our beliefs
We are part of the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church conforms to that of the undivided Orthodox Catholic Church of the first millennium of its existence. It is expressed in the ancient Symbol of Faith of the Nicene Creed, promulgated by the Council of Nicaea in AD 325 and enlarged by the Council of Constantinople in AD 381:
"I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of Heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible, and in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God; begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father, by Whom all things were made, who, for us men, and for our salvation, came down from Heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary; and became man; He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered, and was buried, and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into Heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory, to judge the living and the dead; whose Kingdom shall have no end, and in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, Who proceed from the Father; Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; Who spoke by the prophets, and in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins; I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen".
We believe that the source of the Orthodox Catholic Faith is fully expressed in the Nicene Creed (based on Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition).
We believe that Sacred Scripture (the Bible), which comprises the Old Testament (including the deuterocanonical/apocryphal books) and the New Testament, contains God’s revelation to us, particularly that concerning His Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and that in matters essential to our salvation it is inerrant.
In order to understand our understanding to the faith, it will be helpful to explain briefly where our teaching and theology comes from.
Byzantine Theology:
Byzantine theology begins in 330, the year when the city of Byzantium was inaugurated, was christened Constantinople, “New Rome.” Those theologians writing in Greek after the year 330 can indeed be considered “Byzantine” theologians.
However, as the decades and centuries flow onward the Latin West appears incapable of keeping abreast with the vital work of Byzantine theologians.
It is truer that there is usually a small circle of persons in Rome who have contact and some knowledge of Byzantine or Eastern theology but this circle is limited and their knowledge fragmented. It was a sore tragedy for the history of Christianity, for the life of the united Church, that this drift took place. There were certainly political and cultural reasons for the drift, and, often, the blame can be placed on Byzantium.
Nevertheless, in the realm of the Church, in the realm of theological thought, in the realm of vital issues, concerning the essence of the faith such a drift should never have occurred. In modern terms, someone could say that Byzantium and Byzantine theology has had—and largely still has—a “bad press” among Western Christians. Moreover, included in this “bad press” is not only an atmosphere of contempt for the Byzantine East but also a grave ignorance and lack of understanding.
Byzantine theology was engaged in a struggle for the preservation of the truth, it was engaged in vital theological issues just as St. Athanasius and as the Cappadocian fathers in the fourth century were. Western Christians kept abreast with the thought of St. Athanasius and the Cappadocians, but it must be regrettably acknowledged that even that knowledge is not complete, that somehow ineluctably a curtain partially closes and prevents Western Christians from dealing with and understanding the totality of the thought of St. Athanasius and the Cappadocians.
It is not only a brief survey of the salient elements of fourth century Eastern theology necessary for a proper understanding of Byzantine theology but also necessary an overview of certain patterns of thought in the earlier Patristic era. And it is almost scandalous that even a brief overview of Christological thought in the New Testament is a prerequisite for an understanding of Byzantine theology precisely to demonstrate that Byzantine theology is organically related to the original deposit of the truth of the faith, that Byzantine theology is, as it was, a Biblical theology and not a fabrication of sophistry, that Byzantine theology was dealing with burning issues of the Christian faith and of Christian life.
The beginning of Byzantinism is not the beginning of a new Christianity. Rather, it is the legitimate heir of the legacy of the New Testament, of early Christianity, of the Apostolic Fathers, of the Fathers of Church.
The Christological and Trinitarian definitions of the Council of Chalcedony,—moreover, of all the definitions of the seven Ecumenical Councils—are not the result of philosophical intrusions into the Biblical vision of God but rather, and precisely, the explication of what was originally revealed, of what was originally deposited, of what was experienced by the earliest Christians: that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the Living God, that Jesus was both true God and True Man, the God-Man, that God is God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
The rationalism and, as it was, the arrogance of the eighteenth and nineteenth century scholars of the New Testament created more an exercise in exegesis than exegesis of the New Testament. And it has made the understanding of Byzantine theology even more distant to Western Christians.
