| The Holy Synod expressed gratitude to Archbishop Chrysostomos and hierarchs of the Church of Cyprus for the hospitality accorded to the delegation of the Moscow Patriarchate. The Synod underscored the importance of the talks held by the heads of the two Churches for further development of bilateral cooperation and consolidation of Orthodox unity. Patriarch Kirill also made a report about his meeting with Patriarch Theodore of Alexandria and All Africa. They met on July 24 and 25, 2012, in the course of Patriarch Theodore’s unofficial visit to Russia during which he visited the Patriarchal and Synodal Administrative and Cultural Center in southern Russia. The Synod resolved to relieve Metropolitan Platon of Argentina and South America of his duty as administrator of the diocese of Argentina and South America in compliance with his petition and proposal by Metropolitan Vladimir of Kiev and All Ukraine and expressed to His Eminence Platon deep gratitude for his long-standing archpastoral work in South America. Archbishop Justinian of Naro-Fominsk was entrusted with temporary administration over the diocese of Argentina and South America. Metropolitan Hilarion made a report on the visit made in June, 2012, by a delegation of the Presidential Council for Cooperation with Religious Organizations’ working group for contacts and cooperation with the People’s Republic of China in the religious sphere. On June 19, the Russian-Chinese group for contacts and cooperation in the religious sphere met for the 2 nd consultations to discuss the present situation of religious organizations in Russia and China and a number of issues concerning the status of Orthodoxy in China. The Synod expressed satisfaction at the development of dialogue with state authorities in China concerning cooperation between the Orthodox believers in the two countries and the present work of the Chinese Autonomous Orthodox Church. Metropolitan Hilarion also made a report on the 8 th meeting of the joint Russian-Iranian commission for dialogue ‘Orthodoxy-Islam’. The meeting took place on June 26 and 27, 2012, in Moscow and was devoted to the theme ‘Religion and Human Rights’. The Synod expressed satisfaction at the results of the meeting and deemed it important to continue dialogue with the Muslim community in Iran. |
| The program of the commission meeting included visits to churches, educational institutions and social establishments of the Metropolis of India and to holy places associated with the visit to Kerala of St. Thomas who is believed to have generated the Indian Christianity. In conclusion of the commission meeting, a joint communique was adopted. The next meeting will take place in autumn 2020 in the territory of the Russian Orthodox Church. On November 18-19, the delegation also visited old shrines, parishes and charitable organizations of the Malankara Church and the St. Thomas Seminary in Kottayam at the invitation of the Catholicos Mar Baselios Marthoma Paulose II of the Malankara Church, who warmly received them at the patriarchal residence and asked them to convey best wishes to Patriarch Kirill and to thank him for the generous hospitality accorded him during his visit to Russia in August-September 2019. Code for blog Since you are here… …we do have a small request. More and more people visit Orthodoxy and the World website. However, resources for editorial are scarce. In comparison to some mass media, we do not make paid subscription. It is our deepest belief that preaching Christ for money is wrong. Having said that, Pravmir provides daily articles from an autonomous news service, weekly wall newspaper for churches, lectorium, photos, videos, hosting and servers. Editors and translators work together towards one goal: to make our four websites possible - Pravmir.ru, Neinvalid.ru, Matrony.ru and Pravmir.com. Therefore our request for help is understandable. For example, 5 euros a month is it a lot or little? A cup of coffee? It is not that much for a family budget, but it is a significant amount for Pravmir. If everyone reading Pravmir could donate 5 euros a month, they would contribute greatly to our ability to spread the word of Christ, Orthodoxy, life " s purpose, family and society. Also by this author Today " s Articles Most viewed articles Functionality is temporarily unavailable. |
| Hafner J. E. Religiöser Alltag der Christen in Lyon und seine Unterbrechung//Religiöser Alltag in der Spätantike/Hrsg. von P. Eich, E. Faber. Stuttgart, 2013. S. 225–242. Harnack A. Einige Bemerkungen zum 5. Buch der Kirchengeschichte des Eusebius nach der neuen Ausgabe von Eduard Schwartz//Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. 1903. S. 200–207. Harnack A. Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur bis Eusebius. Bd. 2.1. Die Chronologie der Literatur bis Irenaus nebst einleitenden Untersuchungen. Leipzig, 1897. Hall S. G. Women among the Early Martys//Martyrs and martyrologies: papers read at the 1992 summer meeting and the 1993 winter meeting of the Ecclesiastical History Society/Ed. D. Wood. Oxford, 1993. P. 1–22. Hirschfeld О. Zur Geschichte des Christentums in Lugdunum vor Constantine//Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. 1895. S. 381–409. Jones C. Woman, Death and the Law during the Christian Persecution//Martyrs and martyrologies: papers read at the 1992 summer meeting and the 1993 winter meeting of the Ecclesiastical History Society/Ed. by D. Wood. Oxford, 1993. P. 23–34. Jullian C. Quelques remarques sur la lettre des chrétiens de Lyon//Revue des Études Anciennes. Vol. 13.1911. P. 337–330. Kahrstedt U. Die Märtyrerakten von Lugdunum (Eusebius h. e. V, 1 ff.)//Rheinisches Museum für Philologie. Bd. 68.1913. S. 395–412. Kerestzer P. Marcus Aurelius as Persecutor?//Harvard Theological Review. Vol. 61.1968. P. 321–341. Kerestzer P. The Massacre at Lugdunum in 177 A. D.//Historia. Bd. 26. 1967. P. 75–86=Kerestzer P. Das Christenmassaker von Lugdunum im Jahre 177//Marc Aurel/Hrsg. von R. Klein. Darmstadt, 1979. S. 261–278. Kraft H. Die Lyoner Märtyrer und der Montanismus//Pietas. Festschrift für B. Kötting/Hrsg. von E. Dassmann, F. K. Suso. Münster, 1980. S. 250–266. Labriolle P., de. Le style de la lettre des chrétiens de Lyon, dans Eusèbe H. E. 5, 1–4//Bulletin d’ancienne littérature et d’archéologie chrétiennes. Vol. 3. 1913. P. 198–203. |
