Christ is Risen! When I first heard this I was just beginning on my path to conversion. Now it is Friday of Bright Week and my whole family has been baptized into the one true church. When I had previously listened to this, I had no grasp of what a tragedy it would be for the Orthodox Church to accept heterodox baptism. After experiencing the grace filled and truly miraculous nature of Orthodox baptism and Chrismation, my heart aches thinking of the feeling of grace that would have been lost if our Priest would have held the idea that our family was only getting baptized for ceremonial reasons because our former baptism had given us everything that we needed. Everything good and pure in this world seems to be under constant assault from the inside. The prayers of this newly illumined will be for the hierarchs and laity of The Church to remain strong through these evil times. My prayers have been and will continue to be with you, Father Peter.
Thank you father for your diligence. I have become aware of the venom theoriatv spews at you over this issue, among other things. It is exhausting for me, I cannot imagine your exhaustion. So thank you for your diligence!!!
Thank You Father, this presentation perfectly answered my question from last week. I thank You for helping me see that I am still Orthodox and safe under the wings of Christ and His Church!
I am currently in a parish where it seems this Economy of recognizing Baptisms (Thank God, at least only in cases of Triple Immersion invoking the Holy Trinity) are being received via Chrismation as a Rule! God help us. Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but there is nothing anywhere, in any of the canons which say you MUST not re-baptise, but that it is simply an option to economize ONLY IN EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES! Forgive the caps, I cannot use italics in these comments. To my understanding, this is not to be considered a rule, but only a pastoral exception. God help us. Thank you Father Peter for everything. - Silouan of Halifax.
Great vid, thank you Father! I still have difficulty understanding how "economy" can apply to such a fundamental question as baptism : how could it be good for the sake of anyone not to be baptized, but received directly through chrismation? (Same question applies to ordination of "convert clergy") To me "economy" means a detachment from the letter of the canons for the spiritual sake of the faithful in circumstances where the application of the letter goes against the spirit that was behind the promulgation of the canon concerned. Here I fail to see the right application of economy, for not being baptized isn't for the spiritual sake of anyone whatsoever (especially after reading what St Gregory the Theologian says). I have the impression that Basil uses "economy" to avoid a new quarrel with Rome on the matter, knowing that there had already been a difficult time discussing this issue in the IIIrd century, but he gives the impression to take it seriously enough to refuse to apply the Roman view and stick to the tradition of his forefathers. I think today it would be welcomed to solve the question dogmatically and stop submitting such a key matter to any "economy" : baptism is not a matter of mere discipline but is a condition sine qua non, according to Scriptures, to enter the Kingdom of God. I also feel that the only reason why so many bishops receive by Chrismation today is Ecumenism, that is a rather bad reason. I am really waiting for a true ecclesiological Council of the Church (a kind of Anti-Vatican II) that will reaffirm the true tradition and dismiss all modern ecclesiological errors and anathematize them. What are your thoughts on this?
Dear God, one can see how revelations unfolds, both on the rinse cycles and how it will be in the final spin!! The hand of good on evil used to bring down anyone lazy, ignorant and forgetful! God help my will to being purified enough to add my bit to his glory and be of service to others through this deluge we are living under!!! Kyrie eleison! Kyrie eleison! Kyrie eleison!
Forgive my boldness and arrogance; I have some further remarks regarding the importance of the boundaries. I am working from the premises I have acquired from Jonathan Pageau, who may be in error on some things for all I know, but he claims to be following the ancient fathers. The point I wish to share is as follows: Orthodoxy is the very Truth of Reality itself. It is Christ, who is the Truth. Therefore, it follows this Truth should be completely harmonious with particular, lower Truths we find at lower levels of reality. For example, Father Peter is constantly admonishing us that the Boundaries of the Church are essential. They define the Identity of the Church (Which is Christ Himself) and without them, the Church ceases to exist. If this is True, it follows we would notice the same exact, God ordained pattern throughout the rest of the Cosmos. And in fact we do. A nation, whose borders break down, eventually ceases to exist. A house, without walls, or a roof, with are the boundaries of the house, cannot be said to be a house at all. A physical body, if it were without its skin (which allows some things in and prevents the entrance of other things) results in the rapid death of the Body. Just so with the individual cells of the body, if the cell wall becomes blurred to a certain extreme extent, it will cease to exist, and the cell dies. If this happens to enough cells, the whole body dies. And all the way up and down the micro and macro cosmos does this principle apply. Without boundaries, bodies die. The Lack of boundaries is therefore tantamount to death. No Boundaries... No Life! Of course, we have Christ's guarantee that Hades will not prevail over His Church, but this does not mean Death does not make his attempts on us. Even in something as simple as a musical band, it is abundantly clear who is and who is not in the band. If an outsider suddenly mounts the stage during a performance, without becoming initiated and trained through the proper channels in the musical project, chaos would result. How much more so in God's Church? How much more so in the Body of Christ our God? It is abundantly clear who is within and who is outside the Body of Christ, exactly the same way as it is abundantly clear what is within and what is outside of my own body. It is so simple. God help us all. Forgive me my dear brothers and my dear sisters. I have quoted no Holy Fathers, and no Scripture. But I hoped to point out how these Truths perfectly reflect the rest of all Truth one can observe in the Cosmos. The Church is nothing other than deep and total communion with Reality, which is Christ. Christ filled all in all. Lord have mercy on our deluded generation, among whom I am the worst. Forgive me dear ones.
