ÿþ<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" /> <!-- InstanceBeginEditable name="doctitle" --> <title>The Voice Of Orthodoxy</title> <style type="text/css"> <!-- body { background-color: #ecedf2; } .style81 {color: #0C5ADC; font-weight: bold; } .style82 {font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-weight: bold; } --> </style></head> <BODY LEFTMARGIN=0 TOPMARGIN=0 MARGINWIDTH=0 MARGINHEIGHT=0> <table width="784" height="111" border="0" align="center" bordercolor="#E9E9E9" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <tr> <td height="45" bgcolor="#9999FF"> <p align="center"><font size="+6" COLOR = #990000> THE VOICE OF ORTHODOXY</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="45" bgcolor="#9999FF" valign="top" > <p align="center"><b><font size="+2"> <i>A Bimonthly Conservative Journal To Defend The Apostolic Faith, Morals And Canons Of The Ancient Orthodox Church.</b></i> <strong> <table width="784" border="0" align="center"> <tr> <td align = "left">Volume : XIV</td> <td align = "center">JANUARY- FEBRUARY 2010</td> <td align = "right">Issue : 1</td> </tr> </table> </strong> <marquee scrollamount="2" direction="left"><i>ORTHODOXY: THE TRUTH BEARER; FOR REQUESTS CALL: 773-480-7273</i></marquee> </p> </td> </tr> </table> <table width="784" height="758" border="0" align="center" bordercolor="#E9E9E9" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <tr> <td width="164" height="182" rowspan="2" valign="top" bgcolor="#9999FF"><br /> <table width="96%" height="75" border="0" align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="1" bgcolor="#9999FF"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="153" valign="top"> <table> <tr> <p><img src="../../images/st.mary.jpg" width="153" height="209" /></p> </tr> </table> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#eef5f9"> <td bgcolor="#ecedf2" height="14"><table cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" width="98%" align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="15%" height="16"><div align="right"> <div align="justify"><font color="#333333" size="2"><width="8" height="9" /></font></div> </div></td> <td align="justify" width="85%"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" color="#333333" size="2"><a href="../../default.html">Home</a></font></td> </tr> </tbody> </table></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#eef5f9"> <td bgcolor="#ecedf2" height="14"><table cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" width="98%" align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="15%" height="16"><div align="right"> <div align="justify"><font color="#333333" size="2"><width="8" height="9" /></font></div> </div></td> <td align="justify" width="85%"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" color="#333333" size="2"><a href="../../current.html">Current Issue</a></font></td> </tr> </tbody> </table></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor="#eef5f9"> <td bgcolor="#ecedf2" height="21"><table width="99%" height="18" border="0" align="center" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="15%"><div align="right"> <div align="justify"><font color="#333333" size="2"><width="8" height="9" /></font></div> </div></td> <td align="justify" width="85%"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" color="#333333" size="2"><a href="../../archives.html">Archives</a></font></td> </tr> </tbody> </table></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </br> <font size="2" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Sponsors &gt;&gt;</strong></font><br /> <table width="98%" height="159" border="0" align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="1" bgcolor="#ecedf2"> <tbody> <tr bgcolor="#eef5f9"> <td width="149" bgcolor="#ecedf2" height="23"><table cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" width="100%" align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td><div align="justify"></div> <font color="#333333" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" class="style45"><b>Coming Soon..</b></font></td> </tr> </tbody> </table></td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><!-- InstanceBeginEditable name="EditRegion13" --> <table width="620" border="0" align="center"> <tr> <td width="614" height="476" valign="top"> <p align="center"><font size="6" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b>Papism: The Insurmountable Obstacle of Christian Unity</b></font></p> <p align="center"><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b>By Archbishop Stylianos Harkianakis of Australia</b></font> <br> </p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b>Part I</b></font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b>1. Introductory Remarks</b></font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Following the totally unexpected escalation in provocations from the Vatican, under BENEDICT XVI, towards other Christians (especially the Orthodox, as we shall see below!), it is as plain as the sun that we are unfortunately entering a period of complete uncertainty, to mention nothing of strange  obscurity .</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">The medieval audacity of  Papism , which we all believed was a thing of the past  in spite of the highly controversial dogmatism of the  doctrine of papal infallibility at Vatican Council I (1870)  is making a surprising return, and indeed in a manner that is completely incompatible with the deeper cultivation of persons, and the sincere efforts towards  purification which the Western Christian world in general has presented during the past two centuries.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Therefore, given the general tendency of the  Ecumenical Movement on the one hand towards revitalization and reconstitution, coupled with the official decision of the Roman Church expressed through Vatican Council II concerning a substantial purification of  institutions ,  functions and  persons on the basis of the genuine sources of the common first Christian millennium, the terrible impression may be given that all these things are not only doubted, but in fact ridiculed.