Talk:Eastern Churches Council of Australia - Revision history

Pistevo: moved Talk:Eastern Hierarchs to Talk:Eastern Churches Council of Australia: name seems to have changed.

2012-04-17T12:40:10Z

moved Talk:Eastern Hierarchs to Talk:Eastern Churches Council of Australia: name seems to have changed.

ASDamick at 11:33, May 22, 2006

2006-05-22T11:33:02Z

Chrisg at 10:09, May 22, 2006

2006-05-22T10:09:21Z

Pistevo at 08:46, May 22, 2006

2006-05-22T08:46:01Z

Chrisg at 08:04, May 22, 2006

2006-05-22T08:04:03Z

Pistevo at 05:02, May 22, 2006

2006-05-22T05:02:48Z

Chrisg at 04:42, May 22, 2006

2006-05-22T04:42:16Z

New page

'''Pre-Chalcedonian and Pre-Ephesian'''

The Antiochian Archdiocese, and the pre-Chalcedonian Churches, prefer the use of the term Pre-Chalcedonian in this article, and any article dealing with Eastern Hierarchs, or the Pre-Chalcedonian Churches themselves.

Non-Chalcedonian is a loaded term showing bias against those "who did not accept the truth decided by Chalcedon", as the obviously biased put it. Pre-Chalcedonian is a positive term acknowledging the common heritage of both divisions prior to Chalcedon.

The unbiased term Pre-Chalcedonian is needed to help Christians of good-will work towards healing the tearing of Christ's Church.

Similarly, the term Pre-Ephesian is preferred to describe those Churches erroneously referred to as "Nestorian", by so many in the Chalcedonian Churches and their offshoots.

To heal the wounds it is necessary to start from common ground and look at the circumstances and reasons for the divergences, and the semantics in the formularies of the divergences.

The terms Chalcedonian and Pre-Chalcedonian, and Ephesian and Pre-Ephesian, acknowledge the common ground prior to those Councils.

chrisg 2006-05-22-1441 EAST

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:33, May 22, 2006
Line 28:		Line 28:
	:Of course, these are just [[OW:SM\|the rules]] - I didn't make them; that being said, I don't see how it can be any other way. If there is no intercommunion, it's not the one church. {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 03:46, May 22, 2006 (CDT)		:Of course, these are just [[OW:SM\|the rules]] - I didn't make them; that being said, I don't see how it can be any other way. If there is no intercommunion, it's not the one church. {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 03:46, May 22, 2006 (CDT)
	:: Interesting. So when Moscow broke off communion with Constantinople a few years ago, which one do you say was not part of the One Church? chrisg 2006-05-22-2008 EAST		:: Interesting. So when Moscow broke off communion with Constantinople a few years ago, which one do you say was not part of the One Church? chrisg 2006-05-22-2008 EAST
		+
		+	::: The break was not permanent, as I am sure it was not meant to be. It's tough to define exactly, of course. Let us just say that at this point, the division which occurred over Chalcedon has not been healed. There has to be some sort of rule of thumb for the wiki. The MCB is one of the standards agreed upon from the beginning. {{User:ASDamick/sig}} 06:33, May 22, 2006 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:09, May 22, 2006
Line 27:		Line 27:
	:Probably not. Mainstream Chalcedonian Bias (MCB), a corner-stone of OrthodoxWiki, means that articles are designed to be slanted towards the 14/15 autocephalous churches. This, of course, means that they are slanted away from the old-calendarists (non-mainstream) and those who do not accept the first four ecumenical councils. The [[User:FrJohn\|administrator]] is an OCA priest, which necessitates this.		:Probably not. Mainstream Chalcedonian Bias (MCB), a corner-stone of OrthodoxWiki, means that articles are designed to be slanted towards the 14/15 autocephalous churches. This, of course, means that they are slanted away from the old-calendarists (non-mainstream) and those who do not accept the first four ecumenical councils. The [[User:FrJohn\|administrator]] is an OCA priest, which necessitates this.
	:Of course, these are just [[OW:SM\|the rules]] - I didn't make them; that being said, I don't see how it can be any other way. If there is no intercommunion, it's not the one church. {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 03:46, May 22, 2006 (CDT)		:Of course, these are just [[OW:SM\|the rules]] - I didn't make them; that being said, I don't see how it can be any other way. If there is no intercommunion, it's not the one church. {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 03:46, May 22, 2006 (CDT)
		+	:: Interesting. So when Moscow broke off communion with Constantinople a few years ago, which one do you say was not part of the One Church? chrisg 2006-05-22-2008 EAST

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:46, May 22, 2006
Line 24:		Line 24:

	chrisg 2006-05-22-1803 EAST		chrisg 2006-05-22-1803 EAST
		+
		+	:Probably not. Mainstream Chalcedonian Bias (MCB), a corner-stone of OrthodoxWiki, means that articles are designed to be slanted towards the 14/15 autocephalous churches. This, of course, means that they are slanted away from the old-calendarists (non-mainstream) and those who do not accept the first four ecumenical councils. The [[User:FrJohn\|administrator]] is an OCA priest, which necessitates this.
		+	:Of course, these are just [[OW:SM\|the rules]] - I didn't make them; that being said, I don't see how it can be any other way. If there is no intercommunion, it's not the one church. {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 03:46, May 22, 2006 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:04, May 22, 2006
Line 16:		Line 16:

	:In the same way that the term 'traditionalist', used for "old calendarists", is objected to by "new calendarists" on the basis of a lack of tradition, for a similar reason is pre-chalcedonian objected to, as ''both'' Eastern and Oriental Orthodox (to use different descriptions) were pre-chalcedonian. The question is not whether the Oriental Orthodox (or the Easterns, for that matter) existed before or after Chalcedon, but whether the canons of the council were accepted. In acknowledgement of this, "Chalcedonian" and "Non-Chalcedonian" are the best descriptive terms we have. {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 00:02, May 22, 2006 (CDT)		:In the same way that the term 'traditionalist', used for "old calendarists", is objected to by "new calendarists" on the basis of a lack of tradition, for a similar reason is pre-chalcedonian objected to, as ''both'' Eastern and Oriental Orthodox (to use different descriptions) were pre-chalcedonian. The question is not whether the Oriental Orthodox (or the Easterns, for that matter) existed before or after Chalcedon, but whether the canons of the council were accepted. In acknowledgement of this, "Chalcedonian" and "Non-Chalcedonian" are the best descriptive terms we have. {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 00:02, May 22, 2006 (CDT)
		+	------------
		+	'''Chalcedonian Bias'''
		+
		+	Is there any way to get away from this Chalcedonian bias to a Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) applicable to all of Orthodoxy?
		+
		+	Thanks
		+
		+	chrisg 2006-05-22-1803 EAST

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:02, May 22, 2006
Line 14:		Line 14:

	chrisg 2006-05-22-1441 EAST		chrisg 2006-05-22-1441 EAST
		+
		+	:In the same way that the term 'traditionalist', used for "old calendarists", is objected to by "new calendarists" on the basis of a lack of tradition, for a similar reason is pre-chalcedonian objected to, as ''both'' Eastern and Oriental Orthodox (to use different descriptions) were pre-chalcedonian. The question is not whether the Oriental Orthodox (or the Easterns, for that matter) existed before or after Chalcedon, but whether the canons of the council were accepted. In acknowledgement of this, "Chalcedonian" and "Non-Chalcedonian" are the best descriptive terms we have. {{User:Pistevo/sig}} 00:02, May 22, 2006 (CDT)

← Older revision	Revision as of 12:40, April 17, 2012
(No difference)