Bless Father! With the information presented, which has been captured for us in written text by the Saints of our Faith, how does any deviation from our tradition exist, concerning Baptism and the mysteries of the Church? Is it a case of only reading what one wishes, and closing the remaining chapters? Manipulation of existing doctrine? Such a tragedy. What good has any deviation from the Church and Christ led to? May the good Lord help us, and enable us to understand his teachings and life!
Amen. May He help us. . . I fear that with this matter of the boundaries and reception of converts we have a kind of “western captivity” and now an “ecumenist captivity.” In both cases, the political and social pressures have been decisive for the Orthodox to depart from their own internal witness and practice and bend so much as to break in many places, which means to adopt a heterodox outlook and interpret our pastoral practice within categories and a context which are foreign to the Holy Fathers.
This Video actually begins at 9/00 for those paying in Internet Cafe who do not want waste their time or money Could you Please identify where your Depictions are taken from e/g 11/21 and Blue /Altar is very Beautiful I have never seen Before
@@OrthodoxEthos Thank you father, im asking because a friend of mine is impressed from Afanasiev’s teachings and this is convincing him to think that Ecumenism is a good thing, so i was wondering if father Seraphim or someone like him who was writing on these topics like “new spirituality”, criticized Afanasiev’s teachings.
So, it is obvious from this dissertation that I am not a Christian since, even in the name of the Trinity, my baptism at age 8 in a Baptist church is not salvific. Which means I do not have the Holy Spirit. So, I know what I need to do and that is to be a catechumen, be initiated into the One Church through holy baptism and chrismation in order to really be a Christian. How is it I plainly understand this without being indwelled by the Holy Spirit?
The Holy Spirit works throughout creation and especially for the salvation of everyone, and works to bring all to Christ, to his Body, the Church. It is by the Holy Spirit that all knowledge is given. However, the Holy Spirit is given and works in the Holy Mysteries in a different way than He works outside of the Church. It is the Divine Energies of purification, illumination, and deification, that do not exist outside of the Body of Christ. They have *presuppositions*, which must be met, and that is initiation and adoption and acceptance and proclamation of the Faith. Repentance and faith. Life in Christ, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, begins with initiation, which is Baptism, Chrismation , and the Holy Eucharist. All together.
@@pah9730 thank you for your encouraging reply. Pray for me for courage to leave behind almost 70 years of heterosexual. This will be hard on family and friends. Please pray for my wife, Tricia that she will have an open mind and heart. Steve
You know that we do not teach that the Holy Spirit does nothing outside of the Church (this would be limiting God's Providence), we simply say that there is no saving and sanctifying grace and mysteries outside of the Church, which is quite distinct. Thus you can say : "The Spirit has inspired me, thanks to the Providence of God who wants all to be saved and come to the knowledge of truth (St Paul), to decide to become a catechumen and finally participate in the deifying grace of God which dwells in the Church." On this distinction you can read St Diadochos of Photikê, a great spiritual author from the Vth century.
So if both spouse are orthodox but never were married in the church but the priest say it’s not necessary...are we not married and in sin? I’ve never met a priest who denied me communion over this or said we were in fornication. I understand why we need to get the sacrament done but if you haven’t wether it’s on the couple or the priest are these people sinning?
The stance and outlook of accepting marriages outside the church - instead of performing the marriage- is at least problematic if not condemnable, but not the couple. The greater blessing does not harm! The former is minimalism, the latter, zeal according to knowledge.
