Brief Orthodox Replies to the Innovations of the Papacy.

[Scotth1960]

"Brief Orthodox Replies to the Innovations of the Papacy"

"Our Orthodox Faith is our wealth, our glory, our race, our crown, and our boast." [Joseph

Bryennios (1350-1437)].


"Concerning the union of the Eastern Churches with the Church of Rome, the Great Church

of Constantinople, in August 1895, made a reply to the Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII (1878-

1903). Pope Leo said that union could only be obtained by acknowledging him as supreme

Pontiff and the highest spiritual and temporal ruler of the universal church, as the only

representative of Christ upon the earth and the dispenser of all grace.

"The Orthodox reply was published in the patriarchal periodical Truth. Signatories in-

cluded Patriarch Anthimos VII of Constantinople (1895-1898), Bishop Nicodemos of

Cyzicos, Philotheos of Nicomedia, Jerome of Nicaea, Nathanael of Prusa, Basil of Smyrna,

Stephen of Philadelphia, Athanasios of Lemnos, Bessarion of Dyrrachium, Dorotheos

of Belgrade, Nicodemos of Elasson, Sophronios of Carpathos and Cassos and Dionysios

of Eleutheropolis.

"The Orthodox assume as the basis of right Faith the doctrine of the New Testament as

expressed by the holy Fathers and the holy Seven Ecumenical Councils, common to all

the patriarchates, because all the patriarchates, including Rome, were Orthodox during

the first ten centuries of Christianity. The eastern patriarchates point out the following

serious and arbitrary innovations concerning faith and practice which the Papal Church

has introduced. The Orthodox assert that the innovations are clearly opposed to the

ecclesiastical condition of the first nine centuries, making the longed for union of the

Church of Rome with the eastern patriarchates impossible. The Orthodox hope that the

Papal Church will reject these heretical innovations and return to the ancient condition

of the one holy, catholic and apostolic Church of Christ." (pages 528-539.).

1. "Filioque" (page 529).
2. Water for Baptism (pages 529-531.).
3. The Host of Unleavened Wafer (pages 531-535.).
4. Consecration of the Holy Gifts (pages 535-537.).
5. Lay Participation in the Mystery of Communion. (page 537.).
6. Purgatory (pages 537-539.).
7. The Immaculate Conception (pages 539-542.).
8. Papal Supremacy (pages 542-548.).
Other Innovations:
9. Statues (page 549.).
10. Compulsory Clerical Celibacy (pages 549-550.).
11. The Gregorian Calendar (pages 550-553.).
12. Holy Unction (page 553.).


The Lives of the Pillars of Orthodoxy. by Holy Apostles Convent. Buena Vista, CO. Copyright 1990 AD.

God bless us everyone; Amen. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington August 2011 AD

 

[Strangelove]

Defend your own cult Scott.

LINK:

Eastern Orthodoxy is not Talmud Pharisaism (Mishnaism). (It is!)

 

[Scotth1960]

Defend your own cult Scott.

LINK:

Eastern Orthodoxy is not Talmud Pharisaism (Mishnaism). (It is!)

Dear friend,
Name calling is not the truth. You're violating the Scripture, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor." I'm your neighbor though we live far apart. I did not call you names or say bad things about you. You need to act more maturely.
God bless you. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington PS Yes I am just a sinner. We all are. (Lord have mercy. There, are you glad? I didn't repeat it 40 times.).

 

[Strangelove]

What name did I call you?

 

[Scotth1960]

What name did I call you?

You call Christ's Church a "cult". Call me anything you like, I can let it alone. Those who ignore the truth can resort to false labels like cult.
Any group that does not believe in the historic doctrine of Christ as God and man, true God and true man, is, if it anything else, a cult. Any group that causes a senseless schism is a sect, not a cult, because it may still believe in the Deity of Christ.
Neither of us is a cult member. You and I both believe that Jesus Christ is LORD.
You're just causing trouble. I don't know if you are intentionally trying to cause trouble, but you are succeeding in doing that. Not everyone understand about the Orthodox Church. Most people who write into this CC are Protestants or Catholics. Very few Eastern Orthodox.

