Replies

Lest there be any misunderstanding, Lukaris was condemned by the Pan Orthodox Council at Jerusalem in 1672 as was Calvinism generally.

I am aware of that, certainly.

Though technically I believe (and here I offer correction humbly, and admit that I may be mistaken) that the Patriarch Cyril Lukaris, a much-beloved Anti-Turkish Patriot of the Greek Church, was never himself condemned; but rather, certain portions of his Confessions were rejected.

However, unless the 1672 Council is elevated to the status of the Seven General Councils, it seems to me that what we have here is a case of Dueling Patriarchs -- the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople has offered his Confessions; and the Patriarch of Jerusalem has, in council with largely Middle-Eastern Bishops (The decisions of the Council were only later transmitted to Great Russia, or am I mistaken?), rejected them -- long after the Ecumenical Patriarch was murdered by Turks, and thus unable to defend his Confessions.

This would seem, at least to me, to raise two questions:

FIRST: UNLESS the 1672 Council holds an equal status to that of the Seven General Councils, does the Patriarch of Jerusalem with some assembled Middle-Eastern Bishops have the Ecclesial Authority to deny the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople his Pastoral Right to promulgate a non-binding pastoral teaching?
AND SECONDLY: GIVEN THAT Bishop Saint Augustine of Hippo, in the days of the Pelagian Heresy, whose teachings on Original Sin and Absolute Predestination were far more stringent than that of John Calvin (remember that Saint Augustine believed that all those "Dying in the Womb" and all those "Dying in Infancy without Baptism" perished unto Hell, two positions which were utterly rejected by Saint John Calvin -- who believed in the Salvation of Dying Infants by Gratuitous Atonement), was in fact received by the Universal Christian Church (including both the West and also the East) as being Magisterial and Authoritative -- does a much later Eastern Orthodox Local Council have the Right to overthrow the teachings of Bishop Saint Augustine, whose Magisterial and Authoritative teachings the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople merely affirmed in a non-binding pastoral confession (indeed, like the Calvinists, in an even more modest formulation)?
Which, incidentally, leads me to a third question (call it Question 2B): If GOD HIMSELF Inspired and Authorized the Infallible Scriptures of Daniel and Esther amongst the Jews in Exile in the Old Testament; and if (as it is surely true) that The Presbyters of Iona, the ancient Scottish forebears of modern Calvinism ("Geneva shakes hands with Iona across the gulf of a thousand years"; Wylie, History of the Scottish Nation) were founded by Greek Orthodox -- not Roman-Latin -- missionaries from Asia Minor according to Greek customs and Greek baptismal rites.... then how can the Eastern Orthodox presume that their Western step-children, upon throwing off the chains of Papist Domination, did not preserve and extend Augustinian Truths in the West? Granted, the Scottish Orthodox were cut off from their Founders in Greece and Asia Minor -- but that does not mean that we, while yet in Papist Exile, were cut off from the Enlightenment of the All-Holy Spirit. Perhaps we have something to add to Eastern Orthodoxy, as God added the Books of Daniel and Esther to the Canon of Israelite Scripture.
Just a thought... just a thought...

But we regard works not as witnesses certifying our calling, but as being fruits in themselves, through which faith becomes efficacious, and as in themselves meriting, through the Divine promises, that each of the faithful may receive what is done through his own body, whether it is good or bad."

I don't have a great many problems with this quotation. We Protestants will also agree, with the Orthodox and the Bible, that "Faith without Works, is Dead."

Indeed, provided that our mutual conception of the relation between Works (which are indeed "fruits in themselves", I wholly agree) and Efficacious Faith are understood in the light of the Old Orthodox "Canon to Jesus":

Let my faith be reckoned in place of works, and seek not deeds which would justify me. But may my faith alone suffice instead of any deeds; may it answer for me, may it justify me, may it make me a partaker of Thine eternal glory. Let not Satan seize me and boast that he hath torn me from Thy hand and fold, O Word. But whether I will it or not, save me, O Christ my Savior. Go before me quickly, quickly, for I am perishing! Thou art my God from my mother's womb. Grant that I may love Thee, O Lord, as formerly I loved sin itself, and that I may work for Thee earnestly and without laziness, as I once worked for deceitful Satan..."
(From the Canon to Jesus in Old Orthodox Prayer Book, Priest Pimen Simon, Priest Theodore Jurewicz and Hieromonk German Ciuba, trans. and ed., pp. 150-151.)

...Then, in that case, I should have no objection whatsoever to Eastern Orthodox Theology on Faith and Works.

Indeed, I don't think that any Calvinist would object.

Best, OP