Met. Jonah to Old World bishops: Hands Off the American Church!
April 7, 2009 by John Couretas ·
In a stinging rebuke to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Metropolitan Jonah of the Orthodox Church in America issued a call for a unified American Church and rejected any path to unity that would mean “we surrender the freedom we have embraced as American Orthodox Christians to a patriarchate still under Islamic domination.” The video here records his sermon on April 5 at Pan-Orthodox vespers at St. Seraphim Cathedral in Dallas.
Although he did not mention him by name, the Metropolitan was responding to a speech given March 16 at Holy Cross School of Theology by the Very Reverend Archimandrite Dr. Elpidophoros Lambriniadis, chief secretary of the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. In the speech, Fr. Lambriniadis was critical of calls for unity by both the Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese and OCA and asserted that “submission to the First Throne of the Church, that is, to the Ecumenical Patriarchate” is the proper mode of unity for American Orthodox Christians.
To such a suggestion, Metropolitan Jonah said: “I would submit that, if we wanted a pope, we would be under the real one.”
He asserted that a Church dedicated to the conciliar process does not ignore the voice of the laity or the priests. The metropolitan spoke of Old World hierarchs “who are ignorant of our saints and who refuse to recognize the sacrifice of so many of those who have come before us in Christ to establish the Gospel here.”
During his sermon, Metropolitan Jonah repeatedly cited the sacrifices that Orthodox Christians have made for more than 200 years to bring the Gospel “in its wholeness” to North America. But this sacrifice, he says, is devalued by Old World hierarchs who believe that they are the only criterion of Orthodoxy.
“We can’t allow our Church to be controlled by people who have no appreciation of our culture and have to bow to the Turkish Islamic authorities,” the metropolitan said.
He concluded with an affirmation that the Church of the Apostles exists in America, in the Orthodox Church “now here in our midst. It was planted by our fathers in the faith generations ago on this continent and it has grown and borne fruit. And it subsists out of our common, sacrificial commitment to Jesus Christ. So let us give thanks to God for our unity. Let us give thanks to God for our diversity. And let us affirm to our bishops that they might tell the churches of the Old World that there is an American Orthodox Church. Leave it alone!”
Loading ...
Dean, Michael, Scott, Steve, et al, since it’s obvious that the Phanar/GOA is reading this blog and taking direction from the many criticisms (legitimate IMHO) leveled herein, let’s have fun with it! If any of you have any ideas that you think would make the GOA more evangelical, post them! I ask that they send Phanariote missionaries to the Yucatan and evangelize the Zapotec Indians. In Zapotec.
[Translate]
would you like to explain being you all have the trite answers what the differenvces are between autcelphaly and automonous.
[Translate]
It is incredible to me that punctuation and grammar are the primary concerns for what is stated here when you have a Heirarch who mispresents the OCA’s real or tiny presence in the U.S as compared with the Greek Orthodox Church which is overflowig building larger Churches which are filled to capacity and where we are having to have two Liturgies regularily in many churches. let’s also remember american history alaska was not part of the united states and neither was california for that matter. it was not part of the first colonies and had nothing to do with the formation of the country until much later in our countries history. the argument that we are in some way creating a shine to byzantium is an inane argument. our church is one of history and it is just as valid as the church today as we stand in the most profound sense out of time. You all seem envious and bitter. As for my grammar i am a most educated and elequent speaker. if i have typos or improper punctuation grow up by and large your clergy can’t even read Greek the language of the Gospels which are a greek phenomenon. get a grip. Good thing our Lord and Savior didn’t look at the communication skills of those fisherman he called to help him. you all need a good history lesson and more importantly a good does of humility. If you want your own church go ahead God bless you but you would be wrong and would take only a fraction of believers with you. the ignorant, the arrogant, the prideful and the spiteful. don’t let the door hit you on the way out. BTY, conversion doesn’t happen with fanciful articuation.the GOA or EP as you rudely refer to them do not and will never take their lead from the likes of you. You have no influence expect in the space of your small minds. The actions taken are corrective and not do to tredipation or fear. sounds like Met. Jonah is the only one back peddling. i won’t be back to this forum because you ahve an agenda hang with the OCL and puff yourselves up all you’d like. http://www.elgreca262.blogspot
[Translate]
FINAL POST HERE: you might check out my blog for more details on Met. Jonah. (on another matter none of you mention the misappropriation of funds that standard protocol in syoccet,ny in the OCA!!!
Met. Johan not to be included in meeting
Metropolitan Jonah interviewed by Russian news outlet
#fullpost{display:inline;}
This is a solid and frank interview.
The autocephaly of the OCA is still not recognized by all of world Orthodoxy. Could you remind us which Local Churches recognize it, and which do not? How do you see the prospect of dealing with this sensitive issue? Do you plan to visit the Patriarch of Constantinople?
to see his answer which acknowledges his desire for legitimacy and the protocol he needs to follow go to my blog: elgreca262.blogspot.com
[Translate]
Angela,
The intentional non-use of traditional modes of communication is not a trivial matter. The denigration of language that is involved is one more step into the nihilist culture that is robbing us of both beauty and humanity. We are rapidly regressing to a pre-literate form of communication approaching the Summerian forms and heading to hieroglyphics. Do we really want to go there?
Such denigration of language relates to many things in the Church especially any notion of ‘liturgical reform’ using modern language (anathema)!