24:10 Those who accuse others of being rigorists have positioned themselves on this fatal flaw. If Cyprian was an innovator, why do they say oh his position is somewhat or fully valid but only circumstantial and not standard practice? Either the teachings are holy or they are to be discarded as error based on the notion they are innovations, its gotta be one or the other. Do we have a coherent doctrine and praxis or not? Well according to their anti-patristic version of sacramentology and ecclesiology yes we are divided and have various opposing approaches to how we receive the heterodox. So they are totally discredited. Just like those who spread the notion 'Palamite', they imply there is some validity to st gregorys teachings but at the same time they are somehow innovations. We on the other hand TOTALLY REJECT innovations, we don't play with fire when it comes to holy tradition, we have never claimed there are various ways, rather we have said one is right and one is incorrect even if there are saints here and there which subscribed to this incorrect way of not baptizing the heterodox upon reception. Its an inadvertant admission on their part that their orthodoxy is one of innovation and contradiction, then they are projecting that flawed type of Orthodoxy onto those who are NOT in contradiction, who are tradition based, as an attempt to accuse them of being objectively WRONG, but we have neither accepted innovation or approved it as an alternative to the standard way. It is doubly absurd if you think about it long and hard enough. There is ONE tradition of teaching and practice, not various, we are not split up into factions with different ratios of legality and economy, it is one standard thing all throughout the history of the Church. Simple.
I was baptised with three other guys. One had been baptised catholic, one dutch reformed and one baptist (I’d never been), all were baptised Orthodox.
I am an Anglican watching and discerning. Thank you for these videos Father.
Christ is Risen! When I first heard this I was just beginning on my path to conversion. Now it is Friday of Bright Week and my whole family has been baptized into the one true church. When I had previously listened to this, I had no grasp of what a tragedy it would be for the Orthodox Church to accept heterodox baptism. After experiencing the grace filled and truly miraculous nature of Orthodox baptism and Chrismation, my heart aches thinking of the feeling of grace that would have been lost if our Priest would have held the idea that our family was only getting baptized for ceremonial reasons because our former baptism had given us everything that we needed. Everything good and pure in this world seems to be under constant assault from the inside. The prayers of this newly illumined will be for the hierarchs and laity of The Church to remain strong through these evil times.
My prayers have been and will continue to be with you, Father Peter.
Thank you father for your diligence. I have become aware of the venom theoriatv spews at you over this issue, among other things. It is exhausting for me, I cannot imagine your exhaustion. So thank you for your diligence!!!
wow what a great class thank you
Amazing presentation
Thank You Father, this presentation perfectly answered my question from last week. I thank You for helping me see that I am still Orthodox and safe under the wings of Christ and His Church!
Thank you Father for such a quality lecture. I'm listening to it with a great zeal and appreciation. -Ioachim.
May we all have your blessings Father Peter ☦️❤️
Time stamp
1:06:00
Pravoslavie (Orthodox Christian, in Russian)
Another OUTSTANDING lecture on Ecclesiology. God bless you for your lecture series. Am posting it on my facebook page.
I am currently in a parish where it seems this Economy of recognizing Baptisms (Thank God, at least only in cases of Triple Immersion invoking the Holy Trinity) are being received via Chrismation as a Rule! God help us. Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but there is nothing anywhere, in any of the canons which say you MUST not re-baptise, but that it is simply an option to economize ONLY IN EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES! Forgive the caps, I cannot use italics in these comments. To my understanding, this is not to be considered a rule, but only a pastoral exception. God help us. Thank you Father Peter for everything.
- Silouan of Halifax.
2:12:34 I really appreciate that. Wanting to go to confession for the first time I thought the Church was perfect and every Priest holy haha :(
So edifying and I’m looking forward to be part of your Patreon very soon! Glory to God 🙏🏼☦️
We await you! God bless you!
PA H.
PA H how do I join Patreon?
Oh yes! Spotify would be amazing. 🙏🏼 Thank you for these lectures.
Thanks for the class!
Very good again. Thankyou Father.
