British Orthodox Fellowship

[Peter Farrington]

I would appreciate prayers for a new venture in the British Orthodox Church.
We are seeking to open ourselves up to a wider, looser community of folk who
are interested in our British Orthodox life and witness and who are gathered
around us as friends and enquirers.

Peter

========================================

Dear friends and enquirers,

After months of preparation and hard work the British Orthodox Fellowship
has now launched its activities.

http://www.britishorthodox.org/fellowship.php

The British Orthodox Church has been approached by a growing number of
enquirers over the last few years, and it has been plain that a new way of
allowing people to discover Orthodoxy was urgently needed.

The British Orthodox Fellowship is the answer to that need. It is a
dispersed community of friends, enquirers and members of the British
Orthodox Church, who are united in their desire to discover how the Orthodox
Faith can help them develop and deepen their Christian life.

Anyone with a genuine interest in Orthodoxy can join the British Orthodox
Fellowship. There is a small annual membership charge and members benefit
from receiving our British Orthodox Fellowship Handbook, filled with
prayers, readings and useful suggestions for developing the spiritual life.

Members also receive our twice yearly magazine, and are invited to join us
at an annual weekend conference and our annual pilgrimage to one of the holy
places of the British Isles.

The British Orthodox Fellowship is a means of allowing ordinary people to
experience the faith and spirituality of the British Orthodox Church while
they remain members of their own Christian tradition, or even are
investigating the Christian Faith for the first time.

The British Orthodox Fellowship is a ministry of the British Orthodox
Church. We are committed to helping British people find out more about our
Faith in whatever ways are most appropriate for their own circumstances.

Our bishop, Metropolitan Seraphim, is the Patron of the British Orthodox
Fellowship, and the priests and clergy are Pastoral Officers, willing and
able to provide support and guidance to Fellowship members when requested.

We hope that you will take this opportunity of joining the British Orthodox
Fellowship and exploring the Orthodox Faith with us.

http://www.britishorthodox.org/fellowship.php

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by Peter Farrington
I would appreciate prayers for a new venture in the British Orthodox Church.
We are seeking to open ourselves up to a wider, looser community of folk who
are interested in our British Orthodox life and witness and who are gathered
around us as friends and enquirers.

"British Orthodox"? But I see you are under the jurisdiction of the Coptic
Church. So has Pope Shenouda stopped preaching virulent anti-chalcedonian
(anti-dyophysite) sermons? Unless he has, there is no way anyone should regard
you as 'Orthodox'.

[Bbd]

Post by Peter Farrington
I would appreciate prayers for a new venture in the British Orthodox Church.
http://www.britishorthodox.org/fellowship.php

To assist readers of this invitation in deciding how and whether to
respond to it, can you please confirm the "British Orthodox Church" is
a non-Chalcedonian body, one of those now generally referred to as
"Oriental Orthodox"?

Thank you.

[h***@geneva.rutgers.edu]

Post by Matthew Johnson
"British Orthodox"? But I see you are under the jurisdiction of the Coptic
Church. So has Pope Shenouda stopped preaching virulent anti-chalcedonian
(anti-dyophysite) sermons? Unless he has, there is no way anyone should regard
you as 'Orthodox'.

Both Shenouda and the British Orthodox church have web sites. The most
detailed treatment I see there is this, from the bishop of the British
Orthodox church: http://www.britishorthodox.org/112g.php He seems to
hope for an agreement that Oriental and Chalcedonian churches hold the
same essential faith. From the most detailed of Shenouda's statements,
I have to say that what he means by one nature after the union sounds
very suspiciously like what Chalcedonians mean by one person.

My primary caution is that Shenouda teaches one will. However further
discussion would be needed to be clear what he means. The arguments he
gives for one will appear to me to establish unity of will. But that's
subtly different: it is consistent with the orthodox position that
there are two wills that are always in agreement.

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by Peter Farrington
I would appreciate prayers for a new venture in the British Orthodox Church.
We are seeking to open ourselves up to a wider, looser community of folk who
are interested in our British Orthodox life and witness and who are gathered
around us as friends and enquirers.

"British Orthodox"? But I see you are under the jurisdiction of the Coptic
Church. So has Pope Shenouda stopped preaching virulent anti-chalcedonian
(anti-dyophysite) sermons? Unless he has, there is no way anyone should regard
you as 'Orthodox'.

[Bbd]

Post by Peter Farrington
I would appreciate prayers for a new venture in the British Orthodox Church.
http://www.britishorthodox.org/fellowship.php

To assist readers of this invitation in deciding how and whether to
respond to it, can you please confirm the "British Orthodox Church" is
a non-Chalcedonian body, one of those now generally referred to as
"Oriental Orthodox"?

Thank you.

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by h***@geneva.rutgers.edu

Post by Matthew Johnson
"British Orthodox"? But I see you are under the jurisdiction of the
Coptic Church. So has Pope Shenouda stopped preaching virulent
anti-chalcedonian (anti-dyophysite) sermons? Unless he has, there is
no way anyone should regard you as 'Orthodox'.