If the Christ of the New Testament is one and the same with the Christ of Byzantine theology in its ultimate victory over heretical thought and if the Christ of the New Testament has been misrepresented by schools of New Testament thought in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, some carrying over to the twentieth century, then the possibility of misunderstanding Byzantine theology is heightened, is increased.
For this reason, it is necessary to present textual material from the New Testament precisely as a legacy inherited by Byzantine theologians, a task that should not be necessary and that would not have been necessary in most periods of the history of Christianity.
The twentieth century has witnessed largely a reverse of this position, a considerable body of twentieth century scholarship on the New Testament has again discovered that the definitions of the Ecumenical Councils correspond to that truth.
There is no intention to present any comprehensive study of the New Testament. Moreover, there is no intention to present an exhaustive and comprehensive analysis of the Christology of the New Testament. Only some texts from various writers of the New Testament will be presented.
These texts consist of those, which are explicit, and those, in which many do not discern the Christological implications. It is merely a sampling, merely an overview to set the basis of the background, the core of the foundation, in which and from which Byzantine theology worked. Moreover, it must not be forgotten that the Byzantine theologians were always conscience of being the heirs of the apostolic faith, heirs of the theology of the New Testament and the theology first delivered.
They saw a continuous and cohesive link and bond between them and the earliest theology of the Church, between them and the Incarnation, Life, Death, Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus Christ, the eternal Only-Begotten Son of the Father. The very fact of the existence of the Christological controversies in Byzantium testifies that it was a vibrant and creative theological life rather than an ossified one. It is true that they also saw themselves as preservers of that faith once delivered, but in the very process of preserving that original deposit, they are of necessity creative.
Byzantine theology remained faithful to the dogmas defined by the first seven ecumenical councils and had great reverence for the writings of the fathers of the church. It recognized the same Sacraments and the same ecclesiastical organization and was presided over by bishops whom the Roman Church acknowledged as true successors of the Apostles.
Nevertheless, Byzantine and Latin theology are profoundly different. While they treat the same matters, they deal with them diversely.
What differentiates and even divides Latin from Byzantine theology is not so much the objects of belief as the manner of dealing with them. It is a question of mentality or esprit.
For over a thousand years, Eastern Christendom had as its centre the second capital of the Roman Empire, Constantinople, the "New Rome," or Byzantium.
The geographical division between the Eastern and Western Churches was only one manifestation of deeper rifts, characterized by a long history of conflicts, suspicions, and misunderstandings. Although the art, monasticism, and spirituality of Byzantium have come to be recognized as inspirational and influential in the shaping of Eastern European civilization, and of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance as well, the West has been in the main ignorant of the historical evolution and the doctrinal significance of Byzantine theology.
On The Bible:
We do not consider the Bible to be a source of information concerning science or any other human discipline. Its purpose is to teach us about God and about His Son Jesus Christ. It does that within the cultural environment of its time and place, hence the need for careful study to understand its message correctly,
We believe that Sacred Scripture itself is part of Sacred Tradition, that process by which God’s revelation is passed on to us from the Apostles, and unto the Church Fathers and to the unbroken succession of Bishops through the centuries. This handing on occurs through the prayers and liturgy of the Church, through preaching, teaching, catechesis, devotions, doctrines, and the Bible itself.
We believe that Church Tradition is a collection of orthodox practices and beliefs, from the earliest of days, which makes Sacred Tradition an inerrant source of God’s revelation in matters essential to our faith and our Christian life. A very important part of Sacred Tradition is the teaching of the Ecumenical Councils.