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">We should then say bluntly: that it appears that the approach of the hard-line cardinals of the Roman Curia has prevailed, which establishes  Papism (not as the  Primacy of one Bishop , but as an unbearably totalitarian  ideology ) as the truly INSURMOUNTABLE OBSTACLE, firstly for the  reunification of divided Christians, but also simply for peaceful  unity among themselves. Not to mention with non-Christians and  atheists .</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">For this reason we are obliged today to make several brief comments and observations in simplified language (as much as this is possible, for the benefit mainly of the everyday Christians of East and West), in relation to the very recent revival of Papal Primacy and Infallibility, under the most unexpected circumstances, and at the expense of Christianity as a whole.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">The observations presented here become even more urgent in order to prevent possibly greater problems between the Christian Churches and Denominations, but also in terms of the Churches imperative creative relations with the rest of the world, which finds itself before enormous impasses, and for which Christianity still claims to  maintain unchanged the only saving truth of Revelation for all.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b> <br> 2. Brief overview of the historical evolution of Papism in the Church</b></font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Whoever has happened to study Church history seriously, i.e. without prejudices, would no doubt have observed (sometimes with astonishment, but on most occasions with justifiable indignation) an almost incredible fact: Before the Roman Emperors frightful persecutions of Christians had ceased on an institutional level (312-313AD), their Bishops  who were considered to be the immediate Successors of the Apostles  began to show signs of an unhealthy  ambition which was incompatible with the teaching of Christ.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">What was initially a reserved rivalry between them for  Primacy ,  Seniority and  Presidency , very soon developed almost into a war of  fratricide , when Christianity became the  legal , and then  official , religion of the State under Constantine the Great.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">The insatiable thirst of the Bishops was for Primacy and Seniority, in cases where their  Sees were in large cities and therefore acquired secular prestige and glory. First in this regard, and without compare for a considerable time, was Rome.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Just as the pagan Roman Emperor of the day was called Augustus (=  worthy of respect , an epithet of the gods!), and Ancient Rome was characterized as Roma aeterna (=  the eternal city !), so it happened that the Bishop of Rome did not delay to gradually claim, first for his local Church and then for his person, analogously impious titles, and indeed to a superlative degree.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">The Vicarius Christi (=  representative of Christ ) we could say was the approximate translation, in Christian vocabulary, of Pontifex Maximus (=  Supreme Bridge-Maker ).</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">There is perhaps no other issue which has occupied so intensely and continually the Synods of the ancient Church (whether Regional or Ecumenical) during the common first millennium as the order of  Seniority between the Episcopal Thrones, especially of  Rome and  New Rome (Constantinople), before the formation of the well-known Pentarchy of Patriarchs (of Rome Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem).</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">However it must be stated that the problem is not as simple as it may at first appear to be. It did not only arise out of the practical need for the  First among Equals (Primus inter pares) to preside, according to the spirit of the 34th Apostolic Canon. There also intervened difficult historical circumstances, according to which the  more practical solution was a great temptation, with the price in terms of  ethical deontology being not only heavy, but utterly devastating.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Yet if the 34th Canon, which is relatively old and very  Apostolic in spirit (although its date is not in fact from the time of the Apostles!), was respected, it is certain that historical Christianity as a whole would have avoided many perils.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">An equal number of perils, if not more, would have been avoided also by the non-Christian populations which, for centuries now, have undergone the colonial callousness and invasive exploitation by so-called Christian leaders of the West, accompanied and assisted by so-called missionaries who equally saw material aspirations and interests (look at the peoples of what we call the  Third World today!).</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">The concise text of the 34th Apostolic Canon must be quoted here in full, so as to make clear to all the unimaginable  renewal of the world (!) that might have been achieved over the centuries, had this golden Canon been fundamentally applied by those considered to be  spiritual Fathers and Leaders of Christianity.