 

[Strangelove]

You call Christ's Church a "cult". Call me anything you like, I can let it alone. Those who ignore the truth can resort to false labels like cult.
Any group that does not believe in the historic doctrine of Christ as God and man, true God and true man, is, if it anything else, a cult. Any group that causes a senseless schism is a sect, not a cult, because it may still believe in the Deity of Christ.
Neither of us is a cult member. You and I both believe that Jesus Christ is LORD.
You're just causing trouble. I don't know if you are intentionally trying to cause trouble, but you are succeeding in doing that. Not everyone understand about the Orthodox Church. Most people who write into this CC are Protestants or Catholics. Very few Eastern Orthodox.

What name did I call you?

Name calling is not the truth. You're violating the Scripture, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor." I'm your neighbor

Either tell me what name I called you or retract the above statement.

 

[Scotth1960]

What name did I call you?

God bless you, dear Strangelove.
If Eastern Orthodoxy is Mishnaism, where is the Eastern Orthodox Mishnah? And does it agree 100 percent with the Jewish Mishnah? If not, there is no such thing as Eastern Orthodox Mishnaism. Also, what about the Jewish Talmuds (Babylonian and Jerusalem)? Where is there an Eastern Orthodox Talmud. Unless there is, and they agree 100 percent with the Jewish Talmuds, there is no such thing as Eastern Orthodox Pharisaism (Talmudism).
Can you answer where the Orthodox Mishnah is?
Sincerely, Mr. Scott R. Harrington

 

[Strangelove]

God bless you, dear Strangelove.
If Eastern Orthodoxy is Mishnaism, where is the Eastern Orthodox Mishnah? And does it agree 100 percent with the Jewish Mishnah? If not, there is no such thing as Eastern Orthodox Mishnaism. Also, what about the Jewish Talmuds (Babylonian and Jerusalem)? Where is there an Eastern Orthodox Talmud. Unless there is, and they agree 100 percent with the Jewish Talmuds, there is no such thing as Eastern Orthodox Pharisaism (Talmudism).
Can you answer where the Orthodox Mishnah is?
Sincerely, Mr. Scott R. Harrington

Yes I can answer its called HYPOCRISY. Thats all you need to be a pharisaical cult. You need the same DOCTRINES OF DEVILS.

(1 Timothy 4:1) Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

(1 Timothy 4:2) Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron

(Matthew 16:12) Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

Your posts are getting more and more sureal Scotty. Every pharisaical cult needs its own printed version of the Talmud now? huh?

Now...

What name did I call you?

Are you gonna retract your statement or not? Or do YOU want to bear false witness to your neighbour?

 

[Scotth1960]

Defend your own cult Scott.

LINK:

Eastern Orthodoxy is not Talmud Pharisaism (Mishnaism). (It is!)

"Evangelicals remain abysmally unfamiliar with Orthodox Christianity ..." (They, most of

them, criticize what they do not understand):

"Like a man without a foundation built an house upon the earth" (St. Luke 6:49.),

Evangelicalism builds its "invisible church" on the flimsy foundation of personal acceptance

of Jesus Christ as Lord, God, and Savior. Christ Himself dismisses this as an unreliable

litmus test of Christianity: "Not every one that saith unto Me, "Lord, Lord," shall enter

into the Kingdom of Heaven." (St. Matthew 7:21). Such a subjective definition of who

is and who is not a Christian is all too readily used preemptively to disenfranchise non-

Evangelicals from Christendom, as Randall Balmer verifies:

Christian, in the vernacular of my evangelical subculture, was an exclusive, elitist term

reserved for someone who had "prayed the prayer," had acknowledged personal sinful-

ness and the need for salvation into his heart. (Balmer, Randall. Mine Eyes Have Seen

the Glory: A Journey into the Evangelical Subculture in America, expanded ed. (New

York: Oxford University Press, 1993), p. 4. This "exclusive, elitist" tenor rigidly squeezes