We believe that the doctrinal definitions of the first seven Ecumenical Councils, that is those which took place within the undivided Catholic Church, were guided by the Holy Spirit and it accepts them as part of its faith. Those seven Ecumenical Councils are the Councils of Nicaea in AD 325, Constantinople in AD 381, Ephesus in AD 431, Chalcedon in AD 451, Constantinople II in AD 533, Constantinople III in AD 680, and Nicaea II in AD 787.These Councils were concerned essentially with defining the true Catholic faith, in the Holy Trinity and in Jesus Christ the Son of God made man: God is triune, a single God in three Persons, Whom the Saviour Himself named as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ is the Son of God, uniting in His single Person both the divine and the human natures.
We believe that equally important in Sacred Tradition are the seven Sacraments.
We believe that these Sacraments, which are Baptism and Eucharist, both of which are particularly attested to in Sacred Scripture; Confirmation (or Chrismation), Penance (or Reconciliation), Matrimony, Holy Orders and Unction (or Anointing of the Sick and the Dying), are effective signs of the Lord’s continuing presence and action within His Church and efficacious channels of his Grace. Among the Sacraments, the Holy Eucharist holds prominence of place.
We believe that Our Lord Jesus Christ is really and truly present, in His humanity and in His Divinity, in the species of bread and wine that have been consecrated in the Eucharistic Liturgy of the Holy Mass, and that in Holy Communion we receive Him into ourselves to nourish the very life of the soul: ‘Those who eat My Flesh and drink My Blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day’, (John 6:54).
We believe that in Our Lord Jesus’ plan for His Church, the Apostles and the Bishops hold a special place.
We believe that the Bishops, canonically and liturgically consecrated in the unbroken line of Apostolic Succession are the successors of the Apostles and that they are responsible, as were the Apostles, for the ministry of service to the Church, consisting of preaching and teaching, of sanctifying and of governing, but most of all, for the safeguarding and the handing-on intact, of the Deposit of Faith and Sacred Tradition of the Church under the divine command.
On The Blessed Virgin Mary, the Theotokos:
We believe that Mary, the Mother of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Theotokos, the Mother of God, the Mother of the Church and the Queen of Heaven and earth, holds a special place in the faith, the lives and the liturgy of the our Church.
On the Saints:
We believe in the Communion of Saints, and the fellowship of the whole Church in Glory, the Church Militant and the Church Suffering. It holds to the honouring of Saints, and the prayers for their intercession for both the Church Militant and Suffering.
On Life after Death:
Each person is subject to what is called "private judgment" and to what is called "general judgment”.
The private judgment is what an individual receives immediately after death.
The souls of the righteous, who have received a "positive" private judgment have a certain "foretaste" of Heaven, and the souls of unrepentant sinners who received a "negative" private judgment have a "foretaste" of hell.
However, neither Paradise nor the Inferno even exist yet, because the final division of all humans into those who are saints and those who are damned will occur only after the Second Coming of Christ and the general resurrection of the dead (Matthew 25: 31-46).
Even though a person whose soul is separated from his/her body is not able to repent anymore, and thus cannot change the private judgment by him- or herself, the prayers of others, the prayers of the Church, and especially the prayers of the Most Holy Mother of God the Theotokos still can change the destiny of those who received a negative private judgment.
On the Filioque Position:
We maintain, as does the whole Eastern Orthodox Church, the solid and unquestioning beliefs as set out in the Creed of Nicaea/Constantinople of AD 381. We maintain that, whilst theological debate may continue regarding the Filioque clause, no Church and no Bishop or Bishops, nor successive Synods or Councils may change, alter, add to, or take away from, a Creed once it is proclaimed by a legitimate General Ecumenical Council, and that such Sacred Tradition is held as absolute by the Augustinians Fathers.
On the Divine Liturgy:
The authorized Eucharistic Liturgies we use are: John Chrysostom, Basil the Great and Gregory the Theologian, Pope of Rome.
On the Seven Sacraments of the Church:
We recognize and affirm the seven Mysteries or Sacraments of the Church:
Baptism.
Chrismation (Confirmation).
Communion (Holy Eucharist).
Holy Ordination.