It is pretty amazing to me that an Orthodox person would not understand that content is effected by form. Should we write our icons in any old way? Is it not a major part of our practice that particular forms are necessary to properly communicate the Holy Spirit and the faith? Much of the dispute in the 1st Council was over one syllable of one word
Shoot, there are some Greeks who even maintain that only Greek should be used to properly convey the faith. While that is obviously going too far, I can actually understand the point.
There are many more who strongly maintain that any alteration in traditional forms changes the faith. Language is a potent and dangerous tool. Being intentionally sloppy in using language denotes sloppy thought as far as I am concerned. Why should I even bother to read it?
It is especially ironic that someone who is arguing so intensely for maintaining a traditional structure in the Church should use such modern forms. To me it undermines your argument significantly.
Speaking and writing are two different modes of communication. Skill in one does not necessarily translate to the other.
I love history, it is one of the factors Jesus used to get me to His Church. However, when history becomes a detriment to realizing our calling as a Church in this land (as it has), we have to reexamine everything in light of genuine Tradition and go forward. The GOA and the EP do not have a lock on Tradition. What is important to me is communicating Jesus Christ and the Church to the people in this country. I don’t care what nationality. I don’t care who was here first, etc, etc, ad nausem, that has long ago ceased being anything but Pharasitical.
Unfortunately, my experience with the GOA and Greek Orthodox has been almost universally negative in this regard (Tom Kanelos, despite our disagreements is a welcome exception). You do realize the phylitism is a heresy, don’t you?
If we can’t even agree that the Church for Americans and Americans for the Church is our primary job, the rest is moot. If we don’t realize that EVERY JURISDICTION IS A MESS, the rest is moot. If we don’t realize that the Church is not a birthright, but a gift we have to consciously accept, even a calling we have to respond to, everything else is moot.
[Translate]
Michael, you are right. Repentance is called for. Woe be to them who think they have nothing to repent of.
[Translate]
Angela,
On the matter of autocephally not being recognized. Whether it is officially (whatever that means) or not doesn’t matter a whit. Met. Jonah (not Johan) was elected with zero input from any other jurisdiction. Since the OCA is in communion with just about everyone in the Orthodox world (to my knowledge), there is defacto recognition of the autocephally of the OCA. Autocephally means ‘self-heading’ after all.
The OCA elected their head, they are in communion, their autocephally is recognized.
It is beyond me why so many seem to want to degrade and deingrate the OCA. What have they done to offend, exist?
[Translate]
This is both Russian and Met. Jonah view. Here is Met. Jonah speaking in a interview is Russia a few days ago.
“The American Orthodox Church is the former “daughter” of Russian Orthodox Church, who now is like our older sister. We have no difficulties in our relations with her. Here we are perceived as a fully canonical and autocephalous Church. This is logical because the Russian Orthodox Church and granted us autocephaly. I am received here on the same level as the Patriarch himself. If we were not perceived as a fully independent and equal Church, then I would be received here as I am.”
Met. Jonah my God grant you many years…
[Translate]
Re: No. 102
From the OCA web site:
An “autocephalous” Church is completely self-governing. It elects its own primate and has the right to consecrate its own Holy Chrism, among other prerogatives unique to autocephalous Churches. [The term "autocephalous" literally means "self-heading."]
An “autonomous” Church is self-governing to a certain degree in its internal matters, but its head is appointed or confirmed by the autocephalous Church which nurtures it. An autonomous Church also receives its Holy Chrism from its “Mother Church.”
http://www.oca.org/QA.asp?ID=29&SID=3
[Translate]
Re: 104
Angela, it really doesn’t matter which jurisdictions (churches) have or have not officially recognized the autocephaly of the Orthodox Church in America. That all of these churches have served at the altar with the OCA at one time or another is the most important act of validity. In nearly all cases, lack of official recognition is strictly political…such as the Church of Constantinople (Ecumenical Patriarchate) not “officially” recognizing the OCA so as not to tick off the GOA which supplies a bunch of money each year to the Phanar!
[Translate]
Re: 107
Michadel,
Here is a super long list I have compiled on my web site of vagante Orthodox that the OCA is definately not in communion with:
Religious Groups That Use ‘Orthodox’ in Their Names
But Are Not Canonical Eastern Orthodox Churches
http://aggreen.net/other_orthodox/other.html
I’m particularly amused by the section titled: “The Ukrainian Debacle – They boldly go where no Ukrainian has gone before.”
Al
[Translate]
Michael,
the problem is one of “thin skin.” People who are resolute in their knowledge of the truth don’t have to play the victim card. The fact that the Phanar’s defenders pull it out every 5 minutes should tell us something.
[Translate]
first i am resolute in my knowledge. belching facts does not make you correct or your comments appropriate. Al, I take great offense implying that the Ecumenical Patriarchate is a sell out or a whore yeilding to the highest bidder according to your comments the Greek Orthodox Arch. We do not pull the victim card ever. The fact that the Ecumenical Patriarchate has lived under the Ottoman Rule and the yolk of the Turks for four hundred years is not the victim card. Likewise it is not the victim card for Moscow to reflect on its time under the occupation of the communists and the slaughter of clergy and laity alike (memory eternal). As for my Patriarch the Orthodox Christians living their number only about two thousand in a country of 68,000,000. When i have visited throught the last decade there are no victims only survivors. We proclaim the Creed as they call to prayer. We have been photographed, had our passports confiscated and harrassed. I wend to Nicea to the place where the creed was affirmed i have traveled to the Holy places to be around and in the presence of the Holy People of God never numbering myself among them. visit the archon website to learn about the confiscation of properties and the limited on human rights. Basic religious freedom. I am not against Met.Jonah and i have met him on two occaisions. I am not against the OCA in fact i support my local parish. I am offended at how quickly we throw our history under the bus. Let Met. Jonah gain some perspective because trumpeting his own horn so loudly. I sincerely want nothing more then communal respect and affection one orthodox christian for another. but the end doesn’t justify the means St. Paul warns us against doing what is wrong in the name of what is good or God. He repeats “God forbid”!!! Creating patriachates are not signs of promotion or advancement. We are not like the protestants who set up their own creeds and affiliations to suit local needs or demands we are members of the most Holy most richely endowed faith the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. It is the more complete understanding of God that is known or has yet to be revealed. Let’s proclaim love in any language Christ is risen!!!