Evangelicalism into a doctrinaire thought-pattern that dictates a heavy-handed

application of inappropriate and unsuitable standards to Orthodoxy. With their benighted

historiographies and jaundiced Weltanschauungen, Evangelicals remain abysmally un-

familiar with Orthodox Christianity and typically denigrate it either as an ossified variation

of Roman Catholicism or as a pharisaical cult. (For an explication of Protestant criteria

applied to Orthodoxy, see Archimandrite [Bishop] Chrysostomos, "Orthodoxy and the

Cults," in Archimandrite [Bishop] Chrysostomos, Hieromonk [Bishop] Auxentios, and

Hierodeacon [Archimandrite] Akakios, Contemporary Eastern Orthodox Thought: The

Traditionalist Voice (Belmont, MA: Nordland House Publishers, 1982), pp. 100-112.). Such

responses are nothing more than instances of theological projection, the defensive

ascription to another faith of unsavory traits hidden within one's own religious values.

"Protestantism itself is simply a twist on Papism, which in turn is a heretical deviation

from Orthodoxy. Although the Reformers correctly recognized the spiritual putrefaction

of the Church of Rome, they failed to diagnose etiologically the arrogance which

distinguishes the Vatican from Orthodoxy, and accordingly, their Reformation failed to

cauterize the ulcerating heresy of Papism. The ill effects of Papism can only be success-

fully treated in the hospital of the Orthodox Church, with Her panoply of medicinal

remedies, which are administered by the Great Physician Who Himself took our infirmities

and bare our sicknesses. (St. Matthew 8:7; cf. Isaiah 53:4.). The Reformers, however,

did not check into this hospital. Unwisely preferring self-treatment instead, they fixated

on the pharmacopoeia of Holy Writ and rejected all of the other therapeutic protocols of

Orthodoxy. Outside of the sanitary environment of the Church and in the hands of un-

skilled practititoners, the Holy Scriptures served only to aggravate the

presumptuousness of Papism by vulgarizing it. The Reformation infected each and every

Protestant with the contagion of Papism, and this new, yet equally virulent strain of idio-

Papism continues to mutate endlessly, producing a great multitude of impotent folk, of

blind, halt, withered. (St. John 5:3).

"Saint Justine (Popovich) of Chelije similarly observes of Protestantism that "... papist

arrogance and the silliness of "infallibility" reigns despotically and ravages the souls of

its faithful." (Quoted in Metropolitan Cyprian, The Panheresy of Ecumenism, trans. Bishop

Chrysostomos (Etna, CA: Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies, 1992), p. 29.). He

refers to Western Christianity as "Papo-Protestantism," highlighting the fact that Papism

and Protestantism are essentially unified by the same error: the displacement of Christ

with a derivative element of the Church. Papists replace Christ the Victor with "the Vicar

of Christ"; Protestants supplant God the Word with the Word of God. But whether it be

an Episcopate of the Scriptures, "Orthodox ecclesiology ... can never admit of the action

of the Holy Spirit being concentrated, or exclusively present, in one single aspect of the

Church." (Archimandrite (now Bishop) Chrysostomos and Hieromonk (now Bishop)

Auxentios, Scripture and Tradition (Etna, CA: Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies,

1984), p. 42.). In both cases, the ultimacy of Christ God is compromised. Papism restricts

Christianity to one man, while Protestantism dissipates it among all men. Bishop

Chrysostomos of Etna and Bishop Auxentios of Photiki achieve this same conclusion:

Realizing that Papist authority was only tenuously established by Church history, the

Reformers ... deposed the Pope and placed the Bible in his place. They had now, not the

"Sole Apostle," but sola Scriptura. Failing to understand that the Bible grew out of the

Church ... they seized upon it as the exclusive foundation of their faith. Having separated

the Bible from the Church in which it originated and which it expresses, and having

rejected the Roman Church, they lost and enduring idea of the Church itself and

separated into numberless denominations. (Idem., The Roman West and the Byzantine

East (Etna, CA: Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies, 1988), p. 52.).

