www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Orthodox declare Presbyterian as "proto-presbyter"

I thought some might be interested in this:

"BRITISH AND indeed world theology owes a huge debt to Professor Thomas Torrance [Presbyterian theologian], now retired from his chair in Edinburgh and one of the very few non-Orthodox theologians to have been accorded the honour by the Orthodox Church of being made a `proto-presbyter' in recognition of his work on the doctrine of the Trinity."

Could Tom Torrance receive communion as a protopresbyter in the EO Church even though he isn't chrismated? I went to a Presbyterian seminary so I find this interesting.

yours in Christ,
Marshall

Dear Marshall,

One is not (or should not be) "declared" to the rank of Protopresbyter unless one has first been:

1. received into the catechumenate
2. baptized
3. chrismated
4. communed
5. confessed
6. meets canonical requirements for clergy
7. tonsured a reader
8. ordained a subdeacon
9. ordained a deacon
10. ordained a priest
11. designated as a Protopresbyter by a presiding diocesan bishop.

That a leading Prebyterian theologian may have been received by the anointing on the forehead with chrism would not surprise me, especially if he has more or less expressed an Orthodox point of view for some time (see Jaroslav Pelikan formerly of the Lutherans). However, that he would subsequently vault over numbers 4 through 10 would truly surprise me.

Was this declaration made by a canonical bishop in communion with the great body of canonical Orthodox bishops?

Regards.

I hope there's a confusion here.
I can believe that the Orthodox Church is doing this.

I have a question.

The AOC has recently received former episcopalian "priests" as priests. How are they received? I can't believe they're received only through vesting.

It is clear that all those sects (Episcopalians, Lutherans, Prespyterians, etc) do not have a valid priesthood and did not receive the right to confect the sacraments. (they don't have an Apostolic Succession)

Even the Episcopalians and the Anglicans who come from the Catholic Church may not have valid orders, since their original Church through Pope Leo XIII declared that the orders confered with that rite were declared null and void.

Most Lutheran pastors who convert to the Orthodox Church have to go to a seminary and to become priests according to what the Church teaches.

Without a doubt, some Anglican priests have been received in Orthodox by vesting, some by (re-) ordination.

I don't think papal bulls have a whole lot of impact on Orthodox thinking.

What is clear to you, Remie, certainly has not been clear to Orthodoxy. You will find strong opinions on all sides. Our history is quite mixed on Anglicanism.

But one thing all Orthodox would agree to, we are not bound by Leo XIII.

Axios

Well, when I mentioned Leo XIII I did it because of his opinion regarding the validity of the Anglican orders. To tell you the truth I am not a big fan of Pope Leo XIII
I think that his views about the issue of the orders are are important because we all know that Anglicanism, and Protestantism come from the Western Church, so the Popes and the hierarchy of the Western Church misght have a deeper knowledge about their "separated brethen" than the Orthodox Churches.
As I have said here (and I know you disagree) The idea of a re-union between Orthodoxy and Anglicanism, or Protestantism makes no sense to me. These atempts are in opposition to history and the development of the Churches.

The rite of vesting, according to some Antiochian apologists is enough to heal any "doubtful" ordaination, but this opinion is not shared by many jurisdictions (in the case of the Protestants).

Shlomo Marshall,
Where did you get this information. I would like the source so I can link it to an Orthodox Board that I belong to.

Poosh BaShlomo,
Yuhannon

Dear Friends in Christ,

A Proto-Presbyterian? How bizarre and Byzantine! Which Orthodox Church?

Yours in Christ,
Fr Serafim
www.pokrov-seattle.org [pokrov-seattle.org]

Marshall where did this article come from? I could not find it searching the web. Perhaps the reported is confused? It does seem unlikely a non-Orthodox could be awarded the title Protopresbyter. However, it is only an ecclesiastical title so perhaps it is possible.

More likley, he was awarded a pectoral cross by a patriarch. Archimandrite Robert Taft (A Jesuit-Byzantine Catholic) was awarded one by the Ecumenical Patriarch for his work in Liturgics. In fact this was a rare second award of a pectoral cross as he had already been awarded the rank of archimandrite by the Ukrainian Catholic Church.

In Christ,
Lance

Dear brethren

I know for a fact that Torrence is NOT Eastern Orthodox and still Presbyterian, yet he seems to be a "proto-presbyter". Here's the website I found it on:

http://trushare.com/22MAR97/MR97BOOK.htm

Also, Remie, as an Anglican I'm taking you to the mat concerning your statements about Anglicanism as a "sect" and without "a valid priesthood and did not receive the right to confect the sacraments. (they don't have an Apostolic Succession)." Please see the new thread "Apostolic Succession and Anglicanism"

yours in Christ,
Taylor

Glory to Jesus Christ!

I tend to think the article is mistaken and confused on terms. Obviously a Protestant cannot be made a Proto-Presbyter in the Eastern Orthodox tradition, but I am sure he may have received some type of honor, but surely not the title Proto-Presbyter.