Penance.
Anointing of the sick (Holy Unction of the sick and Extreme Unction for the dying).
Holy Matrimony / Marriage.
"I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of Heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible, and in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God; begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father, by Whom all things were made, who, for us men, and for our salvation, came down from Heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary; and became man; He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, suffered, and was buried, and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into Heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory, to judge the living and the dead; whose Kingdom shall have no end, and in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, Who proceed from the Father; Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; Who spoke by the prophets, and in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins; I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen".
We believe that the source of the Orthodox Catholic Faith is fully expressed in the Nicene Creed (based on Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition).
We believe that Sacred Scripture (the Bible), which comprises the Old Testament (including the deuterocanonical/apocryphal books) and the New Testament, contains God’s revelation to us, particularly that concerning His Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and that in matters essential to our salvation it is inerrant.
In order to understand our understanding to the faith, it will be helpful to explain briefly where our teaching and theology comes from.
Byzantine Theology:
Byzantine theology begins in 330, the year when the city of Byzantium was inaugurated, was christened Constantinople, “New Rome.” Those theologians writing in Greek after the year 330 can indeed be considered “Byzantine” theologians.
However, as the decades and centuries flow onward the Latin West appears incapable of keeping abreast with the vital work of Byzantine theologians.
It is truer that there is usually a small circle of persons in Rome who have contact and some knowledge of Byzantine or Eastern theology but this circle is limited and their knowledge fragmented. It was a sore tragedy for the history of Christianity, for the life of the united Church, that this drift took place. There were certainly political and cultural reasons for the drift, and, often, the blame can be placed on Byzantium.
Nevertheless, in the realm of the Church, in the realm of theological thought, in the realm of vital issues, concerning the essence of the faith such a drift should never have occurred. In modern terms, someone could say that Byzantium and Byzantine theology has had—and largely still has—a “bad press” among Western Christians. Moreover, included in this “bad press” is not only an atmosphere of contempt for the Byzantine East but also a grave ignorance and lack of understanding.
Byzantine theology was engaged in a struggle for the preservation of the truth, it was engaged in vital theological issues just as St. Athanasius and as the Cappadocian fathers in the fourth century were. Western Christians kept abreast with the thought of St. Athanasius and the Cappadocians, but it must be regrettably acknowledged that even that knowledge is not complete, that somehow ineluctably a curtain partially closes and prevents Western Christians from dealing with and understanding the totality of the thought of St. Athanasius and the Cappadocians.
It is not only a brief survey of the salient elements of fourth century Eastern theology necessary for a proper understanding of Byzantine theology but also necessary an overview of certain patterns of thought in the earlier Patristic era. And it is almost scandalous that even a brief overview of Christological thought in the New Testament is a prerequisite for an understanding of Byzantine theology precisely to demonstrate that Byzantine theology is organically related to the original deposit of the truth of the faith, that Byzantine theology is, as it was, a Biblical theology and not a fabrication of sophistry, that Byzantine theology was dealing with burning issues of the Christian faith and of Christian life.
The beginning of Byzantinism is not the beginning of a new Christianity. Rather, it is the legitimate heir of the legacy of the New Testament, of early Christianity, of the Apostolic Fathers, of the Fathers of Church.
The Christological and Trinitarian definitions of the Council of Chalcedony,—moreover, of all the definitions of the seven Ecumenical Councils—are not the result of philosophical intrusions into the Biblical vision of God but rather, and precisely, the explication of what was originally revealed, of what was originally deposited, of what was experienced by the earliest Christians: that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the Living God, that Jesus was both true God and True Man, the God-Man, that God is God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
The rationalism and, as it was, the arrogance of the eighteenth and nineteenth century scholars of the New Testament created more an exercise in exegesis than exegesis of the New Testament. And it has made the understanding of Byzantine theology even more distant to Western Christians.
