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

Re: Extremism, Esphigmenou, Mixed Marriages, RC 'church'

Expand Messages
  • vkozyreff <vladimir.kozyreff@skynet.be>
    Dear Luke, You write: Baloney, Stephanos. Don t you know that heretics come from the Church? And if they aren t Christians you d better confess your sin
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 2, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Luke,

      You write:

      "Baloney, Stephanos. Don't you know that heretics come from the
      Church? And if they aren't Christians you'd better confess your sin
      because the apostolic faith is not to judge the world. "For the time
      has come for judgment to begin at the house of God."

      The latino-catholics are indeed schismatic and heretic that have
      pledged to destroy orthodoxy and have already achieved a lot in that
      line. As schismatic, they do indeed come from the Church, but they
      have left her. The siege of Esphigmenou is part of their work.

      You write:

      All the more reason to "let us reason together" with them, to bring
      them to the truth. What happened to going into all the world and
      preaching the gospel to "every creature?"

      Let us not reinvent the appropriate way to relate with heretics. Let
      us not be the frog that initiates an intimate relationship with the
      crocodile to convert him to goodness. "Be self controlled and alert.
      Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for
      someone to devour". (1 Peter 5:7-9).

      Please see also post 6300:

      "Do not converse with heretics even for the sake of defending the
      faith, for fear lest their words instil their poison in your mind".
      Bl. Isaias

      "For if they have doctrines opposed to ours, it is not fitting to be
      mixed up with them for this cause alone. [...] What do you
      say? "Their faith is the same; these men are orthodox"? Why, then,
      are they not with us?" St. John Chrysostom

      "It is therefore unlawful, and a profanation, and an act the
      punishment of which is death, to love to associate with unholy
      heretics, and to unite yourself to their communion". St. Cyril of
      Alexandria.

      etc., etc.

      You write:

      That's true ecumenism. False ecumenism is indeed heretical.

      I have met this argument already. I am afraid this is a new tactic on
      the part of the ecumenist that infiltrate our Church. They suggest
      that there is a good ecumenism and a bad one, and that we must combat
      the first and support the second.

      There is no good ecumenism and bad ecumenism. There is only ecumenism
      and orthodoxy.

      An orthodox knows that any adulteration of the faith that has created
      heresy can be cured only by returning to orthodoxy, not by reaching a
      compromise halfway between orthodoxy and heresy. In such a process,
      orthodoxy would be lost. Half a lie is still a lie.

      This being said, how many latino-catholics and how many ecumenist
      have you brought back to orthodoxy?

      The monks of Esphigmenou are right and think right. They are
      orthodox. Any harm that is done to them is made to us. Any podvig of
      theirs will be for our divinisation.

      Christ will not say to them: "So, because you are lukewarm–neither
      hot nor cold–I am about to spit you out of my mouth". (Revelation
      3:15-17)

      Let us hope Christ will not say that to us either.

      In Christ,

      Vladimir Kozyreff

      --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "luke padgett <boepad@m...>"
      <boepad@m...> wrote:
      > --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, StephenATL <sbu@b...> wrote:
      >
      > > 1. Roman Catholics are NOT Christians............ they are
      HERETICS!
      >
      > Baloney, Stephanos. Don't you know that heretics come from the
      > Church? And if they aren't Christians you'd better confess your sin
      > because the apostolic faith is not to judge the world. "For the
      time
      > has come for judgment to begin at the house of God.."
      >
      > > ROMAN Catholicism is so far from genuine Christianity that it can
      > > be called nothing less than a heresy, and has been so named by
      many
      > > Church Councils and Holy Fathers!
      >
      > All the more reason to "let us reason together" with them, to bring
      > them to the truth. What happened to going into all the world and
      > preaching the gospel to "every creature?"
      >
      > > The Fathers and Saint of the Church constantly warn us about even
      > > talking with heretics and worldly people......... knowing that no
      > > matter how strong our faith and knowledge of the faith is, in a
      > > moment of weakness and/or doubt they could lead us astray, or at
      > > least start us questioning our faith.
      >
      > If it is not of God, they can't do it. Remember the promises. Have
      > faith.
      >
      > > SINCERE, HONEST discussions with Roman Catholics, with a goal of
      > > reuniting them to the Faith would be good.
      >
      > That's true ecumenism. False ecumenism is indeed heretical. But
      true
      > ecumenism is gospel. Let us not give way to fear! For the zealot
      > monks to tell their patriarch that he can't talk to heretics lest
      > they won't acknowledge him seems to me to be unacceptable. I don't
      > believe it's true to Orthodox Christianity. It's not the way to go.
      > And the ROCOR should know all too well the dangers of a schismatic
      > spirit.
      >
      > Save, O Lord, and have mercy on the holy Eastern Orthodox
      patriarchs,
      > most reverend metropolitans, Orthodox archbishops and bishops, and
      > all the priestly and monastic order, and all who serve in the
      Church,
      > whom Thou hast appointed to shepherd Thy rational flock, and
      through
      > their prayers have mercy and save me, a sinner.
      >
      > Love, luke
    • luke padgett <boepad@msn.com>
      Dear Vladimir, ... Even if they have pledged to destroy orthodoxy, can they do it? I don t believe they can. Nevertheless, let us be attentive. ... We war
      Message 2 of 6 , Feb 2, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Vladimir,

        > The latino-catholics are indeed schismatic and heretic that have
        > pledged to destroy orthodoxy and have already achieved a lot in
        > that line. As schismatic, they do indeed come from the Church, but
        > they have left her. The siege of Esphigmenou is part of their work.

        Even if they have "pledged to destroy orthodoxy," can they do it? I
        don't believe they can. Nevertheless, let us be attentive.