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b>This astonishing text is as follows:</b></font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"> It behooves the Bishops of every nation to know the one among them who is the premier or chief, and to recognize them as their head, and to refrain from doing anything superfluous without his advice and approval; but, instead, each of them should do only whatever is necessitated by his own eparchy and by the territories under him. But let not even such a one do anything without the advice and consent and approval of all. For thus there will be concord, and God will be glorified through the Lord in the Holy Spirit, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. </font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">( The Rudder , by Priest-Monk Agapios and Monk Nicodemus, translated by D. Cummins, Chicago, 1957)</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Already from a first glance, the careful reader of this Canon can see where its theological weight is to be found. The  mutuality of honour and confidence which is established as an inviolable  condition of peace in the Church, also safeguards a much higher good. This is the true doxology or glorification of the Trinitarian God, which can only be achieved through  concord among the Bishops.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">In this way, we have vividly before us an Ecclesiology.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b>Part 2</b></font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Following the mystagogical vision of the  primordial Mystery of the Church , as described with astonishing theological consistency in the 34th Apostolic Canon, it would be a terribly backward step and vain endeavour to comment here on the  pseudo-Clementine and  pseudo-Isidorian textual claims concerning primacy, which have long ago been refuted by objective historians and theologians.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">These and other manipulations or casuistic interpretations were employed by Rome on more than a few occasions, so as to  support the  primacy of the Apostle Peter initially, and of the Bishop of Rome subsequently, who was considered to be the only Successor of Peter.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">An exhaustive and systematic negation of what was dared by the Papists of the West was presented in our doctoral thesis (The Infallibility of the Church in Orthodox Theology, Athens, 1965), the English translation of which shall, God willing, soon be published.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">We will therefore restrict ourselves to presenting concisely, and directly to the current Pope Benedict XVI, just a few fundamental questions.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">These questions should  in spite of his high office  be answered by the Pope himself, as they concern him directly. At any rate, in the dialogue between Christians, and especially Bishops, avoidances are impermissible, in accordance with Christ s command to say either  yes or  no .</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">We consider it just for Benedict XVI to answer personally the questions we present below, for two main reasons:</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Firstly, because they bear directly upon the whole of Christianity, as a single body in world history.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Secondly, because a host of the current Pope s earlier writings, as Professor Ratzinger, had contributed greatly to the intended  renewal and  purification of the Western Church, through the Second Vatican Council.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b>First question:</b></font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Can he who made his mark as the Theologian Joseph Ratzinger deny that the function of the  First in the Church  regardless of whether it refers to the Apostle Peter, or to any other of the sacred group of  The Twelve , or even to the Bishops who are their Successors  had from the outset an absolutely soteriological character, with the corresponding and consequent administrative implications upon the entire ecclesiastical life of the  Church militant in each local area?</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b>Second question:</b></font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Is it possible for the soteriological character of the  First , in general, to be  bound and indeed  predetermined by a particular geographic region or city?</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">If the continually changing underlying historical and geographical conditions, which sometimes lead to decay or disuse, were of such decisive significance for SALVATION, would not the Primacy of Jerusalem have from the very beginning prevailed upon world Christianity, since this is where the saving drama of the divine economy had unfolded historically and geographically, with Christ at the very centre?</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Yet in such a case, how are we to understand the radically contrary statements of Christ to the Samaritan woman at the well of Jacob? What is the meaning of those striking messages:  neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem (John 4:21)?</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b>Third question:</b></font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">From when was it possible, and with which theological arguments, for Rome to be  differentiated so radically from the common teaching of the Christian Church of both East and West, concerning  Apostolic Succession (succesio Apostolica), making the succession of the Bishop of Rome such a weighty matter? Would it ever be possible to seriously claim that the local Bishop is the successor of only one specific Apostle (eg. Peter by the Bishop of Rome, Mark by the Bishop of Alexandria, Andrew by the Bishop of New Rome, and so on)?