November 23, 2016
Meeting last week, the Holy Synod of the Church of Bulgaria came to a conclusion on the Council of Crete and its decisions, maintaining their earlier rejection of it.
The patriarch of Bulgaria has informed Archbishop Ieronymos of Athens by letter of the synod’s decision, with an official announcement expected soon.
The Bulgarian Synod is the first to have made an official decision regarding the documents adopted on Crete in June. The Holy Synod of the Greek Church is meeting today and tomorrow and is expected to come to a decision on the conciliar documents.
23 / 11 / 2016
Pe lângă faptul că destui episcopi nu au semnat (15% din cei prezenţi), trebuie subliniat cazul delegaţiei Patriarhiei Serbiei în care majoritatea episcopilor din nu au semnat documentul 6, cel cu ecumenismul. Deci, nu a existat consens în interiorul delegaţiei, ci a existat o clară majoritate împotriva documentului mult contestat. Şi atunci, ne întrebăm: ce vot a dat Patriarhul Serbiei? Pentru că se spune că el ar fi exprimat ca vot al Bisericii Sârbe contrarul voinţei majorităţii delegaţiei. Şi, astfel, ajungem la vechea problemă a noii eclesiologii adoptate implicit de Adunarea din Creta: neo papismul întâi-stătătorilor – marele cal troian introdus în cetatea Bisericii de către evenimentul din Creta. Lucru de care se plâng şi Mitropoliţi participanţi, mari nume în teologia contemporană, precum Irineu Bulobic al Backăi:
Metropolitan Irinej of Bačka, who took part in the Crete Council as part of the delegation of the Serbian Orthodox Church, explained on the pages of the Greek site Romfea precisely why he refused to sign the document entitled “Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World.”
Vladkya Irinej thus confirmed the information reported in Greek media that he was one of those who did not sign the document.
“I did not sign the document ‘Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World,’” writes His Grace Irinej, “because the episcopal members of the Council had the right to express themselves, but not the right to vote. At the Council instead of the rule adopted by the Apostles and commanded by the Holy Fathers of ‘one man, one vote,’ another rule was in force: ‘one autocephalous Church, one vote.’ In other words, only the primates of the Local Churches have the right to vote.
From this rule, in his opinion, flows the following:
- The Council presents itself not as an institution of the one unified Body of the Church, but as a parliamentary body, consisting of independent and self-sustaining Churches;
- The Council of primates of the Churches acted in essence as a gathering of popes;
- Intentionally or not, the Council is belittled to the level of a gathering of the primates of Local Churches who simply have an extended accompanying delegation.
“Therefore,” concludes Vladyka Irinej, “the difference between an Orthodox bishop and a heterodox observer at the Council is simply that the first can speak at his own discretion, while the second sits silently: neither one could decide anything.”
The only thing a bishop could have done is to not sign a text that does not express his convictions.
“But the main reason I didn’t sign the document is its ecclesiologically ambiguous and dubious contents in a few places which border on heretical teachings,“ Vladyka Irinej explained.
The publication of the open letter of His Grace Irinej of Bačka and the recent statement of Metropolitan Amfilohije of Montenegro on television confirmed that these two delegates of the Serbian Orthodox Church refused to sign the aforementioned document. It is important to note that both bishops played one of the key roles in the work of the Serbian delegation and were present during all of the meetings in the presidium together with the Serbian Patriarch, Irinej.
The statements of these two delegates simultaneously state that the number of Serbian bishops who refused to sign the document “Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World” could be much larger
Sfântul Ioan Gură de Aur, acest sfânt ierarh condamnat pe nedrept de un sinod şi prăznuit astăzi, să ocrotească Biserica în aceste grele vremuri! Amin!
Citiţi despre faptul că nu postul de mâncare este esenţial înainte de Sf. Împărtăşanie şila că în afară de posturile rânduite peste an şi cele de miercuri şi vineri, Biserica nu a rânduit alt post pentru Împărtăşanie decât ajunarea euharistică (adică să nu fi mâncat în ziua când ne împărtăşim): http://www.pemptousia.ro/2013/01/dumnezeiasca-impartasanie-fara-post/