We are not a living body that contains a soul

We are a living soul that dwells within a body!

Wednesday September 5, 2007

Ecumenical Synods and Heresies:

The Byzantine Empire had remarkable endurance, surviving for over a millennium until it fell to the Ottoman Turks in 1453. The seven ecumenical synods (councils) with their doctrinal formulations are of particular importance to the Byzantine period, as these synods were responsible for the formulation of Christian doctrine. They constitute a permanent standard for an Orthodox understanding of the Trinity, the persons of Christ, and the incarnation. The decisions of these synods constitute an authoritative norm, against which all subsequent theology is measured, and they remain binding for the whole Church; non-acceptance constitutes exclusion from the communion of the Church. This explains the separation from the Church of such groups as the Jacobites, Armenians, Copts, and Nestorians. The ultimate acceptance of these synods by the Church as a whole is what gave the Church its validity and authority. Their acceptance was due, to a large part, to the great theologians of the age; their literary defense of these synods was decisive. These fathers of the Church were such men as saints Basil, Athanasius, Chrysostom, Gregory of Nazianzus, Cyril, and Gregory of Nyssa. Their writings still constitute an inexhaustible theological source for contemporary Orthodox Christians.

The seven ecumenical councils are important for another reason. The threefold ministerial structure of the Church was already a reality in many communities by the post-apostolic period. Each of these self-contained local churches, with its own independent hierarchal structure, was a self-governing unit. However, exact standards governing the relations of these churches with each other had not yet been defined. Still, a certain “power structure” modeled upon the organization of the Roman Empire eventually emerged; a provincial system in which churches were grouped in provinces had developed even before the beginning of the fourth century. In such cases it was the norm to give greater honor to the “metropolitan” or bishop of the capital city (metropolis) of each province. Likewise, given the importance of certain cities in the Roman administration, special precedence was given the presiding bishop of the three largest cities in the empire: Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. These developments, in which a church was ranked according to its civil importance in the administrative divisions of the Roman state, had evolved by common consensus without ecclesiastical legislation to support it. This problem was addressed by the ecumenical synods. The fathers of the first synod (325) formerly recognized the status of the three dioceses of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, and with the emergence of Constantinople as the new capital of the empire, this patriarchal system was further modified, since the change brought about in the civil administration by Constantinople’s new status could not help but to affect the ecclesiastical structure. At the synod of 381, Constantinople, as the “New Rome,” was given second place after the old Rome, while Alexandria was assigned third place. This legislation received further confirmation at the fourth synod of Chalcedon (451), when Constantinople, along with Jerusalem, was granted patriarchal status.

So, by the fifth century, a “pentarchy” or system of five sees (patriarchates) had been established, with a settled order of precedence. As the ancient center and the largest city of the empire, Rome, understandably, was given the primacy of honor within the pentarchy into which Christendom was now divided. This system of patriarchs and metropolitans was exclusively the result of ecclesiastical legislation; there was nothing inherently divine in its origin. None of the five sees possessed its authority by divine right. Had this been so, Alexandria could not have been demoted to third rank in order to have Constantinople exalted to second place. The determining factor was nothing more than their secular status as the most important cities in the empire. Another thing to note is that each of the five patriarchs was totally sovereign within their sphere of jurisdiction. The primacy of Rome, as such, did not entail universal jurisdictional power over the others. On the contrary, all bishops, whether patriarchs, metropolitans, or just bishops of a small local diocese, were equal, no one bishop, however exalted his see or diocese could claim supremacy over the others. The bishop of Rome was simply honored as the “first among equals”.

I humbly hope and pray that you will accept this news with love and understanding. Reflect on its truth. Research it with an open mind in order to see the truth and if in fact any part of these letters that touches on any teaching that you are currently receiving and is shown to you to be true,

Then you will give up yourself, your pride, and your ego in this area and give it to the truth of Jesus Christ and change your life accordingly.

This is sent with the love of Christ for you from me.

As always, all comments and questions are welcome, send them to me at;

monkmichael@newwarriorministries.com.

Rev. Gary Sweet

A humble servant of Jesus Christ

On the Web at: http://www.newwarriorministries.com

Email: monkmichael@newwarriorministries.com

Phone: (803) 377-1244

Chester, SC

To unsubscribe from this email, click here and hit send;

you will be immediately dropped from our mailing list.