Metropolitan Amfilohije of Montenegro and Litoral did not sign controversial document at Crete

Cetinje, July 7, 2016

    

Metropolitan Amfilohije of Montenegro and Litoral has stated that he did not sign the document “Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World” adopted during the work of the Council held on Crete June 18-26, 2016.

The bishop spoke about it on the program “Living Truth” of the Montenegro channel “Atlas,” reporting that namely this document caused sharp controversy at the meeting on Crete.

At the same time Metropolitan Amfilohije considers that the document itself was inadequately prepared, which the Serbian delegation pointed out at the preceding preparatory meetings on Crete.

“I must tell you that I was one of those who did not sign the sixth document,” emphasized Metropolitan Amfilohije, answering the question of journalist Darko Sukovich.

The message itself states that the number of Serbian bishops not signing the controversial document could be much bigger. Greek media has reported the name of Bishop Irinej of Bačka in this context, and several other sources have reported that the document was not signed by a few Serbian bishops. However, in Serbian media itself this question until now remains veiled in mystery.

It is noteworthy that the publication of the adopted documents on the official site of the Council doesn’t allow for accurately understanding who precisely signed the document and who not. Under the document itself stands the names of every member of the delegations without exception, which gives the impression that they were all signatories.

The names of the Local Church representatives who refused to sign the document were earlier reported by the media. Among them were Metropolitan Athanasius of Limassol, Neophytos of Morphou, Nikolaos of Amathus, Epiphanios of Ledra, and Porphyrios of Neapolis of the Church of Cyprus, and Met. Hierotheos Nafpatkos (Greek Orthodox Church).

Some of the bishops enumerated came forward at the end of the meeting on Crete with open theological criticism of the document, stating that they were prepared to defend their position.

Translated by Jesse Dominick

Pravoslavie.ru

7/7/2016

See also
Metropolitan Athanasius of Limassol: My conscience would not allow me to sign Metropolitan Athanasius of Limassol: My conscience would not allow me to sign Metropolitan Athanasius of Limassol: My conscience would not allow me to sign Metropolitan Athanasius of Limassol: My conscience would not allow me to sign
“As there arose a misunderstanding in informing believing Christians that I didn’t sign the document ‘Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World’ of the Holy and Great Council,” writes Vladyka Athanasius, “I wish to notify all those interested, that my conscience would not allow me to sign. I didn’t sign because I don’t agree with the text of the document in its finalized form.”
UPDATED: Seven Metropolitans withheld signatures from Pan-Orthodox Council documents UPDATED: Seven Metropolitans withheld signatures from Pan-Orthodox Council documents UPDATED: Seven Metropolitans withheld signatures from Pan-Orthodox Council documents UPDATED: Seven Metropolitans withheld signatures from Pan-Orthodox Council documents
While the names of all delegate bishops from each of the ten represented Local Churches were added to each document by the Secretariat of the Holy and Great Council, there were those who abstained from signing the documents “The Sacrament of Marriage and its Impediments” and “Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World.”
Delegation of Serbian Orthodox Church will go to Crete, but could leave the Council Delegation of Serbian Orthodox Church will go to Crete, but could leave the Council Delegation of Serbian Orthodox Church will go to Crete, but could leave the Council Delegation of Serbian Orthodox Church will go to Crete, but could leave the Council
Above all, understanding the greatness and significance of the Council, our Church wants, in the spirit of ecclesial creativity, to contribute to the Holy and Great Council’s fulfilling of the criteria and measure of those true Councils which took place in the history of the Orthodox Church, thereby justifying its title.
Comments
Priest Nicholas Young7/11/2016 4:35 am
Gio seems to not be aware of the propaganda stemming from Constantinople . . . he could point us in the direction of few articles in favour of the council's official documents.
michael jovanovich7/9/2016 10:42 pm
"Gio's" comment is so bitter, ignorant and anti-Russian that he must be Cardinal Gio of the Roman Catholic Church. He's frustrated that the Orthodox are still not completely under the Pope of Rome yet. Too bad that people like this won't do us all a favor and keep their ignorant comments to themselves. Thank you.
Gio7/9/2016 10:18 am
Pravoslavie.ru's one-sided journalism in full force: a "Discussion" of the Great and Holy Council where 99% of the articles take a stance inimical to the Council. As the propaganda machine of the Moscow Patriarchate, journalistic integrity (where concepts of fairness and balance are upheld) doesn't seem to be a priority.
Here you can leave your comment on the present article, not exceeding 700 characters. All comments will be read by the editors of OrthoChristian.Com.
Enter through FaceBook , or enter your information:
Your name:
Your e-mail:
Enter the digits, seen on picture:

Characters remaining: 700

×