[Translate]
No. 112
You wrote: “Al, I take great offense implying that the Ecumenical Patriarchate is a sell out or a whore yeilding to the highest bidder according to your comments the Greek Orthodox Arch.”
Angela, you read too much into what I wrote and i take great offense in your putting words in my mouth, which is disingenuous on your part. Keep in mind that the E.P. is my patriarch. That said, facts are facts. Without financial support from the Greeks in America, the Phanar would become dust. Time for the E.P. to pull out of Turkey and find residence in a friendlier country. (There is precedence for this…The Church of Antioch.)
I suggest you deal with it.
Al
[Translate]
Al, first i would like to say that each time you feel disagreed with we don’t need to take great offense. Our Lord went to the cross in Extreme Humility. As for your comment “lack of official recognition is strictly political…such as the Church of Constantinople (Ecumenical Patriarchate) not “officially” recognizing the OCA so as not to tick off the GOA which supplies a bunch of money each year to the Phanar!” does state not even imply a sell out for perhaps you were refering to a decision of necessity. Nonetheless asking The Ecumentical Patriarch to leave would we akin to telling the Jews to leave Israel. Not likely. Have you been to the city. Have you seen the ancient monuments to Christianity and the current monuments behld in the testimonies of those still living there. Some secretly living as Christians. Abandoment is not the key here. Ecumenical Patriarch Archbipshop of Constantinople And Pope of New Rome himself has said that he will not leave not during his lifetime. The answer may be political and our current president Obama (who i dislike immeasureably for his stance on abortion and economics) did at least mention Halki Theological school. I have been there on several occaisions and it is a school which is very much alive with the spirits of those who have passed through those hallways dormiories and books. We have the Hospital at Barulki which is owned by the Patriarchate and serves all who need free of charge about 30-40,000 annually with a full services in and out patient specialties. That means that even if every Greek were to go the 98% are muslims/turks. It also has an old age home limited to the the Greeks where they live their entire lives with top notch medical care and social interaction. They have a chapel in their housing and are visited regulariy by priests. They are given memorial services when they doe as the church perscpribes for years. I have visited this hopsital many times also. The goverment has been trying to take this too. The archons God bless each and every one of them have been tireless in their efforts to apply internation pressure not to pack and run. The efforts spent here and on other websites should be to ignite a ground swell from the grassroot orthodox christians like you to defend her (the churches) right to exist where it as been for over a thousand years. By the way i listed your weblink of non orthodox religious groups at my blog. very informative.
[Translate]
See if the orthodox churches in America truely went by cannon law and didn’t want to be a Greek/Arab/Russian social club than we would not have the problems today. Most of us would not have anything to mad about.
Well the OCA is going by cannon law.
[Translate]
Re: No. 115
Angela, I converted to Orthodoxy because of theological and dogmatic truth, not religious political B.S. I’ll let you cradle Orthodox worry about such stuff. Frankly, I could care less whether the E.P. is in Istanbul or Podunk, USA. He can shepherd his flock from anywhere. You make some good points, but I’m not going to lose very much sleep over it. And yes, the Archons, even the Carpatho-Russian ones in my parish, have worked hard to keep the Church of Constantinople viable where it is.
Glad you like my list of Ortho-Pretenders.
Al
[Translate]
Al, first of all B.S is not a legitimate arguement. It is dismissive and uncuts all that you are trying to convey. I find the only people engaging in the politics of character assassination are some of the members here. Why do you profile me and assume that i am a craddle orthodox because of my last name. My maiden name could be smith or hernandez. as i stated earlier all believers of all faiths are converts there is a comming of age a time when each individual proclaims or rejects their beliefs. I don’t understand why insults continue to be slug. It would be much simpler to address the comments and positions not the person. I do not attack Met. Jonah or anyone else i reject the positions. someone can be very sincere and still be deluded. i am also dismayed to find individuals whose comments are not posted here. Freedom of speech is one of the foundations of a free society of American culture and law and to banish and censure comments is unamerican. Is that the kind of dialogue we want? isn’t that the strong arming you fear or reject? if what the moderators what conversations exclusively which express their own thoughts then it should be a private club and not something open to everyone. Am i allowed to publish here simply to serve as a target and punching bag? please publish all non profane comments as i think it will either strengthen your position or change it. It’s the american way!!
[Translate]
Al and Angela, your posts are devolving into a private argument. Either is gets elevated to the expression and defense of ideas, or else it will be closed.
[Translate]
Re: No. 118
Angela, I attacked no one. But if that’s the way you see it, then I say those famous words of Roy Rogers: “May the good Lord take a liking to ya.” I’ll chat with you no more. Goodnight and godspeed!
