PDF Archive search engine
Last database update: 05 July at 21:54 - Around 220000 files indexed.
Results for «macedonians»:
Total: 31 results - 0.056 seconds
These are only a few out of many US supported projects that have improved the lives of Macedonians, while at the same time, being non - ideological in their nature.
The Position of Bp. Kirykos Regarding Re‐Baptism Differs From the Canons of the Ecumenical Councils In the last few years, Bp. Kirykos has begun receiving New Calendarists and even Florinites and ROCOR faithful under his omophorion by re‐baptism, even if these faithful received the correct form of baptism by triple immersion completely under water with the invocation of the Holy Trinity. He also has begun re‐ordaining such clergy from scratch instead of reading a cheirothesia. But this strict approach, where he applies akriveia exclusively for these people, is different from the historical approach taken by the Holy Fathers of the Ecumenical Councils. Canon 7 of the Second Ecumenical Council declares that Arians, Macedonians, Sabbatians, Novatians, Cathars, Aristeri, Quartodecimens and Apollinarians are to be received only by a written libellus and re‐chrismation, because their baptism was already valid in form and did not require repetition. The Canon reads as follows: “As for those heretics who betake themselves to Orthodoxy, and to the lot of the saved, we accept them in accordance with the subjoined sequence and custom; viz.: Arians, and Macedonians, and Sabbatians, and Novatians, those calling themselves Cathari, and Aristeri, and the Quartodecimans, otherwise known as Tetradites, and Apollinarians, we accept when they offer libelli (i.e., recantations in writing) and anathematize every heresy that does not hold the same beliefs as the catholic and apostolic Church of God, and are sealed first with holy chrism on their forehead and their eyes, and nose, and mouth, and ears; and in sealing them we say: “A seal of a free gift of Holy Spirit”…” The same Canon only requires a re‐baptism of individuals who did not receive the correct form of baptism originally (i.e. those who were sprinkled or who were baptized by single immersion instead of triple immersion, etc). The Canon reads as follows: “As for Eunomians, however, who are baptized with a single immersion, and Montanists, who are here called Phrygians, and the Sabellians, who teach that Father and Son are the same person, and who do some other bad things, and (those belonging to) any other heresies (for there are many heretics here, especially such as come from the country of the Galatians: all of them that want to adhere to Orthodoxy we are willing to accept as Greeks. Accordingly, on the first day we make them Christians; on the second day, catechumens; then, on the third day, we exorcize them with the act of blowing thrice into their face and into their ears; and thus do we catechize them, and we make them tarry a while in the church and listen to the Scriptures; and then we baptize them.” Thus it is wrong to re‐baptize those who have already received the correct form by triple immersion. The Holy Fathers advise in this Holy Canon that only those who did not receive the correct form are to be re‐baptized. Now then, if the Holy Second Ecumenical Council declares that such heretics as Arians, Macedonians, Quartodecimens, Apollinarians, etc, are to be received only by libellus and chrismation, how on earth does Bp. Kirykos justify his refusal to receive Florinites and ROCOR faithful by chrismation, but instead insists upon their rebaptism as if they are worse than Arians? The 95th Canon of the Quinisext (Fifth‐and‐Sixth) Ecumenical Council declares that those baptized by Nestorians, Monophysites and Monothelites are to be received into the Orthodox Church by a simple libellus and anathematization of the heresies, without needing to be re‐baptized, and even without needing to be re‐chrismated! The Canon reads: As for Nestorians, and Eutychians (Monophysites), and Severians (Monothelites), and those from similar heresies, they have to give us certificates (called libelli) and anathematize their heresy, the Nestorians, and Nestorius, and Eutyches and Dioscorus, and Severus, and the other exarchs of such heresies, and those who entertain their beliefs, and all the aforementioned heresies, and thus they are allowed to partake of holy Communion. Now then, if the Quinisext Ecumenical Council allows even Nestorians, Monophysites and Monothelites to be received by mere libellus, without requiring to be baptized or even chrismated, and following this mere libellus they are immediately free to receive Holy Communion, how is Bp. Kirykos’s approach patristic, if he requires the re‐baptism of even Florinites and ROCOR faithful?!!! Is Bp. Kirykos not trying to outdo the Holy Fathers in his attempt to be “super‐Orthodox”? Can such an approach taken by Bp. Kirykos be considered Orthodox if the Holy Fathers in their Canons request otherwise? Are the Canons of Ecumenical Councils invalid for Bp. Kirykos? Certainly the Latins (Franks, Papists) are unbaptised, because their baptisms consist of mere sprinklings instead of triple immersion. Likewise, various New Calendarists are also unbaptised if they were not dunked completely under the water three times. But can such be said for those Orthodox Christians, and even Genuine Orthodox Christians (be they Florinite, ROCOR or otherwise), who do have the correct form of baptism? In