"By the same token, Protestant denominations often fragment into cults, for cultism is

merely an extreme form of denominationalism; such phenomena are philosophically in-

herent in the "religious anarchy" (Holy New-Martyr Ilarion (Troitsky), Christianity or the

Church? (Jordanville, NY: Holy Trinity Monastery, 1985), p. 28.) of Protestantism. From

an Orthodox standpoint, most cults are kith and kin to the "mainstream" denominations,

for they are essentially Protestant churches with overly developed sectarian theologies.

For example, wherein lies the difference between the implicit Evangelical belief that the

Protestant Reformation reinaugurated an era of pristine New Testament truth, after a

supposed absence of fifteen centuries, and the explicit Mormon tenet that "... The Church

of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord's kingdom once again established on the

earth. ...", (The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ, trans. Joseph Smith,

Jr. (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1987), n.p.). after an

alleged absence of eighteen centuries? There is no fundamental difference between

these views, since both endorse an ecclesiological (or rather anti-ecclesiological) stance

that precludes the providential possibility of Christ building His Church such that the gates

of hell will not prevail against Her.".

(pages 4-7: Hierodeacon Gregory. (1994). THE CHURCH, TRADITION, SCRIPTURE, TRUTH,

AND CHRISTIAN LIFE: Some Heresies of Evangelicalism and an Orthodox Response. Etna,

CA: Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies.).

God have mercy on all of us in Christ Jesus. Amen. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington August

2011 AD

 

[Scotth1960]

Yes I can answer its called HYPOCRISY. Thats all you need to be a pharisaical cult. You need the same DOCTRINES OF DEVILS.

(1 Timothy 4:1) Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

(1 Timothy 4:2) Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron

(Matthew 16:12) Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

Your posts are getting more and more sureal Scotty. Every pharisaical cult needs its own printed version of the Talmud now? huh?

Now...

What name did I call you?

Are you gonna retract your statement or not? Or do YOU want to bear false witness to your neighbour?

Dear Strangelove,

You dodged my question. For you to bear true witness to your dogma that Eastern Orthodoxy is Pharisaism, Mishnaism, Talmudism, you really need to do the following:
1. First: Read ever single word in the Jewish Mishnah.
2. Second: Read every single word in the Babylonian Talmud.
3. Third: Read every single word in the Jerusalem Talmud.
4. Read every single word in what you think are the Eastern Orthodox versions of the Mishnah and the Talmud.
5. Compare them closely.
6. If they do not agree 100 percent, they are not the same.
7. If they are not the same 100 percent, then Eastern Orthodoxy is not a form of Jewish Mishnaism,
and Jewish Talmudism, or Jewish Pharisaism.
8. Come back in 5 to 10 years and tell us all what you find.
9. God bless you. Have a great weekend.
10. Sincerely, Scott R. Harrington, Erie, PA

 

[Scotth1960]

What name did I call you?





Either tell me what name I called you or retract the above statement.

Dear friend,
You said, "My cult".
Isn't that the same as name calling Mr. Scott, saying, "Mr. Scott is a pharisaical cult member."
Do you retract your accusation against me? "My EO cult"?
Scott In Erie PA

 

[Strangelove]

Dear Strangelove,

You dodged my question. For you to bear true witness to your dogma that Eastern Orthodoxy is Pharisaism, Mishnaism, Talmudism, you really need to do the following:
1. First: Read ever single word in the Jewish Mishnah.
2. Second: Read every single word in the Babylonian Talmud.
3. Third: Read every single word in the Jerusalem Talmud.
4. Read every single word in what you think are the Eastern Orthodox versions of the Mishnah and the Talmud.
5. Compare them closely.
6. If they do not agree 100 percent, they are not the same.
7. If they are not the same 100 percent, then Eastern Orthodoxy is not a form of Jewish Mishnaism,
and Jewish Talmudism, or Jewish Pharisaism.
8. Come back in 5 to 10 years and tell us all what you find.
9. God bless you. Have a great weekend.
10. Sincerely, Scott R. Harrington, Erie, PA

Wrong Scotty..I only need to judge the fruit of your cult and recognise the HYPOCRISY and the DOCTRINES OF DEVILS.