Al
[Translate]
Dear Father,
I am dismayed to learn thatyou would ban me from exchanging in a healthy discourse. I am not dealing with specific individuals who express themselves here. In fact unlike several of your members i have not attacked the ability to write concisely or express themselves. I always make the effort to understand the spirit of what they are stating. I am upset that the only group which is consistenly on the out are craddle orthodox. You may choose not to publish my posts any longer and if i were some disenfranchised minority thenthe ACLU would rush to my defense. Please clarify what your mission is for this site. I have read other topics also and it regularly slanders the leaders of the Greek Orthodox ARch. Arch. Bishop Demetrios is the object of many unworhty comments and yet his defenders are marginalized and silenced as you wish to do here to me. this is an unfortunate state. In the spirit of St athanasious who was persecuted until his death i will continue state what my conscience dictates. God has truly blessed me that i may be wrongful persecuted for His names sake.
[Translate]
It is always difficult and sometimes risky to try to address controversial issues in a format designed for brief interchanges like a blog (though my posts tend to violate these requirements). One can not be thorough enough, nor nuanced enough, nor can one “read” all of those important facial expressions that help us understand how someone else might understand our comments so we can modify them as needed to foster clarity.
On more than one of occasion, I have noticed claims made that others had attacked them (or some other person or Jurisdiction) or had engaged in character assassination. Having followed this post closely since its inception, I can not see anything that would warrant these claims. I have seen some occasionally snarky and uncharitable comments, but nothing that reaches the level of the accusations.
What I have also noticed, however, is that those making these charges seem to be personalizing criticisms that – to me at least – are not fundamentally personal; they are focused on issues, policies and specific positions. That is, the responses to their position or comments may be critical or unkind, but nothing appears to be directed at them personally. Yet their responses made it clear that they experience the comments that way.
While I can not begin to speculate on the reasons for the personalization, that they do so is evident in both the nature of the response and the apparent tendency to assume or impute motives to the others in their responses. (It is also evident in their focus on being attacked and the apparent unwillingness to respond to the content of the criticism offered.) That this is so is made particularly clear by the fact that those accused of such attacks have readily offered apologies for any misunderstandings or uncharitable comments, where as those who have claimed that they were attacked seem to continue to personalize and generalize, elevating the disagreement into an Epic Battle over Principles of Enormous Import. Perhaps this justifies the intensity of the feeling. I don’t know. In my experience, it can be difficult to converse long with anyone who tends to personalize issues, since it will tend to turn disagreement into persecution. If so, it is a persecution to which no one else will show up.
(As an aside, this is what makes the notion of “hate speech” so destructive – it allows those most prone to personalizing issues to use their perception to silence the opposition. The irony, then, is that those who claim to be the victims become very effective victimizers – not that that is occurring here. So far as I can see, those who have felt themselves to be the victim have not sought to silence anyone else.)
The desire to maintain a focus on the issues rather than personalizing them is, as I read it, the purpose of Father’s challenge (#119). More to the point (since it was subsequently challenged), moderators have a duty to monitor the character of the conversation or it will undermine the value of this site. Free speech is presumably not undermined when editors choose not to publish letters, radio talk-show hosts select particular callers or when moderators at a given site establish ground rules.
It should not need to be repeated, but – for those for whom it seems difficult to believe, my reading of the conversation resulting from the initial post is that everyone on this site would readily and eagerly grant the EP the honor and respect owed to him due to his Primacy. We would all, I believe, support as much as possible the (truly) persecuted Christians in Constantinople. They are suffering a modern martyrdom and deserve our active, urgent love and support. At the same time, many of us take issue with the claims for Supremacy made by the EP. It is this issue alone that is being addressed – not out of disrespect for the EP but out of a fundamental disagreement over the Orthodox understanding of the nature and function of hierarchy. While these are issues that touch on deeply-held beliefs, disagreement is not denigration nor persecution. In the end, however much we may disagree with my brother or sister, I believe that all of us would still affirm them as brothers and sisters in the Body of Christ, worthy of our love and, if need be, sacrifice.
[Translate]
Comment requirements.
The comments must deal with ideas, the ideas must be coherently expressed, and they must move the conversation forward.
Discussions that trail off into a private conversation will be closed.
Moral posturing (finger wagging; false outrage; charges of “hate speech,” “slander,” “censorship” etc. in place or reasoned argument; etc.) will not be accepted.
Sentiment masquerading as clear thinking will not be accepted.
Participation in the discussions occur solely at the discretion of the moderators.
Having said all that, everyone is welcome to post as long as they hold to these standards. Those that don’t will have their posting privileges rescinded regardless of their stand on the questions discussed.
[Translate]
Re: No. 122, 123:
***Just a thought…when a discussion group such as this has rules to be followed, there is no such thing as freedom of speech (ala the amendment to the U.S. Constitution). Speech is free only to the extent that such does not go beyond the discussion group’s rules and regulations. Thus, since this is Fr. Hans’ blog, he can do pretty mush as he pleases.
Al
[Translate]
the point to made here is a simple one. the comments should remain dispassionate and rational. often times when discussing religion and politics it can be difficult.the freedom to think and speak is endowed by the law of the land and just like you can’t yell fire in a crowded theature there can be guidelines for self expression like in a classroom. my real concern and objection to censuring commentary and banning participants is that it undermines what i would assume is the goal of this forum. it is perceived on the surface as being a place for the exchange of thoughts and expression of concern and encouragement. if however it becomes a cheerleading squad then it is like a group of adolescents all with high self esteem and opinions of themselves while not having accomplished anything. it is morally reprehensible to ban membership but allow the persistent slander of church leaders like Archbishop Demetrios who was ordained as a bishop over 40 years ago. he has been a bishop as long as i have been alive give or take a few months. if this is a forum for dissention then it should be flexible enough for traditionalist like me. we are all free in the end to pick up our toys and leave the sandbox.