If the Christ of the New Testament is one and the same with the Christ of Byzantine theology in its ultimate victory over heretical thought and if the Christ of the New Testament has been misrepresented by schools of New Testament thought in the eighteenth and nineteenth century, some carrying over to the twentieth century, then the possibility of misunderstanding Byzantine theology is heightened, is increased.
For this reason, it is necessary to present textual material from the New Testament precisely as a legacy inherited by Byzantine theologians, a task that should not be necessary and that would not have been necessary in most periods of the history of Christianity.
The twentieth century has witnessed largely a reverse of this position, a considerable body of twentieth century scholarship on the New Testament has again discovered that the definitions of the Ecumenical Councils correspond to that truth.
There is no intention to present any comprehensive study of the New Testament. Moreover, there is no intention to present an exhaustive and comprehensive analysis of the Christology of the New Testament. Only some texts from various writers of the New Testament will be presented.
These texts consist of those, which are explicit, and those, in which many do not discern the Christological implications. It is merely a sampling, merely an overview to set the basis of the background, the core of the foundation, in which and from which Byzantine theology worked. Moreover, it must not be forgotten that the Byzantine theologians were always conscience of being the heirs of the apostolic faith, heirs of the theology of the New Testament and the theology first delivered.
They saw a continuous and cohesive link and bond between them and the earliest theology of the Church, between them and the Incarnation, Life, Death, Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus Christ, the eternal Only-Begotten Son of the Father. The very fact of the existence of the Christological controversies in Byzantium testifies that it was a vibrant and creative theological life rather than an ossified one. It is true that they also saw themselves as preservers of that faith once delivered, but in the very process of preserving that original deposit, they are of necessity creative.
Byzantine theology remained faithful to the dogmas defined by the first seven ecumenical councils and had great reverence for the writings of the fathers of the church. It recognized the same Sacraments and the same ecclesiastical organization and was presided over by bishops whom the Roman Church acknowledged as true successors of the Apostles.
Nevertheless, Byzantine and Latin theology are profoundly different. While they treat the same matters, they deal with them diversely.
What differentiates and even divides Latin from Byzantine theology is not so much the objects of belief as the manner of dealing with them. It is a question of mentality or esprit.
For over a thousand years, Eastern Christendom had as its centre the second capital of the Roman Empire, Constantinople, the "New Rome," or Byzantium.
The geographical division between the Eastern and Western Churches was only one manifestation of deeper rifts, characterized by a long history of conflicts, suspicions, and misunderstandings. Although the art, monasticism, and spirituality of Byzantium have come to be recognized as inspirational and influential in the shaping of Eastern European civilization, and of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance as well, the West has been in the main ignorant of the historical evolution and the doctrinal significance of Byzantine theology.
On The Bible:
We do not consider the Bible to be a source of information concerning science or any other human discipline. Its purpose is to teach us about God and about His Son Jesus Christ. It does that within the cultural environment of its time and place, hence the need for careful study to understand its message correctly,
We believe that Sacred Scripture itself is part of Sacred Tradition, that process by which God’s revelation is passed on to us from the Apostles, and unto the Church Fathers and to the unbroken succession of Bishops through the centuries. This handing on occurs through the prayers and liturgy of the Church, through preaching, teaching, catechesis, devotions, doctrines, and the Bible itself.
We believe that Church Tradition is a collection of orthodox practices and beliefs, from the earliest of days, which makes Sacred Tradition an inerrant source of God’s revelation in matters essential to our faith and our Christian life. A very important part of Sacred Tradition is the teaching of the Ecumenical Councils.
We believe that the doctrinal definitions of the first seven Ecumenical Councils, that is those which took place within the undivided Catholic Church, were guided by the Holy Spirit and it accepts them as part of its faith. Those seven Ecumenical Councils are the Councils of Nicaea in AD 325, Constantinople in AD 381, Ephesus in AD 431, Chalcedon in AD 451, Constantinople II in AD 533, Constantinople III in AD 680, and Nicaea II in AD 787.These Councils were concerned essentially with defining the true Catholic faith, in the Holy Trinity and in Jesus Christ the Son of God made man: God is triune, a single God in three Persons, Whom the Saviour Himself named as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ is the Son of God, uniting in His single Person both the divine and the human natures.