Great vid, thank you Father! I still have difficulty understanding how "economy" can apply to such a fundamental question as baptism : how could it be good for the sake of anyone not to be baptized, but received directly through chrismation? (Same question applies to ordination of "convert clergy") To me "economy" means a detachment from the letter of the canons for the spiritual sake of the faithful in circumstances where the application of the letter goes against the spirit that was behind the promulgation of the canon concerned. Here I fail to see the right application of economy, for not being baptized isn't for the spiritual sake of anyone whatsoever (especially after reading what St Gregory the Theologian says). I have the impression that Basil uses "economy" to avoid a new quarrel with Rome on the matter, knowing that there had already been a difficult time discussing this issue in the IIIrd century, but he gives the impression to take it seriously enough to refuse to apply the Roman view and stick to the tradition of his forefathers. I think today it would be welcomed to solve the question dogmatically and stop submitting such a key matter to any "economy" : baptism is not a matter of mere discipline but is a condition sine qua non, according to Scriptures, to enter the Kingdom of God. I also feel that the only reason why so many bishops receive by Chrismation today is Ecumenism, that is a rather bad reason. I am really waiting for a true ecclesiological Council of the Church (a kind of Anti-Vatican II) that will reaffirm the true tradition and dismiss all modern ecclesiological errors and anathematize them. What are your thoughts on this?
Dear God, one can see how revelations unfolds, both on the rinse cycles and how it will be in the final spin!! The hand of good on evil used to bring down anyone lazy, ignorant and forgetful! God help my will to being purified enough to add my bit to his glory and be of service to others through this deluge we are living under!!!
Kyrie eleison! Kyrie eleison! Kyrie eleison!
Forgive my boldness and arrogance; I have some further remarks regarding the importance of the boundaries.
I am working from the premises I have acquired from Jonathan Pageau, who may be in error on some things for all I know, but he claims to be following the ancient fathers. The point I wish to share is as follows:
Orthodoxy is the very Truth of Reality itself. It is Christ, who is the Truth. Therefore, it follows this Truth should be completely harmonious with particular, lower Truths we find at lower levels of reality. For example, Father Peter is constantly admonishing us that the Boundaries of the Church are essential. They define the Identity of the Church (Which is Christ Himself) and without them, the Church ceases to exist.
If this is True, it follows we would notice the same exact, God ordained pattern throughout the rest of the Cosmos. And in fact we do.
A nation, whose borders break down, eventually ceases to exist. A house, without walls, or a roof, with are the boundaries of the house, cannot be said to be a house at all. A physical body, if it were without its skin (which allows some things in and prevents the entrance of other things) results in the rapid death of the Body. Just so with the individual cells of the body, if the cell wall becomes blurred to a certain extreme extent, it will cease to exist, and the cell dies. If this happens to enough cells, the whole body dies. And all the way up and down the micro and macro cosmos does this principle apply. Without boundaries, bodies die. The Lack of boundaries is therefore tantamount to death. No Boundaries... No Life! Of course, we have Christ's guarantee that Hades will not prevail over His Church, but this does not mean Death does not make his attempts on us.
Even in something as simple as a musical band, it is abundantly clear who is and who is not in the band. If an outsider suddenly mounts the stage during a performance, without becoming initiated and trained through the proper channels in the musical project, chaos would result. How much more so in God's Church? How much more so in the Body of Christ our God?
It is abundantly clear who is within and who is outside the Body of Christ, exactly the same way as it is abundantly clear what is within and what is outside of my own body. It is so simple. God help us all.
Forgive me my dear brothers and my dear sisters. I have quoted no Holy Fathers, and no Scripture. But I hoped to point out how these Truths perfectly reflect the rest of all Truth one can observe in the Cosmos. The Church is nothing other than deep and total communion with Reality, which is Christ. Christ filled all in all. Lord have mercy on our deluded generation, among whom I am the worst. Forgive me dear ones.
Bless Father! With the information presented, which has been captured for us in written text by the Saints of our Faith, how does any deviation from our tradition exist, concerning Baptism and the mysteries of the Church? Is it a case of only reading what one wishes, and closing the remaining chapters? Manipulation of existing doctrine? Such a tragedy. What good has any deviation from the Church and Christ led to? May the good Lord help us, and enable us to understand his teachings and life!
Amen. May He help us. . . I fear that with this matter of the boundaries and reception of converts we have a kind of “western captivity” and now an “ecumenist captivity.” In both cases, the political and social pressures have been decisive for the Orthodox to depart from their own internal witness and practice and bend so much as to break in many places, which means to adopt a heterodox outlook and interpret our pastoral practice within categories and a context which are foreign to the Holy Fathers.
This Video actually begins at 9/00 for those paying in Internet Cafe who do not want waste their time or money
Could you Please identify where your Depictions are taken from e/g 11/21 and Blue /Altar is very Beautiful I have never seen Before
Father, have you heard about the teachings of Nicholas Afanasiev and did father Seraphim Rose wrote something about this? Thank you.
