I hate to make this message, I was hoping for a different result, however, nothing can be done, I have to admit: they agreed...
“The dates for the Pan-Orthodox Council have been determined, which will become an important historical event for the entire Orthodox world. The meeting of the primates of all 15 Local Churches will be held on the Greek island of Crete on June 19-26, the press secretary of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Kirill, priest Alexander Volkov, told TASS on Thursday. “The cathedral will begin on Trinity Day, June 19, and will last for a week,” Volkov said.
The decision on the time and place of the Council was made at the Meeting for its preparation, which took place on January 22-27 with the participation of the primates of the Orthodox churches in the Orthodox Center of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in the village of Chambesy near Geneva (Switzerland). It is the Primate of the Orthodox Church of Constantinople, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, who convenes the Pan-Orthodox Council. The historical location is Constantinople or present-day Istanbul. However, due to the complicated geopolitical situation, it was decided to hold the Pan-Orthodox Council, which has been preparing intermittently for 55 years, in Crete. Patriarch Kirill, who also took part in the Meeting, explained this decision by the presence of suitable conditions on the island. “There (in Crete - TASS note) the most favorable conditions: there is a hall for 400 people, there is a place to stay,” he told reporters at the end of the trip. — There are a lot of different kinds of conferences taking place in Crete, including theological and international ones. We know this place well, and of course we agree with holding this Council in Crete.” The Patriarch also noted that Crete is under the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.
Practical work on the preparation of the Pan-Orthodox Council has been carried out intermittently since September 1961. 24 bishops from each of the Orthodox churches should arrive at the upcoming Pan-Orthodox Council. There are 15 local or autocephalous Orthodox churches - independent from each other, but connected by a single liturgical communion: Constantinople (Turkey), Alexandria (Egypt), Antioch (Syria), Jerusalem, Georgian, Serbian, Romanian, Bulgarian, Cypriot, Hellenic (Greece), Polish Orthodox Churches, as well as Churches of the Czech Lands and Slovakia and in America. Of these, the largest - the Russian Orthodox Church - unites at least 50 million people.
Those gathered will discuss and adopt documents important for believers and Churches, regulating various aspects of religious life. The publication of drafts of these documents for public access and discussion is expected in the near future. Thus, the exact agenda of the upcoming Pan-Orthodox Council will become known.
More details on TASS: https://tass.ru/obschestvo/2622374″
Canon 8 of the Third Ecumenical Council, Ephesus
The matter, contrary to the decrees of the church, and the rules of the saints of the Apostle, newly introduced, and encroaching on the freedom of all, was announced by the most God-loving co-bishop Rigin, and the most reverent bishops of the Cyprus region, Zinon and Evagrius, who were with him. For this reason, since public diseases require the strongest healing, as they bring greater harm, and even more so, even if it was not an ancient custom for the bishop of the city of Antioch to perform orders in Cyprus, as the most reverent men who came to the holy council announced to us in writing and verbally: then the rulers of let the holy Cypriot churches have freedom, without claims to them, and without constraint, according to the rules of the holy fathers, and according to ancient custom, they themselves appointed the most reverent bishops. Let the same be observed in other areas, and everywhere in dioceses: so that none of the most God-loving bishops extends power to another diocese, which was not before and at first under the hands of him, or his predecessors: but if anyone extends it, he will forcibly take what diocese for himself subjugated, let him give it back: let the rules of the father not be violated: let not the arrogance of worldly power creep in under the guise of sacred rites: and let us not little by little, imperceptibly, lose that freedom that our Lord Jesus Christ, the liberator of all men, gave us with His blood. And so the holy and ecumenical council desires that every diocese preserve in purity, and without restraint, the rights that first belong to it, according to the custom established from ancient times. Each metropolitan, for his own identification, may without restriction take the list from this decree. If anyone proposes a decree contrary to what has now been determined: it pleases the entire holy and ecumenical council, let it be invalid
.
(Ap. 34, ; I Om. 6, ; II Om. 2; Trul. 20, , ; Antioch. 9, , ; Serdic. 3, )
.
The reason for the publication of this rule was a complaint filed at the seventh meeting of the Council of Ephesus by three Cypriot bishops against the Bishop of Antioch, who wanted to subordinate the Cypriot Church to his jurisdiction and, therefore, take away from it those old privileges that it had always enjoyed and on the basis of which the Council of Cypriot bishops had the right to independently appoint their own bishops.