By the way.....copy pasta of lengthy, vain philosophical warble against protestantism, and EO propaganda is not gonna divert me from my line of questioning.

When are you gonna defend your cults unbiblical doctrines?

 

[Strangelove]

Dear friend,
You said, "My cult".
Isn't that the same as name calling Mr. Scott, saying, "Mr. Scott is a pharisaical cult member."
Do you retract your accusation against me? "My EO cult"?
Scott In Erie PA

No its not the same Scott.

....and you need to defend your cult and stop playing games.

There I even bumped the topic for ya.

 

[Scotth1960]

Wrong Scotty..I only need to judge the fruit of your cult and recognise the HYPOCRISY and the DOCTRINES OF DEVILS.

By the way.....copy pasta of lengthy, vain philosophical warble against protestantism, and EO propaganda is not gonna divert me from my line of questioning.

When are you gonna defend your cults unbiblical doctrines?

Dear Doctor Strangelove:

One simple question: Where was the True Church before 1517 AD?

God bless you. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington

 

[Strangelove]

Dear Doctor Strangelove:

One simple question: Where was the True Church before 1517 AD?

God bless you. In Erie PA USA Scott R. Harrington

Ermmmm....In Erie PA?

 

[Scotth1960]

Ermmmm....In Erie PA?

Friend,
It shows everyone, your response does, that you can't handle the truth. You may not even know the truth. You would have given a true answer to my sincere question if you had one!
God bless you. Scott

 

[Strangelove]

Friend,
It shows everyone, your response does, that you can't handle the truth. You may not even know the truth. You would have given a true answer to my sincere question if you had one!
God bless you. Scott

Oh sorry Scotty...just testing you out for the old funny bone. You obviously donated it to medical research.

What was the question again?

One simple question: Where was the True Church before 1517 AD?

Ok..serious answer. It was and still is inside where any true believer is.

(1 Corinthians 3:17) If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

(1 Corinthians 6:19) What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

The Church is the eklesia. Made up of all believers. Invisible in the Kingdom of God.

Oh but you want it to be a fancy network of temples all commanded by a puffed up clergy with pompous robes and crowns,

....so did the pharisees.

 

[Scotth1960]

Oh sorry Scotty...just testing you out for the old funny bone. You obviously donated it to medical research.

What was the question again?



Ok..serious answer. It was and still is inside where any true believer is.

(1 Corinthians 3:17) If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

(1 Corinthians 6:19) What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?



Strangelove believes:

The Church is .... Invisible ..


Okay, Strangelove. Do a study of the word Church in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the KJV. See if you can find the word "invisible" written anywhere in the actual text of the actual Bible. God bless you. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington


Oh but you want it to be a fancy network of temples all commanded by a puffed up clergy with pompous robes and crowns,

....so did the pharisees.

So you're better than that? You're not puffed up and pompous? You're not judging anyone by slandering other people? You're saying, "I thank God that I am not a Pharisee".

 

[Strangelove]

trangelove believes:

The Church is .... Invisible ..


Okay, Strangelove. Do a study of the word Church in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the KJV. See if you can find the word "invisible" written anywhere in the actual text of the actual Bible. God bless you. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

Scott you can try running around all the threads pretending I havnt answered you but I'm very good at finding my posts....even if they are days old.

Here was my answer when you asked me before, and you failed to respond:

(1 Peter 2:9) But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

(Luke 17:20) And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:

The kingdom of God cometh not with observation

Christians are a royal priesthood

Royal = of the Kingdom (which is invisible)

Therefore the Royal priesthood (the congregation) is invisible just like the Kingdom of God.

So you're better than that? You're not puffed up and pompous? You're not judging anyone by slandering other people? You're saying, "I thank God that I am not a Pharisee".

Yup.