[Translate]
Restrictions on freedom of speech apply to the government. “Congress shall make no law…” It does not mean that publications are required to list every possible opinion on subjects they choose to discuss. Nor does it meant that every person who contributes to a publication gets a say in setting the rules.
[Translate]
Nor does free speech mean there will be no consequences.
[Translate]
Hi everyone,
Happy Mother’s Day.
I just happened to bump into this today. Thought it might be of interest. Maybe we should adopt this practice as well? See what y’all think…it’s from Fr Meyendorff:
When Metropolitan Jonas died (1461), his successor, Theodosius, was elected ‘Metropolitan of all Rus’’ without the title of ‘Kiev’: he was appointed ‘for the house of the most-pure Mother of God, near the grave of the holy wonder-worker Peter, the metropolitan’ (i.e. in Moscow), whereas Russian bishops were required to pledge allegiance to him, as their legitimate primate, and to renounce ‘Gregory, excommunicated from the holy Catholic church, who calls himself Metropolitan of Kiev’. Thus, the Muscovite metropolitan had de facto renounced a claim to ‘Little Russia’, as belonging to his jurisdiction. In later years, the newly consecrated Russian bishops were also asked to pledge not to receive metropolitans ‘appointed in Constantinople, in the dominion of ungodly Turks, by a pagan Tsar.’
Source: Byzantium and the Rise of Russia, Fr. John Meyendorff, p 269
Sounds good to me!
Best Regards,
Dean
[Translate]
I would be willing to wager that the next chapter in Phanariot lunacy will be at the HC/HC Graduation. Given the statement of the faculty posted at hchc.org -a statement without any context of who signed it or how it was issued- you can pretty much bet that this year’s graduation is going to be an omogenia before orthodoxy type of affair complete with a traditional episode of GOA buffoonery.
It will be a Phanariot version of dueling banjos for sure……
Cue the music Fr. Tom Fitzgerald……..
[Translate]
There is a difference between a Traditionalist and an inflexible legalist although the two often get confused.
[Translate]
Regarding #129, I suspect that you may well be right in your prediction. More to the point, I would probably agree with your position – which should be evident from my prior comments. I strongly favor efforts to build a vital American Orthodox Church and, if possible, realize some degree of jurisdictional unity – something focused fully on the faith the Church that appreciates but does not elevate ethnic origins. I have also been very disappointed by recent (political) episodes involving the GOA. At the same time, I do hold Archbishop Demetrios in very high regard – for both who he is and for his office. In that light, disparaging descriptions (such as lunacy or buffoonery) seem unnecessarily disrespectful and uncharitable. Aware as I am of my own sins, I am not eager to add to them: my reading of Acts 23:5 doesn’t constrain criticism but it does demand respect. While I take the underlying point (and fear that you may well be right) it should also be evident from recent comments that others may not. In the spirit of charity, it would go a long way to express even vehement disagreement in a manner that would generate more light than heat.
[Translate]
a consequence for free speech should not be censorship or a smack down. i take responsibility for my actions and commentary both here in the real world. but to speak in such a totalitarian tone that there will be or should be consequences to what i have said short of a debate is a dangerous slippery slope. chrys spoke quite well about the cost of slander to the church. as for andrew, he has already begun the attacks prior to an event. first character assassination and bigotry by his term “Phanariot lunacy…..of GOA buffoonery”. I feel strongly father that these are the comments which should be strongly condemned not removed but condemned. they do not open dialogue but in inflame the senses. All the that Greek American money that is sent overseas goes to hospitals in Georgia for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer spearheaded by Andrew Athens. We have Greek from Greece who paid to renovate the Phanar. but to assume that monies have given His All Holiness some life of luxury is improper. Much of the funds go a defense fund for appeals made to the EU and for charitable needs in the City. The GOA as you frequently refer to that jurisdiction has created many vital worldwide charities like the IOCC under Alexander Rondos, The Philoptochos under the vision of Archbishop Iakovos, OCMC etc. I am glad to see that other jurisdictions a have joined such efforts and began their own. But to imply that the Greeks are nationalists who don’t welcome non-Greeks is untrue. Case in point Met. Iakovos of Mytilini establishes churches throughout the world like Cameroon where the services are conducted in English and locals where worship with traditional sounds and sights. He for decades had taken children from Serbia every summer to feed them and give them respit from there war torn country. These are only small examples of the love and charity of one man in a few instances. Please refrain from attacking entire groups for matters which you do not have all the details and which is destructive and misleading. We have not spent countless hours discussing the theft of the OCA for years and years. We have nto discussed that also thank God the OCA has opened many parishes in the Dio. of the So. they often come from priests who were converted int he Greek Orth. Church went to seminary and then set of mission parishes blocks from the Greek (Hellenic) churches. The OCA churches seldom number more then 15 which the GOA parishes easily number in the hundreds. I myself am not impresses with numbers necessarily but they are telling. Also when you have church leadership who are over 75% (a conservative estimate) are converts the community or church can be top heavy. there is something to be said for cradle orthodox who remain faithful. there is a marinating that occurs where you are shaped and molded as a child in the faith. We are all constantly going through a purification of fire removing impurities under the guidance and leadership of the clergy. If however the clergy themselves are new to the faith and only recently finding the path themselves it is more difficult to have the discernment necessary for such a task. Let’s discuss these issues and not develop this into a cult of personality
[Translate]
Angela, how about a few paragraph breaks and some conventional punctuation? The post is a waterfall of assertions that makes it difficult to respond; as soon as I place my cup in it another one barrels down to displace the one I just caught.