| On the 17th of October, the second round of theological consultations was opened. As the moderator of the meeting, Hieromonk Stefan (Igumnov) noted, " the expected end result of the theological consultations is the achievement of mutual understanding on each of the specific issues. Accordingly, neither the conclusion of declarations nor the restoration of Eucharistic communion falls within the competence of the working group. The consultations are primarily of scholarly interest. Their aim is to contribute to the common dialogue " . Thus, the bilateral theological consultations aim not to replace the official theological dialogue that took place between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Ancient Oriental Churches for a long period of time in the twentieth century, but only to promote its continuation. In accordance with the agreements concluded during the first round of consultations held in January 2020 in Leeveld (Netherlands), at the meeting at the MTA the parties discussed the wording of the Chambesy Agreement adopted in 1990 at the third meeting of the Joint Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Orthodox Churches and the Ancient Eastern Churches. They concern, first of all, Christological issues. It is known that the Russian Orthodox Church and some other Orthodox Churches felt that the wording of the Chambesy Agreement required clarification. The Synodal Biblical and Theological Commission of the Russian Orthodox Church in the 1990s did a great deal of work to formulate questions concerning a number of clauses of that agreement and to develop a position related to the further development of dialogue with the pre-Chalcedonian Churches. As a result of the Commission " s work, the relevant decisions were adopted at the Councils of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1997 and 2000. Accordingly, members of the Working Group on the part of the Russian Orthodox Church submitted comments on the Second Agreed Statement. The Coptic Church prepared responses to those comments, which were discussed during the meeting at the Moscow Theological Academy. |
| ‘As Latin America and Russia play a special role in the preservation and development of modern Christianity, a decision was made that the first ever meeting between the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and the Pope of Rome should take place in the Latin American land’ His Holiness continued, ‘The problems, which emerged in relations between the Churches of East and West, the Orthodox and the Catholics, were to a great extend linked with the historical European context. But they had nothing to do with Russia or Latin America at that time. We as it were inherited the consequences of that division. Certainly, there are difference between the Orthodox and the Catholics today, including theological ones. We are aware of the importance of this issue and support in all possible ways the theological dialogue held between our two Churches. We are not inclined to belittle the existing differences but at the same time we understand that especially Christians in Latin America and Russia have a potential for attracting the Christian power in solving many problems that disturb humanity’. Patriarch Kirill stated that the Cuba meeting was not devoted to theological issues but rather to problems of concern for the whole world, for both Christians and non-Christians. ‘Precisely for this reason we decided to meet in Latin America, in a country which is far from the history of divisions that took place in Europe. Besides, we wished to underscore that it is impossible to speak today about Eurocentrism or America-centrism in the Christian family, as today other nations, too, play a very important role in Christian work, in solution of problems facing Christians’, he stated. His Holiness told his guests that the meeting focused on the need to protect Christians from persecution and oppression they have encountered today. The patriarch and the pope also touched upon the problem of struggle against terrorism and other urgent topics, including the situation in Ukraine. They underscored the value of the institution of the family and the need to protect human life beginning from the moment of conception. The meeting was summed up in a declaration containing a clear call for the Church to continue its peacemaking work and stressing the need for Orthodox-Catholic cooperation in defending the Christian foundation of the European civilization. |
