5956Re: Communion with the Serbian Church
- Jun 21, 2002Why do you quote a HOCNA site from 1986 to justify your position?
--- In orthodox-synod@y..., "vladimir kozyreff"
> October 15/ 28, 1986
> The Serbian patriarch himself, in the words of Fr. Justin Popovich,
> become the leader of 300 protestant churches by being a presidentof the
> World Council of Churches.Memory,
> under the leadership of the late Metropolitan Philaret of Blessed
> was the anathema against ecumenism and modernism issued by ourSynodal
> The Anathema . states openly that it is against "those who" promote
> ecumenism in word and deed..
> .the Serbian Church by its own arbitrary actions has fallen under
> Synod's anathema against ecumenism.truth
> Friendship .can be strengthened, forgotten or violated; doctrinal
> remains constant and unchanging.we share
> If we have true friendship with ecclesiastical bodies it is because
> the same confession of faith. Indeed, true friendship demands thatwe point
> out something that may be harmful or detrimental.condone their
> The Serbian Church has offended our friendship by asking us to
> violation of the canonical and doctrinal norms of the Church.condoned
> Even in the times of persecution in the past, the Church never
> doctrinal deviations. External conditions, including persecution,cannot
> determine what the Church teaches.formally issued
> In God
> Vladimir Kozyreff
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Hristofor [mailto:hristofor@m...]
> Envoye : mercredi 19 juin 2002 4:03
> A : orthodox-synod@y...
> Objet : [orthodox-synod] Communion with the Serbian Church
> To the best of my knowledge, I do not belive the Synod ever
> a "we are no longer in communion with Serbia" ukase (If someoneknows to
> the contrary, pls inform). Obviously, up until the communisttakeover, we
> were in communion with the Serbian Church. I belive that the policyunder
> Metropolitans Anastassy and Philaret was that there was nodefinitive break
> with the SC and that it fell on the bishops to use ekonomia.was
> At 10:24 PM 6/17/2002, you wrote:
> >Forgive me, I agree with you a great deal on the MP, et cetera, but
> >here I have to disagree. Vl Mark is not the sole participant in
> >communion with the Serbs-- the Synod in general acknowledges such
> >communion, and in the documents following the 2000 Sobor, they
> >clearly state why. Nor is this something underhanded as people
> >claim; when I was first a catechumen in 1998, this concelebration
> >something I knew about, when I asked who we were in communiondescribe a
> >To boot, the 12 priests in question *were* disobeying, since a new
> >Bishop had been chosen by the Synod. Whether the Bishop himself was
> >doing wrong is another matter-- but I wouldn't put the
> >word 'disobedience' in quotes.
> >Are the Serbs ecumenist? I don't know. I am not inclined to think
> >so, however. Not with the 'proof' I have been given.
> >--- In orthodox-synod@y..., "vladimir kozyreff"
> ><vladimir.kozyreff@s...> wrote:
> > > I am glad to see that all those who speak about Vl Mark
> > > knowledgeable and respected person.
> > >
> > > I do not have the honour of knowing him, but I insist that he
> > > atypical. Below is one more apparent contradiction about hisChurch
> > >
> > > In the "Bulletin" of the German Diocese of Russian Orthodox
> >Abroad ofdescribes a
> > > February, 2001, an article entitled " Visit to Serbia "
> > > visit of Serbia by Vl Mark, from February, 4/17 till February,
> >8/21. The
> > > report tells about his visiting a few monasteries in which he
> > > with Serbian priests.
> > >
> > > The Serbian orthodox church is a member of the World Council of
> > > The ecumenical movement was anathematised by our church in1983.
> >can weline
> > > reconcliate the anathema of our Church with Vl Mark's communion
> >with the
> > > Serbian Church? Again, I cannot understand Vl Mark's position
> >relative to
> > > our Church's.
> > >
> > > Do we not expect bishops to act, think and teach following the
> >of thenot?
> > > Church? Is this co-celebration not a clear disobedience to the
> > > committed in difficult times by a bishop that incidently teaches
> > > to his flock? Does this not add to the confusion of an already
> >confuse time?
> > > Is he anathema for communed with an anatematised movement? Or
> >If not,been
> > > why? Is this a acceptable question to put?
> > >
> > > Please explain this to me. I am puzzled. In the meantime, 12
> >priests from
> > > Western Europe were suspended for "disobeying", without having
> >heard bythat
> > > the Synod and without any explanation to the believers, except
> >they didhttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > not obey.
> > >
> > > In Christ,
> > >
> > > Vladimir Kozyreff
> >Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>