Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

13720RE: [orthodox-synod] Re: Documents Concerning the HOCNA Separation?

Expand Messages
  • byakimov@csc.com.au
    Mar 1 1:46 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Father Alexis,

      Well (& correctly) said.

      protodeacon Basil from Canberra




      "Fr. Alexis
      Duncan" To: <orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com>
      <7848@adelphia.n cc:
      et> Subject: RE: [orthodox-synod] Re: Documents Concerning the HOCNA
      Separation?
      02/03/2005 04:31
      AM
      Please respond
      to
      orthodox-synod






      A terribly odd sentiment that I have heard expressed at
      other times is that the Anathema of 1983 is only for our
      Church Abroad and her faithful children. It is odd because
      if we believe our bishops in congregation are led by the
      Holy Spirit, then the anathema must necessarily speak for
      the Church as a whole.

      Now certain jurisdictions not in agreement might not
      recognize the anathema. That is true. However, whether they
      recognize it or not, if, as I say, we believe the Holy
      Spirit directs the synod of bishops, then it is a little
      like the fellow who doesn't recognize that planets invisible
      to the naked eye exist. Even if the synod of bishops were
      not directed by the Holy Spirit, the anathema still remains
      an historic pronouncement and it is either true or not.
      Would any Orthodox Christian dare say it is false?

      Now we have a thorny question. Can the synod of bishops be
      incorrect? Does the Holy Spirit direct them at one time and
      not at others? That opens a whole can of worms does it not?
      I have an understanding that a local synod of bishops
      possesses the grace of the Holy Spirit, yet might make
      mistakes. In other words, the Holy Spirit does not force a
      bishop to be correct. Such, I feel, was the anathematization
      of the Old Believers. It was a mistake, in my opinion.

      So, we still have the anathema of 1983 in force. We can
      discuss whether it was contrived or expected or secretly
      written or slipped in or any other number of charges
      stemming from our own personal suspicions or prejudices
      (even though that seems terribly wasteful of intellectual
      energies). But the bishops did accept it and none of them
      were dupes were they? So, it seems to me that until they
      rescind it, we confess it to be true.

      _________________________________________________
      Fr. Alexis Duncan
      Joy of All Who Sorrow Russian Orthodox Church
      Atlanta, GA
      www.orthodoxinfo.biz




      JRS: No anathema has the power to "act of itself" or to
      place anyone outside the Church;
      anathemas can be read or studied for their doctinal content,
      rather like a catechism, and they
      can be applied as Church law by a Synod over matters within
      its own jurisdiction.

      JRS: The anathema was nothing that was planned or even
      expected by the ROCOR hierarchs,
      including Metropolitan Philaret, who had gathered for the
      Sobor of 1983.
    • Show all 19 messages in this topic