Talk:Eastern Orthodox Church

Bold text

Oecumenical Councils

Within the article the following statement is made:

Some Orthodox consider two additional councils to be ecumenical, although this is not universally agreed upon (especially the ninth, which occurred after the East-West Schism)

My question is this: Who among the Orthodox does not accept the 8th and 9th ecumenical councils? As far as I know everyone in the Church accepts these. This passage also seems to imply that without Rome the council would not be ecumenical. This is, of course, nonsense since Rome was no longer a member of the Church. The Church does not require inviting former heretical members to participate in a council.--Phiddipus (talk) 21:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree. This statement should go.--Michael X the White (talk) 10:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Wandered by and took a look at the list of Ecumenical councils. I, for one, was unaware that the Orthodox recognized more than seven, so I took a look at the main articles for the 8th and 9th. Lo and behold, both mention that they are not recognized as ecumenical by all Orthodox Christians. I'm going to restore some similar language to that objected in above. Gabrielthursday (talk) 05:25, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Once again, Who among Orthodox do not accept these councils? Its not a true statement. All Orthodox accept these councils as valid.--Phiddipus (talk) 15:43, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Find a reference that they are universally or near-universally accepted. Take a look at the articles on the 8th and 9th councils- they say they are disputed. Orthowiki likewise says they are disputed. Other pages on Wikipedia reflect the view that they are disputed. Given this, I'm reverting. Gabrielthursday (talk) 04:29, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what the correct answer is, but I'd suggest that editors support their positions by referencing reliable sources. For example, the Blackwell Dictionary of Eastern Christianity (2001 edition; ISBN: 0-631-18966-1) says that only the first seven are acknowledged as ecumentical (see pages 169 and 171-172.) Perhaps it's incorrect, but it's generally known as reliable. I'd like to know what other sources say on the matter.Majoreditor (talk) 02:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

This page: http://www.holytrinityorthodox.com/calendar/los/Epiphany/e10121-SeventhEcumenicalCouncil.htm from a Moscow Patriarchate parish quotes the Synaxarion as stating, "The second Council of Nicaea is the seventh and last Ecumenical Council recognized by the Orthodox Church." I don't have a copy of the Synaxarion but perhaps someone who does could look up the quote and verify it. Googling the phrase "seventh and last ecumenical council" also produces legions of hits, many from Orthodox sources, though I couldn't find one that was unambiguously authoritative. It's perhaps worth noting that there are feast days for the Fathers of each of the (first) seven ecumenical councils, but none for the other two afaik. Mrhsj (talk) 20:01, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

The Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs of 1848 lists the Synod of Constantinople of 879/880 as the Eighth Ecumenical Synod and the Synods of Constantinople of the years 1341, 1347, and 1351 as the 9th. The pronouncements of these councils are dogmatic and absolutely accepted by the entire Orthodox Church. This alone makes them ecumenical. If your argument is that the Roman Catholics were not a part of the deliberation then I would remind you that their presence was not required since they were no longer a part of the church. They were also not the first to break from the Church, you might as well argue that no council was ecumenical after Chalcedon since the monophysites were not invited to any council after that. I really don't see why this is an issue? There are some things that just don't need backing up with the opinion of someone who happened to write it down. Are these councils universally accepted by the EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCH, yes!. Are they Dogmatic? Yes!, then they are ecumenical by definition. If you want to know why so many Orthodox sources list only seven councils, well, I would say that whatever text they were referencing was probably written in the spirit of comparing our Church to others, specifically the Roman church; to point out similarities. In other words, it was dumbed down for the masses. You can find a lot of pseudo-scholarly work like this. Either that or it was written by a scholar outside the Orthodox Church who chose, for academic reasons to adopt an impartial point of view and look to western history books for his information; which gave him only one perspective (writing about the Eastern Orthodox Church from a Roman Catholic POV). Well, lets try getting our information from the horses mouth instead.

I see where the Encyclical speaks of the "eighth ecumenical council," in two places, thank you. I am afraid I am unable to locate where it speaks of the ninth; could you please provide direct quotes and section numbers? As to the rest of your comment I don't know what to make of it; who is the "you" you are addressing? Four editors besides you have contributed to this section, but none has said anything about Roman anything except you. Mrhsj (talk) 04:17, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

The reality of the situation, to me, seems to be clearly between the two opposing sides of this conversation. Yes, it is entirely true that the Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs labels the constantinopolitan council of 879 as the "Eighth Ecumenical Council". This is a document of great authority in the EOC, and as such I think that council should be identified as the Eighth Ecumenical Council. However, while the Fifth Council of Constantinople (1341) is accepted doctrinally by the whole Church, its status as the Ninth Ecumenical Council is much less established and is only championed by a few outspoken clergymen in the modern Church. I may personally agree with them, but I don't think it's anywhere near as evident that it is the mind of the ecumenical Church that the Fifth Council of Constantinople is the Ninth Ecumenical Council. Deusveritasest (talk) 04:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Russian Orthodox Episcopal Ordination.jpg

The image Image:Russian Orthodox Episcopal Ordination.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

"Eastern Orthodox Church"

Please, note that the church is called in most of the countries where this religion is dominant not under the name "Eastern Orthodox Church" but for example in Russia - Православие, in Poland - Prawoslawie etc. which means "The Law preacher". We should include it in the article as a "Pravoslavie" or something similar(name in the latin alphabet). No one calls it in Eastern Europe "Eastern Orthodox Church"...

--Krzyzowiec (talk) 23:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Orthodox Church of Canada

I know that there is an Orthodox Chuch of Canada because I attended a wedding at one of their church buildings. There is no mention of it in this article, nor does it have its own article that I can find. They have a web site at http://www.orthodoxchurchofcanada.org . Ronstew (talk) 08:30, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

The Orthodox Church Was NOT Founded By Christ and His Apostles Nearly 2000 Years Ago!

There is a major error right in the first paragraph of the article. It states that the Orthodox Church was founded by Christ and His apostles nearly 2000 years ago. This is blatantly wrong. The Orthodox Church was founded in the 11th century after the Great Schism. --PaladinWriter (talk) 10:10, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Both the claim with which you disagree and your own claim are equally POV.