[Translate]
Sure thing Father, I’ll be sure to break it into smaller more digestable bites.
[Translate]
Chrys,
re:I strongly favor efforts to build a vital American Orthodox Church and, if possible, realize some degree of jurisdictional unity – something focused fully on the faith the Church that appreciates but does not elevate ethnic origins.
One of the things that got me started on path to Orthodox unity was my love of history. I’ve loved Byzantine history since I was about 10. I began by reading all the traditional histories, Ostrogorsky, Runciman, Gibbon, etc. Then, using the bibliographies in those, I went back to the original sources – Eusebius, Psellus, Kinnamos, Choniates, Anna Comnena…etc.
What I found absolutely fascinating, to the point of bewildering, was the absolute LACK of ethnic affiliation in ANY of the original histories…It finally dawned on me that they simply dealt with a completely different paradigm than we do. Having grown up in the Greek Church, with all of the corresponding emphasis on Greek culture, this was really shocking to me. And the contrast could not be more dramatic. For example, Niketas Choniates wrote an extraordinary 800 page history which covers the period before and after the Fourth Crusade (it’s includes an incredible description of the evacuation of C’nople by the residents and the fires). In that 800 page tome (Dr. Harry Magoulias did the translation), I’ll bet he uses the word “Greek” (or Hellene) fewer times than the last issue of the Orthodox Observer did….on the front page alone!!!
What that should teach us, and to underline your point, is that ethnicity is NOT the foundation of our church. This situation in the US, with all of our hyphenated-American attitudes, is a very very recent innovation in Orthodoxy and is an anomaly. It has been branded a heresy by a council of Constantiople, 1872.
The Church Fathers would simply not have known what a “Greek” Orthodox or “Russian” Orthodox was. They spoke of the Orthodox “Oecumene”…that was it.
It is up to us, cradle Orthodox hopefully spurred along by converts, to reclaim this rich patrimony. If we do, we will find that we have a treasure of immeasurable value to offer and transform America. If we don’t, we’ll be extinct as the dinosaurs…and rightly so.
Best Regards,
Dean
[Translate]
Dean, thank you for the detail you provided. As a convert, I may speak my mind, certainly, but I recognize that my words will not be received in the same manner as those from a cradle Orthodox. In a couple of my more cantankerous moments (usually with sympathetically-minded folks), I walked through the sanctuary and, pointing to the icons, noted the ethnic origins of the people depicted – the vast majority of whom were . . . Jewish. This is not to denigrate the Greek witness, for which I am extremely grateful; it is to recognize that it is a terrible mistake to assert criteria now by which they would have suffered before. The point is made unequivocally in St. Paul’s condemnation of such ethnic divisions in which the “Greeks” were being treated as second-class members. (Interestingly, Paul’s description of the benefits of being Jewish would recognize that the Jews did indeed have historical and cultural advantages. However, all these things and more are ours in Christ.) His full-throated assertion that we are one in Christ is based on the cross itself: in it, Christ over came the divisions in and between human caused by sin.
Soon we will celebrate Pentecost – the outpouring of the Spirit by which we become by grace what He is by nature, the first fruits of healed humanity, and by which Babel is overturned. In the end, I do not want to find myself knowingly or unknowingly on the other side of the cross, undoing Pentecost and restoring Babel.
[Translate]
Angela,
It may not be true for all, but it is certainly true for many. Of course such activity is not limited to the Greeks because the Slavs, Arabs and Anglos also demonstrate the same not Orthodox approach. Frankly, I don’t care who is doing it, it is dead wrong.
You and Chrys are correct in that we should strive to moderate our vehemence in a personal sense. However, the idea that Obama warrants any comparison to any Greek ruler of the past is archaic at best, but mostly the idea is looney. It gives the perception that Abp. Demetrios is not living in reality. Perhaps he is too gentle and saintly a man to be in the position he occupies (and I mean that without a trace of sarcasm or irony).
The comparisons and statements of the Archmandrite at Holy Cross were inflamatory and insulting.
The environmental statements of Pat Bartholomew are, IMO, putting Christian window dressing on leftist political ideology.
I am vastly disappointed because I want and expect a higher level of thought from men in their positions. I expect them to be better than I am, a lot better.
The Greeks make themselves easy targets, but I could easily say many of the same types of things about my own Met.–Met. Philip and probably worse.
So many of our bishops are not calling us to higher things, are too ivolved with partison and ideological politics, seemingly to concerned with upholding their perogatives without enough concern for the Church, i.e, the Orthodox faithful, in this country.
Defending old ethnic divisions simply will not work here. We have to go beyond anything history has to show us and work together from the heart of living Tradition to find our way now. History and Tradition are not the same thing. The sucesses of history are not repeatable as they are crafted from the unique combinations of people and circumstance in a given moment of time.
Failure is much more perdictable from history. Legalism is too rigid to be sucessful for long because it is a fundamentally false assumption about the inter-relationship between God and man.
BTW the consequence for speaking truth or even attempting to speak truth is far more likely to be adverse than positive.
[Translate]
Angela,
I don’t know where you get your numbers (OCA = #15 people vs. GOA = hundreds). This only holds true for missions. You’re comparing apples to oranges. As a rule, GOA parishes are larger than OCA parishes but there are exceptions to this as well. But the ratio you use is completely caterwampus. Indeed, I’ve been in GOA parishes which were well under 45 on a Sunday, from start to finish.