The chief bishop (metropolitan) of Cyprus has been independent since time immemorial and from church rules we see that he has always been recognized as autocephalous, άυτοκέφαλος (nemini subjectus). If Rule 2 of the Second Ecumenical Council subordinates the metropolitans to the bishops at the head of the diocese (patriarchs), nevertheless, some metropolitans still remained αυτοκέφαλοι. In the interpretation of the mentioned rule, Balsamon says: “Let it not seem strange to you if you find other independent (autocephalous) churches (έτερας έκκλησίας αύτοκεφάλους), such as: Bulgarian, Cypriot and Iveron... The Archbishop of Cyprus was honored by the Third Council, therefore about read rule 8 of this Council and 39 rule of the VI Council"742. Thus, the right of independence of the Cypriot Church is based on ancient custom and rules. The motivation for issuing this rule shows us this in the clearest way743. The words in canon 6 of the First Ecumenical Council εν ταΐς άλλαις έπαρχίαις τά πρεσβεία σώζεσθαι ταΐς έκκλησίας obviously have no other meaning , in addition, what has already been indicated by us in our interpretation of this rule, that the autocephaly of some church regions, except for those mentioned in that rule , should be sacredly revered, because it is based on an ancient custom - τά άρχαία έθη κρατείτω. The Antiochian bishops tried several times to deprive the Cypriot Church of its independence and subordinate it to their authority, based mainly on the fact that politically the island of Cyprus was subordinate to the Antiochian prefect744. Subsequently, John, known as the head of the Ephesian congregation, which retreated from the holy council of the Orthodox, wanting to once and for all subjugate the bishops of Cyprus, began to insist on this with the highest degree of energy, especially after the death of the Cypriot Metropolitan Theodore745. In this regard, he was supported by the political authorities, as we read about in the acts of the seventh meeting of the Council of Ephesus746. As a result of the complaint of Rigin, Zenon and Evagrius, the Council of Ephesus reconsidered this issue and approved the autocephaly of the Cypriot Church. The categorical manner with which the fathers of the council resolved the issue of the Cypriot Church and ensured its rights shows the importance they attached to the sacred protection of the boundaries of churches.
They do not limit themselves only to the solemn affirmation of the autocephaly of the Cypriot Church in this rule, but proclaim it as a law, which is based on the 35th rule of the Holy Apostles and the 3rd rule of the Council of Antioch and which should not be violated by anyone, since no bishop has the right to extend his authority on the church, which was not previously under its jurisdiction747, and conclude: “the holy and ecumenical council desires that every diocese preserve in purity and without restraint the rights that first belong to it, according to the custom established from ancient times”748. We will still have to talk about the Cypriot Church in the interpretation of the 39th rule of the Council of Trullo, which, as we will see, most solemnly confirms this injunction of the Council of Ephesus and proclaims: “may the advantages given to the throne (the primate of the island of Cyprus) from the God-bearing fathers in Ephesus be preserved unchanged once gathered"749.
Particularly noteworthy in this rule are the words: “let not the arrogance of worldly authorities creep in under the guise of sacred rites.”
.
The Church of Christ has never had any other power than that which Christ gave it, and Christ could not give it any other power except that which He received from God the Father. “As the Father sent Me, so I send you”
(John 20:21), Christ says to His disciples, explaining to them what kind of power they will have.
Because of this, the Apostle Paul says that priests are the vicars of Christ and continuers of His ministry. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Apostles or their successors had or could have any power that Christ did not have as the Head of the church. While on earth, Christ never usurped the power of worldly rulers and never used this power. He never resorted to violence or weapons, but through persuasion and miracles he tried to lead people to the knowledge of truth and true piety. He Himself teaches us this, saying that He did not accept any worldly power from the Father. When the Jews accused Him before Pilate of calling Himself the king of the Jews, then to Pilate’s question whether He was the king of the Jews, Christ answered, showing in His words that He had no worldly power on earth: My kingdom is not of this world: Even if My kingdom had been of this world, My servants would have fought, lest I be betrayed by the Jews;
but now my kingdom is not from here (John 18:36).
Pilate again says to Him: art thou a king?
Jesus answered: You say that I am a King: For this I was born, and for this I came into the world, that I may bear witness to the truth , says Christ (John 18:37). And could He have testified more clearly that He did not come into the world to exercise power?
