ECCLESIOLOGY: CONSTANTINOPLE’S PRIMACY, KYIV’S AUTOCEPHALY, AND TBILISI’S CONUNDRUM by Tamar Lomidze

While Orthodoxy in Dialogue continues to support the autocephaly of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine as an ecclesological, pastoral, and political necessity, Ms. Lomidze’s brief report underscores the conundrum that it presents for the Church of Georgia and the other autocephalous Churches.
We have argued previously that the primacy of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in the 21st century—almost six centuries after the fall of Constantinople and twelve centuries after the last Ecumenical Council—must be formulated through ecclesial consensus and not by autocratic decree from the Phanar. (See, for instance, our Editorial: Orthodox Popery Comes to America? or Time for a Greek Orthodox Revolt in America?.)

patriarche-elie

Catholicos-Patriarch Ilia II of All Georgia

The Synod of the Georgian Orthodox Church is about to convene in the next few days. A group of hierarchs allegedly led by Metropolitan Daniel of Chiatura and Sachkhere is up to discuss the recognition of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU), which was established in Kyiv in December 2018 and received autocephalous status from the Ecumenical Patriarch on January 5-6, 2019.

Constantinople is especially interested in the OCU’s recognition. If recognized, Metropolitan Epiphanius and his organization can augment the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s power in the Orthodox world, weaken the Moscow Patriarchate’s influence, and allow the Patriarch of Constantinople to make decisions on extremely important matters for Orthodoxy by his sole authority. Read More


ORTHODOXY IN DIALOGUE COMES TO PATREON

patreon-button

Orthodoxy in Dialogue has created a Patreon page as another method for our readers to support our work. Use Patreon only if you wish to become a monthly contributor in the amount of your choice.

To become a one-time or occasional contributor, contact us at editors@orthodoxyindialogue.com for PayPal or interac e-Transfer information.

Patreon members will be listed separately on our Patrons page.

We are profoundly grateful to our current and future Patrons! Read More


A VIRTUAL LISTENING TOUR: A mother’s tearful plea for her intersex child

This is the second voice to speak in Orthodoxy in Dialogue’s Fifty Years after Stonewall: A Virtual Listening Tour. We urge our readers to forward the articles in this series to their diocesan bishops and parish priests. We beg our hierarchy and clergy to listen, attentively, reflectively, and prayerfully.
We ensure complete anonymity if you wish to contribute to this series between now and the end of June.

rainbow-png-transparent-background

Thank you for your website and work. 

I wanted to share my thoughts. This probably isn’t the type of submission you are looking for, but this is something I’ve wanted to share for a long time and I simply felt moved to write to you after seeing your post about Stonewall. I’m not a professional writer. I’m certainly no theologian. I’m not even much of a deep thinker. I’m a mother who loves my intersex child. I’m Orthodox but struggling to remain in a Church that excludes LGBTQI+ people.  

My child did not go through puberty like other children. When it became clear that my child was not just a “late bloomer” we sought medical advice. Many tests and scans later we discovered that my child has an intersex condition. She has XY chromosomes. Her gonads are part ovary and part testes—ovotestes. She has internal structures that are the size, shape, and position of fallopian tubes but consist of the tissue that forms vas deferens. She has a uterus, and her external genitalia have a typically female appearance. Her body does not produce eggs or sperm. Her body does not make either estrogen or testosterone. Without medical hormone therapy she would have a perpetual pre-pubertal physical appearance.  Read More


A VIRTUAL LISTENING TOUR: A voice from the grave

This marks the first voice to speak in Orthodoxy in Dialogue’s Fifty Years after Stonewall: A Virtual Listening Tour. We urge the hierarchs and pastors of the Orthodox Church to listen reflectively and prayerfully to this and the voices that follow in this series.
Within the context of an online discussion on chastity in the lives of gay Christians in the old Homosexuality and Christianity Yahoo! group, Eric Iliff of blessed memory sent this email dated Sunday, December 3, 2006, 6:09 a.m. This is probably his last public statement on same-sex love prior to his death three months later. We publish it with no corrections, exactly as he sent it. 

rainbow-png-transparent-background

I’ll try and add a couple comments based on my understanding.

Chris,

I think you are possibly not recognizing the subtle difference between to the two terms ‘chaste’ and ‘celibate.’ For the purpose of our discussion here, into which I’m injecting myself, the two terms are quite different. Celibacy denotes no genital contact whatsoever, whether married or not, whether gay or straight, etc. However, chaste is a much more subtle concept I believe. It denotes temperate contenance within one’s life, which involves the moral lifestyle within which one lives.

Therefore, I agree with you, celibacy as a gay Christian is a choice, as many out gay Catholic priests could attest, for instance. BUT, but, but, chastity should be what ALL Christians strive for and ultimately all fall short of because “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.”

Read More