sins in all these 1000s of years still haven't destroyed the Church? Isn't it amazing that we still find healing when we go to Church, Confess, and partake of the Eucharist? In that respect, nothing has changed in the Church.

I'm glad your concerns are leading you to pray for our leadership. I'm with you. For a long time, I didn't think it made any difference if I prayed for them or not, so I didn't. But I've decided to let God be the judge of that, and I just pray.

His promises are true. We will not be overcome by the gates of Hades, not even by our own sins.

Peace in Christ,
Mary.

[amberamuletuk]

I just realized, in my last post, that will take a while to appear... I said that the Church started with the Apostles. I'm sure I was wrong. That would leave out poor Elijah and everyone else who repented way before the Apostles came along. Perhpas the Church began with Adam and Eve, and Cain was the first heretic... still our brother in the flesh, but no longer a part of the Church...

Mary.

[soonahonsefalh]

Perhaps the angelic host were the first Church and Satan the first heretic! There is, if the Book of Revelation is anything to go by, a heavenly Liturgy which presumably has been going on since the creation of the angelic host.

[Seiblybiozy]

That's what I love about Orthodoxy. It's roots go all the way back to the beginning.

[w4HPpbSW]

Seraphim,

I have uploaded an image in my profile section that seems to depict that which your bishop was referring to.

Dear Kypreos :

Any chance you could email the image you posted. When I try to view it, it gets pretty fuzzy when I zoom in to read it. It then become eligible

INXC,
Seraphim

[12Cickprior]

I am sorry Seraphim, I do not know the "Branch Theory" of which you speak. I only know church history. If you do not believe that Orthodoxy is the root of orthodox christianity, do you not believe that Rome broke from the fold in the 11th century and the Protestants broke from Rome in the 16th? How is it that we are our own tree if we share this history?

And, I am not saying that Orthodoxy is a part of other churches, I am saying we share a history in Christendom.

There is really no such thing as "little o" orthodoxy. Roman Catholicism and Protestantism have major Christological, Trinitarian, Ecclesiological, and Mysteriological heresies. Orthodoxy means correct glory. Only Orthodoxy allows man to partake of the uncreated glory of Christ. You cannot get this in Protestantism or Roman Catholicism. They do not produce deified men. Orthodoxy and the rest of Christianity are two seperate things.

A tree's branches are organically united. The logical conclusion of what this bishop said is that the various Christian confessions might not be as solid as Orthodoxy, but they are still all united in essence. This is incredibly false. To believe this nonsense would be to stand outside the mind of the Fathers.

Orthodox participation in ecumenism needs to be done away with. If there is ever another Ecumenical Council, I'm sure this will be the issue. Over the past 100 years this issue has caused much scandal and division within the Church... it has caused some hierarchs to sell out Orthodoxy, and some zealot faithful throw themselves outside the salvific ship of the Church.

[lYVgWWcP]

Dear Kypreos :

Any chance you could email the image you posted. When I try to view it, it gets pretty fuzzy when I zoom in to read it. It then become eligible

INXC,
Seraphim

I have no problem emailing you the photo. It is a copy of a copy of a copy...etc. The quality is not very good. I have scanned it at 8 MB which seems to make it legible.

I can also mail it to you, and anyone else that would like it.