the Patriarchal Oros of 1755 regarding the re‐baptism of Latins, the Orthodox Patriarchs make it quite clear that their reason for requiring the re‐ baptism of Latins is because the Latins do not have the correct form of baptism, but rather sprinkle instead of immersing. The text of the Patriarchal Oros actually refers to the Canons of the Second and Quinisext Councils as their reasons for re‐baptizing the Latins. The relevant text of the Patriarchal Oros of 1755 is as follows: “...And we follow the Second and Quinisext holy Ecumenical Councils, which order us to receive as unbaptized those aspirants to Orthodoxy who were not baptized with three immersions and emersions, and in each immersion did not loudly invoke one of the divine hypostases, but were baptized in some other fashion...” Thus we see in the above Patriarchal Oros of 1755, that even as late as this year, the Orthodox Church was carrying out the very principles of the Second and Quinisext Ecumenical Councils, namely that it is only those who were baptized by some obscure form other than triple immersion and invocation of the Holy Trinity, that were required to be re‐baptized. How then can the positions of the Holy Ecumenical Councils and the Holy Pan‐Orthodox Councils be compared to the extremist methods of Bp. Kirykos and his fellow hierarchs of late? Is Bp. Kirykos’ current practice really Orthodox? Is it possible to preach contrary to the teachings of the Ecumenical and Pan‐Orthodox Councils and yet remain Orthodox? And as for those who believe that there is nothing wrong with being strict, let them remember that the Pharisees were also strict, but it was they who crucified the Lord of Glory! The Orthodox Faith is a Royal Path. Just as it is possible to fall to the left (as the New Calendarists and Ecumenists have done), it is also quite possible to fall to the right and spin off on a wrong turn far away from the tradition of the Holy Fathers. It is this latter type of fall that has occurred with Bp. Kirykos. In fact, even Bp. Matthew of Bresthena was quite moderate compared to Bp. Kirykos. For Bp. Matthew of Bresthena knew the Canons quite well, and required New Calendarists to be received only by chrismation, or in some cases by only a libellus or Confession of Faith.
2048 s14 ms 22 42%
sharing/breaking bread/teaching/praying)/episode of Ananias and Sapphira/needs shown by appointment of the Seven/developing organization/persecution/evangelism 7 (a) (i) Acts 10:9–16 Key Points on roof/trance/sheet/all kinds of animals and birds and reptiles/get up Peter, kill and eat/ surely not Lord/never eaten anything impure or unclean/do not call anything unclean that God made clean/three times (ii) Acts 16:9 Key Points man of Macedonia standing and begging him/come over to Macedonia and help us Notes maximum level 3 (5 marks) if only answered part (i) maximum level 1 (2 marks) if only answered part (ii) (b) Examples no favouritism with God/salvation to all including Gentiles/Paul called to preach to Macedonians/both Peter and Paul obedient to what God said to them in the visions/visit to Cornelius/spread of church 8 (a) Acts 16:24–40 Key Points Paul and Silas praying and singing hymns/prisoners listening to them/earthquake/doors opened/chains fell off/jailer awoke/drew sword to kill himself/do not harm yourself/all are here/what must I do to be saved/believe in Jesus/spoke to those in his house/baptized jailer and family/magistrates let them free/we are Roman citizens/let them come here themselves to free them/magistrates came and apologized/asked them to leave city/exhorted brethren and Lydia and left city (b) Examples recognised name of Jesus but use of name not sufficient/required to be believer to exorcise/inhabit people/powerful/can injure/power of Jesus stronger © Cambridge International Examinations 2014 Page 5 9 Mark Scheme GCE O LEVEL – May/June 2014 Syllabus 2048 Paper 22 (a) Acts 17:1–9 Key Points went into synagogue/three weeks/arguing Christ must suffer and rise from dead/Jesus is the Christ/many Greeks and some leading women believed/jealous Jews attacked house of Jason where Paul and Silas were staying/not there so dragged Jason out to authorities/charged them with acting against decrees of Caesar and claiming another King – Jesus/Paul and Silas left city at night (b) Examples success – message preached/conversions including Greeks failure – opposition from authorities and Jews/rejection of message/friends attacked/driven out weighing up – to what extent 10 (a) Acts 17:22–31 Key Points you are very religious/altar to unknown god/God made world/does not live in shrines/nor served by human hands/as though he needs things/he gives to all life and breath and everything/live on earth to seek and find God/we are God’s offspring/deity not like gold/commands everyone to repent/fixed day on which to judge/by man he has appointed/given assurance by raising him from the dead (b) Examples Athens audience were Greeks/no reference to OT or Jewish background/started with their unknown god and linked to God and Jesus.
Thus, for example in Rome are the classics Cornelios, the Julii and Junius, while among the Successors find Macedonians and Egyptians.
As George Finlay writes 'Some suppose them to have occupied the regions they now inhabit before the days of Homer, and that they are the lineal descendants of the race to which the ancient Epirots and Macedonians belonged as cognate tribes.'2 The introduction to M.