I’ll be glad to provide you some context: In most OCA/ROCOR parishes, the ratio of Vespers attendees to Liturgy attendees is 1:3 or 1:2. Also, I see a higher percentage of people showing up before the Gospel rather than after the Great Entrance (i.e. just in time for Communion). I don’t want to make this a comparison game, just trying to point out some irregularities in your arguments.
Also, since the OCA/ROCOR parishes place a premium on Confession, there is an unwritten but decided bias in keeping the numbers in a congregation less than 150. (It’s just not possible for one priest to seriously counsel/confess 200+ people at least six times a year.) In our diocese, we were told by the bishop to seriously start looking at forming another mission once we hit a 100 regular attendees.
I’m not saying having 300+ is better or worse than having less than 100, but the number “15″ is ridiculous. Our mission started with 15-18 people and there are other OCA missions which started with less, but they don’t remain viable if they remain at these numbers. (Again, our mission has Wed nite vespers crowd of 25-30 and Sun crowd of 70+.
[Translate]
Re: No. 137
Michael Wrote: “But to imply that the Greeks are nationalists who don’t welcome non-Greeks is untrue.”
I concur. Over the past two years I had occasion to stay in Concord, NH, 11 times, many over weekends. In the state capitol there is but one canonical Orthodox parish, and it happens to be GOA. I was not only warmly welcomed, but encouraged to commune…and stay for coffee hour. Because this single parish had so many none Greeks as members, the Divine Liturgy was in Greek, English, and occasionally Church Slavonic.
And, I had a similar experience many years back at a Greek parish near Middletown, NY.
Al
[Translate]
when we cling to our ‘american’ ideals of uniformity we are guilty ourselves not only of nationalism but hypocrisy.
[Translate]
Al, I agree, there are many warm, welcoming GOA parishes. I wish the hierarchy was as warm and welcoming.
[Translate]
Angela, I’ve seen no one here say anything about wanting uniformity. That is absolutely the wrong way. That’s part of what the mess in the Antiochian Archdiocese is all about. Met. Philip thinks unity lies only in uniformity, his uniformity.
The OCA is hardly uniform containing both new and old calendar parishes in the same diocese for instance.
No one in their right mind wants uniformity. That would be a cutting off of both history and Tradition. We need everybody to counter the nihilism of our culture.
God forbid that we ever become a well organized machine!
We need to preach the Gospel with all different flavors and colors, not preach the nationality with a hint of Gospel.
I’d love to see the Greeks and Arabs stand up and fight as they have for so many centuries (not against each other). I love to witness more of the Slavic sense of struggle against this world and its darkness. We have yet to really see what the American spirit can do, but at our best we seem to be able to make odd combinations work together somehow inspite of ourselves. Each tradition has such a rich treasure of saints, fathers and mothers from whom we can learn.
[Translate]
Angela,
This is what the church has said about ethnic divisions:
“We have concluded that when the principle of phyletism (i.e. ecclesiastical nationalism) is juxtaposed with the teaching of the Gospel and the constant practice of the Church, it is not only foreign to it, but also completely opposed, to it. We decree the following in the Holy Spirit: 1. We reject and condemn racial division, that is, racial differences, national quarrels and disagreements in the Church of Christ, as being contrary to the teaching of the Gospel and the holy canons of our blessed fathers, on which the holy Church is established and which adorn human society and lead it to Divine piety. 2. In accordance with the holy canons, we proclaim that those who accept such division according to races and who dare to base on it hitherto unheard-of racial assemblies are foreign to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and are real schismatics.” Constantinople…1872
Read that last sentence particularly closely..“those who accept such division according to races and who dare to base on it hitherto unheard-of racial assemblies are foreign to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and are real schismatics.
This statement was issued by a synod in C’nople called to discuss the setting up of a Bulgarian parish, in Constantinople, which would be under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of Bulgaria (rather than the EP). The sarcasm drips off the words. What they really wanted to say was, “Are you guys NUTS!”
Personally, I think it is one of the proudest moments of the Orthodox Church…think about the time it was written…1872.
This could have come out of the mouth of Martin Luther King…only it preceded him by 100 years!
The Church has labelled these ethnic divisions a heresy…it’s just that simple.
Best Regards,
Dean Calvert
[Translate]
Chrys,
re: As a convert, I may speak my mind, certainly, but I recognize that my words will not be received in the same manner as those from a cradle Orthodox. In a couple of my more cantankerous moments (usually with sympathetically-minded folks), I walked through the sanctuary and, pointing to the icons, noted the ethnic origins of the people depicted – the vast majority of whom were . . . Jewish.
Just always remember this: If you had called ANY of those saints on the iconostasis “Greek” Orthodox you would have confused them, and if you had called them “Greeks” (or Hellenes) you would have just insulted them.
That’s really pretty accurate, historically speaking (as long as you were pointing to saints living in the first 15 centuries of the church).
Best Regards,
Dean
[Translate]
First of all…my apologies to all for the 3 in a row postings…sorry!!!
Chrys,
I just reread your post. I just wanted to tell you that your last sentence, “In the end, I do not want to find myself knowingly or unknowingly on the other side of the cross, undoing Pentecost and restoring Babel.” was about as powerful a statement as I’ve seen with regard to this issue.
Wow…that is truly a breathtaking statement…”undoing Pentecost and restoring Babel”.
Just my opinion..for what it’s worth.
Dean
[Translate]
Chyrs,
I agree. Particularly “restoring Babel” How do we do that in the Orthodox Church? Answer: when we force homogeneity, by forcing one universal language. Ergo, we should be celebrating the liturgy in every language of man in every region where humanity exists. What could be more opposite than Babel?
that’s why I love you converts, you come up with the neatest paradigms and observations!