Yes. Not that I know of. I don’t remember him writing about the theology of Afanasiev.
@@OrthodoxEthos Thank you father, im asking because a friend of mine is impressed from Afanasiev’s teachings and this is convincing him to think that Ecumenism is a good thing, so i was wondering if father Seraphim or someone like him who was writing on these topics like “new spirituality”, criticized Afanasiev’s teachings.
As mentioned in another comment, Fr. Ramsey has a nice book on Afanasiev and others.
@@basilp5179 Thank you.
So, it is obvious from this dissertation that I am not a Christian since, even in the name of the Trinity, my baptism at age 8 in a Baptist church is not salvific. Which means I do not have the Holy Spirit. So, I know what I need to do and that is to be a catechumen, be initiated into the One Church through holy baptism and chrismation in order to really be a Christian.
How is it I plainly understand this without being indwelled by the Holy Spirit?
The Holy Spirit works throughout creation and especially for the salvation of everyone, and works to bring all to Christ, to his Body, the Church. It is by the Holy Spirit that all knowledge is given. However, the Holy Spirit is given and works in the Holy Mysteries in a different way than He works outside of the Church. It is the Divine Energies of purification, illumination, and deification, that do not exist outside of the Body of Christ. They have *presuppositions*, which must be met, and that is initiation and adoption and acceptance and proclamation of the Faith. Repentance and faith. Life in Christ, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, begins with initiation, which is Baptism, Chrismation , and the Holy Eucharist. All together.
@@pah9730 thank you for your encouraging reply. Pray for me for courage to leave behind almost 70 years of heterosexual. This will be hard on family and friends. Please pray for my wife, Tricia that she will have an open mind and heart.
Steve
@@olerocker3470 What does that mean - leave behind 70 years of heterosexual?
@@pah9730 looks like autocorrect on my phone replaced the word heterodoxy .
You know that we do not teach that the Holy Spirit does nothing outside of the Church (this would be limiting God's Providence), we simply say that there is no saving and sanctifying grace and mysteries outside of the Church, which is quite distinct. Thus you can say : "The Spirit has inspired me, thanks to the Providence of God who wants all to be saved and come to the knowledge of truth (St Paul), to decide to become a catechumen and finally participate in the deifying grace of God which dwells in the Church." On this distinction you can read St Diadochos of Photikê, a great spiritual author from the Vth century.
I didn't hear much about Nestorius, who is still followed in parts of the world today?
57:04 and the ego too.
?
@@OrthodoxEthos they need to crucify their ego as well.
How can one get a copy of these slides ?
Sign up, for whatever amount you want, even $1 a month: www.patreon.com/frpeterheers
☦️
So if both spouse are orthodox but never were married in the church but the priest say it’s not necessary...are we not married and in sin? I’ve never met a priest who denied me communion over this or said we were in fornication. I understand why we need to get the sacrament done but if you haven’t wether it’s on the couple or the priest are these people sinning?
The stance and outlook of accepting marriages outside the church - instead of performing the marriage- is at least problematic if not condemnable, but not the couple. The greater blessing does not harm! The former is minimalism, the latter, zeal according to knowledge.
24:10 Those who accuse others of being rigorists have positioned themselves on this fatal flaw. If Cyprian was an innovator, why do they say oh his position is somewhat or fully valid but only circumstantial and not standard practice? Either the teachings are holy or they are to be discarded as error based on the notion they are innovations, its gotta be one or the other. Do we have a coherent doctrine and praxis or not? Well according to their anti-patristic version of sacramentology and ecclesiology yes we are divided and have various opposing approaches to how we receive the heterodox. So they are totally discredited. Just like those who spread the notion 'Palamite', they imply there is some validity to st gregorys teachings but at the same time they are somehow innovations. We on the other hand TOTALLY REJECT innovations, we don't play with fire when it comes to holy tradition, we have never claimed there are various ways, rather we have said one is right and one is incorrect even if there are saints here and there which subscribed to this incorrect way of not baptizing the heterodox upon reception. Its an inadvertant admission on their part that their orthodoxy is one of innovation and contradiction, then they are projecting that flawed type of Orthodoxy onto those who are NOT in contradiction, who are tradition based, as an attempt to accuse them of being objectively WRONG, but we have neither accepted innovation or approved it as an alternative to the standard way. It is doubly absurd if you think about it long and hard enough. There is ONE tradition of teaching and practice, not various, we are not split up into factions with different ratios of legality and economy, it is one standard thing all throughout the history of the Church. Simple.