| Continuation of inter-church cooperation in the solution of topical problems of the legal status of the Coptic community living in the Moscow region and pastoral care for it were considered important. Patriarch Tawadros II has blessed Bishop Theodosius of Giza, who visited Russia with working visits in May and August 2018, to be in charge of this work. Joint theological consultations that would promote dialogue between the Orthodox Church and the family of the Ancient Oriental Churches are an important part of bilateral relations. Plans of the 2020 meeting of theologians were discussed. Coordination of inter-church cooperation in supporting the suffering Christians in the Middle East region is a topical aspect of bilateral cooperation. Highly appreciated was the initiative of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia to hold consultation with Christian leaders of the world, including Patriarch Tawadros II, for finding a common response to the aggravation of the situation in Syria in April 2018. Another important event in this sphere was the meeting of the heads and representatives of the Oriental Churches on the situation of Christians in the Middle East held on the initiative of the Holy See in Bari on 7 July 2018. Among those taking part in the meeting were Patriarch Tawadros II, Primate of the Coptic Church, and Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, chairman of the Moscow Patriarchate’s Department for External Church Relations. Also discussed at the session were other topical issues of mutual interest, including a possibility of common work at the inter-religious meetings and coordination of multidisciplinary cooperation between diaspora communities of both Churches. The participants in the session adopted a communiqué. On May 29, members of the Commission were received by His Holiness Patriarch Tawadros ii. Bishop Gennady thanked him for hospitable reception, conveyed best wishes of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill and together with Metropolitan Serapion presented a report on the current activity of the Commission and its plans. Patriarch Tawadros II heartely welcomed the guests, noting that his meetings with delegations of the Moscow Patriarchate have become a good tradition. His Holiness shared recollections of his visits to Russia in 2014 and 2017, of his fraternal meetings with His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia and of his meeting with Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk in Cairo last year. |
| In related news, a group of Anglican bishops meeting in New Zealand has called for “one of their own” to be named the new head of the Worldwide Anglican Communion with the retirement this year of Rowan Williams as Archbishop of Canterbury. The Church of England is unique in the Communion in that its leadership is chosen not by other members but by Parliament. Until now, the titular head of the Church of England has been automatically accepted as the head of the whole Communion. Prime Minister David Cameron announced that the new Archbishop of Canterbury would be Justin Welby, the former bishop of Durham, who told media last week that he wants to rethink his Church’s position on homosexual relationships. Some African bishops at the meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) – one of the four “Instruments of Anglican Communion” – in Auckland, New Zealand have called for a change to that tradition of acceptance. The doctrinal divisions between the Realigned Anglican Churches and their ultra-liberal counterparts in the West, have become the focal point of much of the discussion at the Auckland meeting. Church leaders from Nigeria and Kenya issued a statement at the meeting saying that since 1998, “the ongoing conflict in our beloved Communion continues to be a crisis of Gospel truth, not only regarding matters of human sexuality but the authority of Holy Scripture as the Word of God written and the unique and universal Lordship of Jesus Christ the Son of God.” The ongoing crisis in the Anglican Communion, they said, is the result of a “failure of governance by the Instruments of Communion. This is a failure and, at times, subversion of leadership at the highest levels.” They wrote that they are “grieved” that the ACC continues to “tolerate, and even honor” the US Episcopal Church, the Anglican Church of Canada “and other provinces who continue to produce revisionist forms of the Christian faith that are unrecognizable to the majority of Anglicans worldwide.” “For this reason, we believe it is time for the Primates themselves to elect one of their own who will call their meetings with an enhanced responsibility to guard the Faith and Order of the Anglican Communion.” |
| Metropolitan Irenei of Batskas (Serbian Church) had this to say about that last, crucial meeting of the Pre-Conciliar Commission which took place in October of 2015: " With regard to the text 'Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World' serious review and correction was, unfortunately, proven impossible, because for most of the meeting...in spite of the disapproval of many and the sharp criticism exacted, the text - for reasons never divulged - was not seriously re-evaluated. Rather, it was sent on as is, essentially untouched, to the Council, where, due to a lack of time and consensus, only cosmetic changes were made. " A careful study of the minutes of the 5th Pre-Conciliar, Pan-Orthodox Conference (October of 2015) reveals that the work was carried out in a atmosphere of pressure and haste with responsibility for this resting with the president of the meeting, Met. John of Pergamon, who was subsequently replaced. It is apparent and a view commonly held among critics of the " Council " that one of the main causes for turning Crete into a " fiasco " was this anti-synodical, unorthodox methodology and pre-conciliar secrecy enforced by the organizers. We said previously that the hierarchies of the Local Churches were kept in the dark with respect to the preparatory period and texts. This is also apparent when one considers that the rules of preparation for the Council only required the signatures of two representatives of each Church in order to confirm the pre-conciliar texts - that is, without the approval of the Holy Synods. Thus, the unorthodox text on the heterodox was considered " approved " by the Local Churches after the October 2015 meeting without being sent, without being discussed, and without being confirmed by the Holy Synods of the Local Churches. In this way, on the strength of two representatives' signatures, the text was considered accepted and binding for the Church of Greece, and then forwarded to the Council. |