[Translate]
I am now defined as a Phanariot for my outright protest of the insidious attempts by some to use their position as priest or hierarchy to silence the faithful. While I am not an official of the Orthodox Church I am bound by membership to protect it. This is the mandate of all the faithful the entire Body—”…because the protector of religion is the very body of the Church, even the people themselves…” (Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs, 1848). As St. John Chrysostomos writes it is a “fundamental ecclesiological truth that all members of the Church, in a certain way, constitute a continuous Synod of the People of God.” I stand firm as a “champion of the Faith,” and take seriously my duty.
“…I want and pray, you to be wholly harsh and implacable with the heretics only in regard to cooperating with them or in any way whatever supporting their deranged belief. For I reckon it misanthropy and a departure from Divine love to lend support to error, that those previously seized by it might be even more greatly corrupted”. Patrologia Graeca, Vol. 91 col. 465c; as cited in The Panheresy of Ecumenism, by Metropolitan Cyprian of Orpos and Fili (Etna, CA: The Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies, 1995), 32
My intention and effort is for the “awakening those in the dark sleep of error and bringing them to repentance”. ( “The True Nature of Heresy,” 76-77)
http://www.elgreca262.blogspot.com
[Translate]
Angela, the term “Phanariot” is not a pejorative. It’s a historical term that outlines the policy adopted the Ecumenical Patriarchate after the fall of Constantinople. The historian Sir Steven Runicman outlined the development of this policy in his epic work “The Fall of Constantinople 1453.” Two relevant paragraphs:
Read the entire article: Nationalism and Greek Orthodoxy.
[Translate]
Angela, while I appreciate and defended your objection to the use of inflammatory language as demeaning and uncharitable, it is probably more inflammatory to accuse others of heresy – whether directly or by presenting yourself as the lone protector/defender of the faith. If you’re going to pull that trigger, you should not be surprised that folks might fire back. If the goal is indeed to lead others to repentance, you need to present compelling reasons for a claim of that magnitude. Since “heresy” is the equivalent of capital punishment in spiritual terms, you should not be surprised if it arouses hostility. What follows is not martyrdom nor suffering persecution; it a response to a highly escalated provocation – not really all that different from your own reaction. Unfortunately, using the term heresy in an unsupported and promiscuous manner is tantamount to using the theological “big gun” to quash unpleasant opposition.
[Translate]
Chrys,
This comment made on my blog might help to clarify the matter it is used with the permission of the author. I offer a brief insight into one of my papers with regards to OCA jurisdictional canonicityIn reading online blogs and the rhetoric from the “modern Day Iconoclasts” at AOI, OCL and elsewhere it seems to me that everybody is missing the point about ‘canonicity’ of the OCA. The problem truly lies with the Moscow Patriarchate. As everybody knows and agrees Jurisdiction is, put simply, a geographical boundary of a particular bishop. It is essential to mention that the “Golden Seal Certificate” of 1591 is the primary source of definition of the canonical territory of the Moscow Patriarchate.The problem today in America goes back to the 16th century when the Moscow Patriarchate took it upon herself to expand her geographic territory along with the secular power of Czarist Russia.It was then, Moscow broke canon law in regards to America. The question is how can the ‘daughter’ church be jurisdictionally legitimate if the ‘mother’ church was not within her canonical authority to bestow it? Obviously there is a common communion the real issue is jurisdictional territory.The online thugs want to make it about: ethnicity, feeling unaccepted, self interest of the Holy Patriarchates or some other irrelevant issue like an individuals grammar… one priest goes so far as to say he won’t serve people pastorally because of their insistence on cultural identity, this smells of bigotry to me. What’s next no pastoral care because of skin tone? What’s worse is his pride in that evil position.The truth of the matter is in 1794 with the arrival of Kodiak Mission’s to supposed Czarist Alaska and part of the geographical jurisdiction of the Diocese of Irkutsk, a diocese well beyond the canonical territory of the Moscow Patriarchate, the continental problem begins. As a foot note as early as 1528 Orthodox had come to other parts of the continent; Don Theodoro with the Narváez expedition in Florida, Ioannis Fokas sailed up Pacific coast under Spanish flag in 1592… so the idea Russians was here first is another scapegoat.As the situation in North America grew further complicated and communities began to bring their own clergy from other homelands, for example The first Greek Orthodox community in the Americas was founded in 1864 in New Orleans under the Ecumenical Patriarchate. By 1900 Moscow recognizing the developing issue of jurisdictional claims to the New World began flexing her political power and unilaterally abrogated Canon law again with no concern for other jurisdictions on the continent and continued further un-canonically expansion with the change to the name of Aleutian Islands and Alaska to Aleutian Islands and ‘North America’ thus attempting to claim, in an expansionist ideology well beyond its canonical geographic and territorial boundaries an entire continent, a new anomaly for Orthodoxy.Confusion grew even further when the Ecumenical Patriarchate in 1908, temporarily transferred jurisdiction to the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece. This arrangement was maintained until 1918 and in 1917 Czarist Russia fell to the communists and the Moscow Patriarchate fell into turmoil. Creating yet another element into the mix.Anybody who claims the situation is as simple as “Moscow granted us autocephaly in 1970” so the conversation is over or tells the Holy Patriarchate of our Mother Churches “Hands off” is either delusion or ignorant to the facts which brought us to this current anomaly.We must pray for the Great Council and the holy mission which they will embark upon for only they can direct the future of this Holy Vessel.
[Translate]