We believe that equally important in Sacred Tradition are the seven Sacraments.
We believe that these Sacraments, which are Baptism and Eucharist, both of which are particularly attested to in Sacred Scripture; Confirmation (or Chrismation), Penance (or Reconciliation), Matrimony, Holy Orders and Unction (or Anointing of the Sick and the Dying), are effective signs of the Lord’s continuing presence and action within His Church and efficacious channels of his Grace. Among the Sacraments, the Holy Eucharist holds prominence of place.
We believe that Our Lord Jesus Christ is really and truly present, in His humanity and in His Divinity, in the species of bread and wine that have been consecrated in the Eucharistic Liturgy of the Holy Mass, and that in Holy Communion we receive Him into ourselves to nourish the very life of the soul: ‘Those who eat My Flesh and drink My Blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day’, (John 6:54).
We believe that in Our Lord Jesus’ plan for His Church, the Apostles and the Bishops hold a special place.
We believe that the Bishops, canonically and liturgically consecrated in the unbroken line of Apostolic Succession are the successors of the Apostles and that they are responsible, as were the Apostles, for the ministry of service to the Church, consisting of preaching and teaching, of sanctifying and of governing, but most of all, for the safeguarding and the handing-on intact, of the Deposit of Faith and Sacred Tradition of the Church under the divine command.
On The Blessed Virgin Mary, the Theotokos:
We believe that Mary, the Mother of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Theotokos, the Mother of God, the Mother of the Church and the Queen of Heaven and earth, holds a special place in the faith, the lives and the liturgy of the our Church.
On the Saints:
We believe in the Communion of Saints, and the fellowship of the whole Church in Glory, the Church Militant and the Church Suffering. It holds to the honouring of Saints, and the prayers for their intercession for both the Church Militant and Suffering.
On Life after Death:
Each person is subject to what is called "private judgment" and to what is called "general judgment”.
The private judgment is what an individual receives immediately after death.
The souls of the righteous, who have received a "positive" private judgment have a certain "foretaste" of Heaven, and the souls of unrepentant sinners who received a "negative" private judgment have a "foretaste" of hell.
However, neither Paradise nor the Inferno even exist yet, because the final division of all humans into those who are saints and those who are damned will occur only after the Second Coming of Christ and the general resurrection of the dead (Matthew 25: 31-46).
Even though a person whose soul is separated from his/her body is not able to repent anymore, and thus cannot change the private judgment by him- or herself, the prayers of others, the prayers of the Church, and especially the prayers of the Most Holy Mother of God the Theotokos still can change the destiny of those who received a negative private judgment.
On the Filioque Position:
We maintain, as does the whole Eastern Orthodox Church, the solid and unquestioning beliefs as set out in the Creed of Nicaea/Constantinople of AD 381. We maintain that, whilst theological debate may continue regarding the Filioque clause, no Church and no Bishop or Bishops, nor successive Synods or Councils may change, alter, add to, or take away from, a Creed once it is proclaimed by a legitimate General Ecumenical Council, and that such Sacred Tradition is held as absolute by the Augustinians Fathers.
On the Divine Liturgy:
The authorized Eucharistic Liturgies we use are: John Chrysostom, Basil the Great and Gregory the Theologian, Pope of Rome.
On the Seven Sacraments of the Church:
We recognize and affirm the seven Mysteries or Sacraments of the Church:
Baptism.
Chrismation (Confirmation).
Communion (Holy Eucharist).
Holy Ordination.
Penance.
Anointing of the sick (Holy Unction of the sick and Extreme Unction for the dying).
Holy Matrimony / Marriage.