        > Let us not reinvent the appropriate way to relate with heretics.

        We war not against flesh and blood. If we have a neighbor who is a
        Presbyterian or a Roman Catholic, it is not our prerogative not to
        talk to them. If they are willing to talk to me about why I'm
        Orthodox, I'm going to talk to them. Such opportunities are rare.

        > Please see also post 6300:

        All these citations have a context. The context is very important. My
        sense is that when the apostolic fathers speak of heretics, they're
        talking about formal heretics, not those who are defending what
        they've always known as "the faith."

        > An orthodox knows that any adulteration of the faith that has
        > created heresy can be cured only by returning to orthodoxy, not by
        > reaching a compromise halfway between orthodoxy and heresy. In such
        > a process, orthodoxy would be lost. Half a lie is still a lie.

        When orthodoxy is lost I'd say the faithful can start to wall
        themselves off from their hierarchs. I could be wrong but I don't
        think the holy canons allow for such just because someone doesn't
        agree with their decisions.

        > This being said, how many latino-catholics and how many ecumenist
        > have you brought back to orthodoxy?

        None, because I don't personally know anyone who has willingly left
        orthodoxy for heresy. But I have witnessed to some by word and life,
        and seen them come to the true faith.

        > The monks of Esphigmenou are right and think right. They are
        > orthodox.

        What concerns me is those who enter into a spiritual relationship
        knowing the basis for it, have no moral justification for changing
        the terms of the relationship when things don't go well. Very much
        like a marriage, isn't it? They may very well be right, but if their
        actions are un-orthodox they forfeit their witness. Even if they're
        right, they're wrong. I would have much more respect for the
        brotherhood if they said, "we're willingly giving up this ground as a
        testimony against what we belive is evil on the part of the
        patriarch."

        I don't agree with everything my priest or bishop does or allows. I
        have to remind myself that if I could design my own bishop, priest,
        and parish, I would have the perfect church. But the brother standing
        next to me probably wouldn't think so! I'm not in the ROCOR, by the
        way, but I am a friend and in many ways an admirer.

        Love, luke
      • luke padgett <boepad@msn.com>
        I want to modify, or more accurately, clarify what I wrote earlier. ... There are really two separate (though related) issues here. One is the issue of
        Message 3 of 6 , Feb 4, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          I want to modify, or more accurately, clarify what I wrote earlier.

          > The latino-catholics are indeed schismatic and heretic that have
          > pledged to destroy orthodoxy and have already achieved a lot in
          > that line. As schismatic, they do indeed come from the Church, but
          > they have left her. The siege of Esphigmenou is part of their work.

          There are really two separate (though related) issues here. One is
          the issue of ecumenism. The other is the issue of the Esphigmenou
          monks and their status on the holy mountain. Let me state that I do
          believe the "branch theory" of the Church is heretical. And when I
          say that there is "good ecumenism" I should modify that to say that,
          on an official level, i.e. hopes for unification/intercommunion with
          Romanism, WCC/NCC involvment, etc., it may be harmful for Orthodoxy.
          On a personal level I believe we have an obligation to witness.

          Having said previously that the EP may be wrong, he may be hurting
          the witness of Orthodoxy if by "contacts" is meant to achieve anything
          official with Romanism. There is nothing to gain on that level other
          than common ground on social-ethical issues, in my opinion. It is
          pretty clear that John Paul II has worked consistently to try to
          bring Orthodoxy "back into the fold." Although I should give them
          credit for repudiating the means of uniatism to do so. But we must be
          discerning.

          The monks may be right in their stance, but wrong in their actions. I
          wish that they would work from within as a sure and steady, but
          humble and faithful witness to the Church, the Patriarch, and the
          world of the glory of the true Faith.

          Love, luke
        • luke padgett <loukas@swbell.net>
          I want to modify, or more accurately, clarify what I wrote earlier. ... There are really two separate (though related) issues here. One is the issue of
          Message 4 of 6 , Feb 5, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            I want to modify, or more accurately, clarify what I wrote earlier.

            > The latino-catholics are indeed schismatic and heretic that have
            > pledged to destroy orthodoxy and have already achieved a lot in
            > that line. As schismatic, they do indeed come from the Church, but
            > they have left her. The siege of Esphigmenou is part of their work.

            There are really two separate (though related) issues here. One is
            the issue of ecumenism. The other is the issue of the Esphigmenou
            monks and their status on the holy mountain. Let me state that I do
            believe the "branch theory" of the Church is heretical. And when I
            say that there is "good ecumenism" I should modify that to say that,
            on an official level, i.e. hopes for unification/intercommunion with
            Romanism, WCC/NCC involvment, etc., it may be harmful for Orthodoxy.
            On a personal level I believe we have an obligation to witness.

            Having said previously that the EP may be wrong, he may be hurting
            the witness of Orthodoxy if by "contacts" is meant to achieve anything
            official with Romanism. There is nothing to gain on that level other
            than common ground on social-ethical issues, in my opinion. It is
            pretty clear that John Paul II has worked consistently to try to
            bring Orthodoxy "back into the fold." Although I should give them
            credit for repudiating the means of uniatism to do so. But we must be
            discerning.

            The monks may be right in their position but wrong in their actions.
            I wish that they would work from within as a sure and steady, but
            humble and faithful witness to the Church, the Patriarch, and the
            world of the glory of the true Faith.

            Luke Padgett
            layman at St. Antony parish of the Antiochian Archdiocese, under His
            Grace Bp. Basil of Enfeh al-Koura (which, being translated means
            Wichita), who has a beard and does not wear suits ;)
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.