Both Shenouda and the British Orthodox church have web sites. The
most detailed treatment I see there is this, from the bishop of the
British Orthodox church: http://www.britishorthodox.org/112g.php

I have looked at it. I am not impressed by it. For example, he
criticizes Orthodox critics of the "Second Agreed Statement", but
makes no mention of Pope Shenouda's anti-dyophysite sermons, which
themselves are a violation of the Agreement.

That is one-sided. Too much so to be fair or reasonable.

Post by h***@geneva.rutgers.edu
He seems to hope for an agreement that Oriental and Chalcedonian
churches hold the same essential faith.

This is actually not uncommon. The sentiment has popped up from time
to time over the last 40 years or so. But it always runs into snags
before they actually accept Chalcedon.

Post by h***@geneva.rutgers.edu
From the most detailed of Shenouda's statements, I have to say that
what he means by one nature after the union sounds very suspiciously
like what Chalcedonians mean by one person.

Yes, it does. But if you compare this to the history of the relevant
Ecumenical Councils, as covered by (for example) Kartashev, this is
too similar to the formulas that were eventually condemned (such as
that of the Council of Constantiople in 448, "two natures before, one
nature after the union").

A related problem: I see no recognition of the historical fact that
the ever-so-beloved battle-cry "one nature of the Incarnate Word"
comes not from St. Athanasius, but from the proto-Monophysite heretic
Apollinarius. St. Cyril _thought_ he was quoting one of the Fathers
(St. Athanasius?), but he was really quoting a work of Apollinarius,
that was preserved by retitling it under someone else's name. But
thanks to St. Cyril, the saying has become very popular among all
Monophysites.

Post by h***@geneva.rutgers.edu
My primary caution is that Shenouda teaches one will.

And this is a problem. As you are probably aware, the belief in one
will in Christ, Monothelitism, _was_ an attempt to con the Church into
union with the Monophysites to unify the Empire. For the difference
between Monothelitism and Monophysitism really is slight.

Post by h***@geneva.rutgers.edu
However further discussion would be needed to be clear what he means.

No doubt. But don't be too surprised if when clarified, we find out
that it is not Orthodox after all.

Post by h***@geneva.rutgers.edu
The arguments he gives for one will appear to me to establish unity
of will. But that's subtly different: it is consistent with the
orthodox position that there are two wills that are always in
agreement.

Only if it agrees that both those two are _natural_ wills. Only then
is it consistent with the Orthodox position. But this is something
that is rarely even understood in the West. I have never seen it
properly covered, for example, in Western texts on Patristics or
Patrology, not even in Quasten, Kelly or Bettencourt, which are very
good in so many other ways. Even Pelikan only made a good start in
describing the difference (between 'natural will' and other senses of
'will').
--
-------------------------------
Subducat se sibi ut haereat Deo
Quidquid boni habet tribuat illi a quo factus est
(Sanctus Aurelius Augustinus, Ser. 96)

---

[In case it isn't clear, what I meant to say is: the arguments he
gives from Scripture and theology in favor of one will don't seem to
me to require one will. They are quite consistent with two wills that
are in agreement. And other arguments seem to me to require that
rather than one will. The problem is that "one will" can be used
quasi-metaphorically to refer to two people who are completely in
accord. Thus one can't *prove* that he's using it in a non-orthodox
sense. One can, however, suspect it.

--clh]

[Peter Farrington]

Dear Matthew

why not join the Fellowship and discover that all your concerns are
groundless.

I have been Orthodox in the British Orthodox Church for 14 years and have
spent all of those studying and researching and writing. There is no
substantive difference between our Orthodox Faith and yours. If I did not
believe that the Orthodox Church of which I am a member had not always
taught that in Christ is perfect humanity and perfect Divinity, complete,
undivided and unconfused, then I would have joined another Church.

Your concerns are noted, but doubtless you have not been able to study as I
have done.

If you joined us then you would be able to see where you were under a
misapprehension.

Peter

says...

Post by Matthew Johnson
"British Orthodox"? But I see you are under the jurisdiction of the
Coptic Church. So has Pope Shenouda stopped preaching virulent
anti-chalcedonian (anti-dyophysite) sermons? Unless he has, there is
no way anyone should regard you as 'Orthodox'.

[Matthew Johnson]

Post by Peter Farrington
Dear Matthew
why not join the Fellowship and discover that all your concerns are
groundless.

So many loaded questions this past week! The answer to your question is, because
I do _not_ beleive that joining it is the best way to discover whether or not my
concerns are groundless. I don't even believe it is a _good_ way to do this.

Even waiting for the Patriarch of Moscow to make a proclamation concerning
whether or not you are Orthodox is a better way -- although it means waiting,
and waiting...

Post by Peter Farrington
I have been Orthodox in the British Orthodox Church for 14 years and have
spent all of those studying and researching and writing. There is no
substantive difference between our Orthodox Faith and yours.

I am not convinced by your say-so. Especially not after reading Pope Shenouda's
anti-chalcedonian sermons.

Post by Peter Farrington
If I did not
believe that the Orthodox Church of which I am a member had not always
taught that in Christ is perfect humanity and perfect Divinity, complete,
undivided and unconfused, then I would have joined another Church.

And I still believe you should have done this.

[snip]