| Does the lifting of anathemas (“oaths”) mean the full restoration of unity? No. Rather, it can sooner be compared with the reconciliation of spouses who have long since parted ways, than with the restoration of their family life. This should not be confused, just as it should not detract from the reconciliation. Patriarch Athenagoras considered the “Dialogue of Love” to be an essential theological dialogue. In the Orthodox Church, a common Eucharist has always been the sign of ecclesial unity. Patriarch Athenagoras repeatedly stated that Communion from a single chalice – that is, the restoration of unity – is the goal of the dialogue between the Orthodox and Catholics. However, contrary to popular belief, neither Patriarch Athenagoras, nor his successors, nor bishops of the Russian Archdiocese of the Ecumenical Patriarchate have ever served a common Liturgy with the Pope or Catholic clergy. Moreover, the decision of the Moscow Synod of 1969 (suspended in 1986) of allowing Catholics and Old Believers to Communion in Orthodox churches in cases of necessity met with criticism from the side of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Why? Because the “Dialogue of Love,” the theological dialogue and cooperation between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches, has not yet reached full unity. After the Jerusalem meeting in 1964, the dialogue between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches has undergone many stages. There have been many “ups” and “downs.” However, communication between bishops, clergy, and laity of both denominations, which was earlier “objectionable,” has now become an everyday reality. Sometimes it seems that the theological dialogue has gone by the wayside but, on the other hand, the Catholic Church now considers its “new dogmas” to be theologumena and the faith of the “Church of the Seven Ecumenical Councils” to be the general guideline. The current pilgrimage, of both Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and Pope Francis, is dedicated to the fiftieth anniversary of the 1964 meeting. The Primates of the two Churches are coming independently of one another, and are having separate pilgrimages, but are meeting at the Lord’s Sepulcher, in memory of the meeting of their predecessors at the foot of the Mount of Olives in 1964. |
| Accept The site uses cookies to help show you the most up-to-date information. By continuing to use the site, you consent to the use of your Metadata and cookies. Cookie policy His Holiness Patriarch Kirill meets with members of Commission for Dialogue between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Coptic Church DECR Communication Service, 20.09.2022. On September 20, His Holiness Kirill, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, met at the Cathedral Church of Christ the Saviour with members of the Commission for Dialogue between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Coptic Church, which is holding its session in Russia. Among the participants in the meeting from the Russian Orthodox Church were Hieromonk Stephen (Igumnov), DECR secretary for inter-Christian relations, and S. G. Alferov, DECR, a member of the Commission. The meeting was co-chaired by Metropolitan Serapion of Los Angeles, Coptic Church, who attended the meeting online. Present at the meeting were Bishop Cyril, secretary of the Commission, dean of the Ss Athanasius and Cyril of Alexandria Seminary; Hieromonk Dawoud El Antony, representative of the Coptic Church in Russia; Dr Anton Milad, Patriarchal adviser; Ms Barbara Soliman, head of the Patriarchal department for church projects; and Dr Iskhak Ibrahim Agban, general secretary of the Institute of Coptic Studies. ‘We cherish the longstanding good and friendly relations that tie our two Churches, and, certainly, the ages-old friendship between the peoples of Egypt and Russia’, Patriarch Kirill said welcoming the delegation of the Coptic Church, ‘Now we are going through a special history of international relations, which in many cases are breaking, becoming more strained and burdened with conflicts. However, we should thank the Lord for the relations between our Churches as well as our countries, Russia and Egypt, which are invariably good and lasting’. The Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church stressed that in recent years, the development of her relations with Churches in Africa became one of the priorities of the Moscow Patriarchate’s external work. His Holiness recalled that in December 2021 the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church established the Patriarchal Exarchate for Africa, which has created an additional potent base for developing cooperation with the Coptic Church in the continent. |
|
|
