Orthodox Leaders Moving Synod to Crete Citing Geopolitical Concerns in Turkey

Pravimir ^ | 1/25/16 | Gregory Pappas

[marshmallow]

Considered to be the most important meeting of the world's Orthodox Christian bishops in over a thousand years, the Great and Holy Synod which was to convene at the headquarter city of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople in Istanbul, Turkey, is being relocated to Crete, citing geopolitical concerns.

The announcement came via the Athens News Agency, covering meetings of various Orthodox Church delegations meeting this week in Switzerland to formulate the agenda item and preparations for the June 2016 event.

The decision comes after "exceptional objective circumstances" (i.e. the inability of the Russian delegation to travel to Turkey because of the Russian-Turkish conflict).

The synod has been seen as a successor to the Second Council of Nicaea, the last major pan-denominational summit of Christian churches, which took place in 787- the first of its kind on more than a thousand years bringing together the heads of all of the autocephalous Orthodox Churches from throughout the world, has created an agenda of items that will be discussed at the synod, which is expected to take place in mid June.

[NRx]

You beat me to this post. I see no compelling reason for a Great Council of the Church and would prefer that this not occur. There are no grave theological issues of the sort that necessitated the previous nine councils. This seems like an invitation for trouble. The only upside is that as long as the Russians are there I am fairly certain that nothing too crazy will go through.

I guess one could say that I have very low expectations for the Council and will be pleased if everyone sleeps through the whole thing.

[livius]

Keep the dread example of Vatican II before your eyes at all times! I hope the Orthodox don’t get blindsided like that - in other words, a council driven by a few people with a secret agenda.

That said, changing it to Crete sounds like a wise move.

[Kolokotronis]

“This seems like an invitation for trouble.”

I doubt it. In any event it won’t have any Vatican II effects. In Orthodoxy, NOTHING a council (even an ecumenical one) says or does becomes dogma (or even a binding discipline) absent the Great Axios of the People of God, the Laity. We are the guardians of Orthodoxy, not the crowned heads!

Were that not enough, without the presence of Rome it can’t be an ecumenical council capable of defining dogma.

[NRx]

In general I agree with your comment. However...

“Were that not enough, without the presence of Rome it can’t be an ecumenical council capable of defining dogma.”

...is doubtful. There is a lot of divergent opinion in Orthodoxy on that subject. I have heard it said we can’t have an ecumenical council without an emperor to convene it. But with the Papacy in schism (and almost certainly heresy) the prerogatives of Old Rome have passed to the See of St. Andrew per the canons of the Fourth Ecumenical Council. It is worth remembering that we have held two great Councils that are universally accepted by the Church but not by Rome (three if we include the Qunisext Council).