</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">If this was the meaning of Apostolic Succession, would it not follow that the number of Bishops throughout the entire Church would never be more than 12 in number? And then should not Rome, as a result, be speaking specifically about successio Petrina, rather than insisting on the more comprehensive term Apostolica?</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">On the contrary, the correct conviction and teaching of Scripture and Tradition concerning succession is that all Bishops succeed the eschatologically significant Group of Twelve, and this is why the Church always essentially included in the meaning of Apostolic Succession not only the Bishops, but also the Presbyters, as differing very little from them in terms of the  saving mission of the Church.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b>Fourth question:</b></font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Can the current Pope state responsibly as a theologian that the Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church  who as all know are appointed directly by the Bishop of Rome without being elected by the Synod of their local Church  are to be considered as equal in authority to the Orthodox Bishops  elected by a canonical Synod?</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Does the holy Father recall that, as the official Theological Dialogue s Co-Chair on behalf of the Orthodox delegation for 20 years, I had personally protested to him because the Vatican had still not restored its Bishops in general to their most sacred office, just as the undivided Church [of the first millennium] knew it, and that the Orthodox justly demand it so that we may consider the election of Roman Catholic Bishops  valid ? Is it not then highly  lenient and  tolerant on the part of Orthodox Bishops that we still  while officially dialoguing with Roman Catholic Bishops  silently accept them as our  counterparts ?</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b>Fifth question:</b></font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">If the non-acceptance by Orthodox of the  primacy and  infallibility of the Bishop of Rome constitutes for Pope Benedict XVI a  deficit of Orthodoxy , in order to be considered by Rome a complete and true Church, then what was the point of the axiomatic common statement concerning the official Theological Dialogue, that it is being conducted  on equal terms ?</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b> <br> Sixth question:</b></font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">The characterization of the Church militant as a  perfect society (societas perfecta), which became prevalent among Roman Catholics through the influence of Augustine (civitas Dei) was justly and most correctly replaced in the texts of the Second Vatican Council by the terms  People of God (populus Dei), to express as a journey of pilgrimage (peregrinatio) the dynamic and evolving character of all categories of faithful (Clergy, Monks, Lay) in the present world. No theologian who has studied the Second Vatican Council can ignore that the Professor of Dogmatic Theology Joseph Ratzinger had also contributed in no small measure to the formulation of the mentioned renewed texts.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">How is it that today the same Dogmatic Theologian, now as Pope, proclaims indirectly the reviled theory of societas perfecta which, even if unwittingly, competes with the most secular forms of narcissism in modern globalization?</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><b>Seventh question:</b></font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">In closing with the symbolic number of seven (7) questions arising from today s  isolation of Pope benedict XVI (both from his deeper self, as well as from his most sincere friends and admirers which he had acquired by his tranquil and ever-modest presence), we would wish to know the position the theologizing Pope takes at this time on two of his better known works, which also showed the broadest horizons that the name Ratzinger represented for many decades.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">We refer to the following enthusiastic and enthusing studies:</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"> The influence of the Order of Beggars in the Middle Ages upon the development of the Worldwide Primacy of the Pope (Munich, 1957). Therein it is admitted that, in spite of the invoked spirituality of the ascetic Bonaventura, artificial means were employed to achieve the purely strategic goal of Rome.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">In  Christian Brotherhood , which was originally delivered as a lecture in Vienna in 1958 and soon became the first book of the young Professor Ratzinger (which was also translated into Greek with a special prologue written by the author), it is emphasized that, in contrast to the various modern groupings which constitute  closed societies , i.e.  exclusive clubs, Christian Brotherhood remains  open so as to include all.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Today, unfortunately, it sounds like a tragic irony to hear the praise offered by the Archdiocese of Freiburg, on the occasion of the new edition of that book, and in particular the assertion that  according precisely to this spirit the current Pope still acts and wishes to be understood !</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">If only that were the case; nothing indicates that it is.</font></p> <p><font size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L">Source:</font></p> <p><a href="http://www.oodegr.com/english/papismos/papism_insurmountable_obstacle.htm" target="_blank"><font color="#000080" size="3" face="Nimbus Roman No9 L"><u>http://www.oodegr.com/english/<WBR>papismos/papism_<WBR>insurmountable_obstacle.htm</u></font></a> <br> <br></p> </table> </body> <!-- InstanceEnd --></html>