What the power really was that Christ gave to the Apostles is best shown by those passages of Holy Scripture in which it is spoken of. If the church has no other power than that which Christ gave to His disciples, and through them to their successors, if it is not clear from the Holy Scriptures that the disciples of Christ received any other power other than spiritual, then the statements of some hierarchs are in vain, trying to prove that they can also perform the functions of secular power. The first and most important power that Christ gave to the Apostles was the power to preach the Gospel throughout the whole earth and to baptize those who have faith (Matthew 28:18), and that this power is only spiritual is quite obvious. Another power given to the Apostles, and through them to the Church, is the power to bind and decide: Amen [for] I say unto you: If ye bind on earth, they shall be bound in heaven: and if ye loose on earth, they shall be loosed in heaven
(Matt. 18:18).
Referring to these words of Christ, some began to argue that the latter also applies to worldly affairs. The evidence is unfounded, because Christ himself responds with the following words: As the Father sent Me, I send you too.
And this he said, breathed, and said to them: Receive the Holy Spirit: Whose sins you forgive, they will be forgiven them: and whose sins you hold, they hold fast (John 20:21-23).
From here it is clear that the power to knit and loosen, received from Christ by the Apostles, applies only to sins - so it applies only to the soul, but not at all to the body, as Chrysostom wisely notes on this matter750. The third power granted by Christ to the Apostles is the power of celebrating the sacrament of the Eucharist in His remembrance (Luke 22:19), which truly cannot be called a worldly power. The last power, which consists in punishing criminals, is mentioned by Ev. Matthew: If the church also disobeys, let you be like a pagan publican
(Matthew 18:17).
These words show that the church cannot impose other punishments on criminals than removal from church fellowship and exclusion from the Christian community. How far Christ and the Apostles were from the thought of any secular power is evident from the fact that they most decisively rejected such power from the church, retaining exclusively spiritual power for it. Avoiding first of all such power, Christ Himself then told His disciples that this power belongs not to them, but to worldly rulers: Kings of the tongue rule over them, and those who possess them are called benefactors.
You are not like that (Luke 22:25; Mark 10:42–43). With these words Christ teaches His disciples two truths: firstly, that they and their successors must be far removed from all worldly power and jurisdiction, and secondly, that the spiritual authority which they have is not the power of dominion, but the power of love and goodness, because the task of worldly power is to manage external affairs, while spiritual power controls the internal movements of the heart. Origen, by the way, says that clergy are not called to dominate the church, but to serve their church751. Jerome draws in this regard the distinction that exists between the power of a prince and the power of a bishop in that the first (prince) rules over those who do not want, and the second (bishop) over those who want, the first subdues through fear, and the second himself becomes a servant, the first guards the body to death, and the second preserves the soul for salvation752.
This is the teaching of Holy Scripture about the nature of church power that the fathers of the Council of Ephesus had in mind, recalling in this definition that the arrogance of worldly power should not creep in under the guise of sacred rites. In their verdict against bishops seeking to gain some dominance over others, the fathers again showed that they had in mind the words of the Savior with which He addressed His disciples regarding seniority: Do not be called teachers: for there is only one Teacher, Christ: You are all brothers. And do not call your Father to earth: for there is only one Father, who is in heaven. Below, call yourself a mentor: for there is only one Mentor, Christ. If there is pain in you, let him be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will humble himself; and he who humbles himself will be exalted.
(Matt. 23:8–12).
The Ephesian fathers had before them other words of the Divine Teacher, in which He showed the equality of His disciples: whoever wants to be in you, let him be your servant; and whoever wants to be old in you, let him be a servant of all
(Mark 10: 43–44).
As an addition to our presentation, we present the remark of Apxumandrite John in his interpretation of this rule: “These words express two special thoughts: 1) that in church government there should not be a predominance of power, so that one local authority is exalted above all others , equal to her in the sacred importance of their rights, by the authorities, and even less so. over all local churches, whose rights, according to the definition of the fathers, should be independent within their limits and inviolable; 2) that the spiritual dignity of church power and its sacred rights should not be mixed with anything worldly, alien to it in spirit, in its types and actions, such as: secular power, worldly honors, the use of worldly means for one’s own purposes, etc. . So strictly did the ancient rules of the fathers limit spiritual power, and so far were they from any thought about the universal primacy of one department over the entire church!”753.
