However, what I’d prefer to address is the Oceania episcopal assembly – a concept that, based on previous experience, could perhaps best be described as ‘humourous’.

The Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Churches (http://orthodoxwiki.org/SCCOCA) was formed in 1979, and the rules were written so that the EP bishop would be the permanent president. I’m not sure what the real story is behind SCCOCA is… of course, neither is anyone else. Currently, the sum total activities are a SCCOCA-sponsored Divine Liturgy in Sydney in Bright Week, with one auxiliary GOA-Aus bishop and the ruling Serbian Orthodox bishop.

These two jurisdictions (GOA-Aus and Serbian Orthodox Dioceses) are also the sum total of SCCOCA members – there are currently three other jurisdictions with bishops, and four that do not…

Seriously, check out the SCCOCA article on OWiki. http://orthodoxwiki.org/SCCOCA

Now the conservative Anglicans in North America have not created an Anglican version of SCOBA, but they’ve actually re-constituted themselves into a single province. Now, they still have a jurisdictional mess to sort out over time. BUT – they are constitutionally and doctrinally united, and in addition, have a single archbishop – which is a huge step toward jurisdictional coherence.

The Orthodox in America need to solve this problem. Not a council of men thousands of miles away. Lord have mercy.

The GOA is alot like Boromir and SCOBA has a steward but no lawful chairman.

Search “Council of Elrond Extended Edition” on youtube if you want to check out the clip.

Is is too much to ask to follow the constitution?

Has the rotating presidency ever been used?

And who appoints the General Secretary of SCOBA anyway?

Liberate SCOBA, restore law and order and save American Orthodoxy I say!

The SCOBA Constitution reads

(b) Structure.

1.Presiding Hierarch. The Office of Presiding Hierarch shall pass in turn annually to the presiding hierarchs of the member jurisdictions in order of their precedence in the Church.
2.The Presiding Hierarch shall preside at all meetings.
3.The conference shall elect a Vice-Chairman, who in the absence of the Presiding Hierarch, shall preside at meetings.

Now this is a nice idea, taking turns and being conciliar but in reality we have something different. We have a SCOBA dominated by the EP that is not following its own constitution.

If this is how the EP functions now with a blatant disregard for the order of SCOBA how can we trust any new iniative in the USA.

We have seen how SCOBA works under the GOA primate has head all these years.

How about a change?

Whatever happens in America, ROCOR and the MP parishes will always remain tied to the Moscow Patriarchate, probably in the form of a Moscow Exarchate. The Russian Churches will never agree to be “adminstered” by outside parties.

SCOBA-like bodies are apparently a new thing in places outside of America, so the Orthodox in other countries are going to give it a shot. Here in America, we can redouble our efforts on the the things that the jurisdictions agree on: IOCC, OCMC, OCF, etc.

Given George’s insight into liberal versus conservative, It seems likely that SCOBA-like bodies will develop along those lines in the future in this country. Who would be included the Conservative SCOBA? The Liberal SCOBA?

I honestly don’t think that the majority of American bishops are going to show up for any more than one meeting. They’ll probably attend the first, but if they get a whiff of more of the same, I think it’ll just go away. As it is right now, I think SCOBA is pretty much dead in the water as well. and for much the same reasons.

Although this looks to be a giant step in the right direction, two caveats spring instantly to mind: 1. It’s SCOBA enlarged (thereby ineffectual), and 2. It’s unworkable, at least here in the US. The American bishops are going to want to meet more than once a year, there’s way too many problems in our society and they aren’t gonna want to subcontract them out to the old SCOBA. (I do like the idea of a bicameral synod though.)

Just as SCOBA has devolved into a massive waste of time, I don’t think there’s gonna be any takers for this in North America. In the other regions, yeah, but they’re working from the ground up and need all the help that they can get. These episcopal assemblies would work fine in Oceania or S America, but there’s too much history here in N America. Plus, the Russians have a special history in North America and they ain’t conceding that (nor should they).

There are other reasons that come to mind: 1. I don’t think the GOA bishops will go for it because their numbers would be overwhelmed. 2. The non-GOA/OCA bishops are waiting to see which way the wind blows. If they think that the American episcopal assembly is just another stop-gap to frustrate unity and ensure GOA hegemony then they’ll do one of two things: a. stay where they are, or b. start joining the OCA.

Of course, there’s the problem of Orthopraxy. The more conservative jurisdictions (Serbs, ROCOR) aren’t necessarily looking to hitch their wagon to an executive committee that’s dominated by liberals. And let’s be honest, although the Ukies and ACROD can’t be considered liberal, they know their place in the pecking order and have never challenged the EP/GOA as it continues its trek towards a more relaxed Orthopraxy. One can counter this by saying that they’ve kept their own rubrics intact but I’ve never heard them complain about the general worldly and liberal drift of the other SCOBA jurisdictions (including the AOCA).

Anyway, that’s my take. Chambesy is still a huge comedown for the EP and for that he deserves credit. If this was done in good faith and was guided by the Holy Spirit, then it will profit God’s Church. If it was simply another ingenious way to prevent the formation of new autocephalous churches, then it will fail.

I think these guys need a history lesson, and a vocabulary lesson, about what a diaspora is. We are being co-opted out of our own faith.

Why do they continue to use this term? The very use of this term does violence to the Great Commission, the history of the Christian Church, and to our identity as members of the Church of Christ. Christians do not ‘belong’ to any particular territory. Christians can not be in diaspora. Period.

This is a dangerous precedent, to be using this word ‘diaspora’ for missionary territories. It is not historically accurate, nor has it ever been used by Christians before. It betrays the ethno-centric identity of Orthodoxy in the vision of these hierarchs.

This means it is not Christo-centric. It does promulgate ‘ethnic identity,’ keeping the Church bound to a culture club vision and mission, and making sure their ecclesiastical identity is never, ever indigenous.

Now we see that the EP’s chosen representatives will be supervising the Episcopal Assemblies designed to promote and guard Orthodox unity?

Well, SCOBA has failed miserably in promoting and guarding Orthodox unity. We can thank the EP’s designated supervisors for that too. Is there some reason we should expect something more or better from a new SCOBA-type assembly?

My friends have a poignant way to describe this kind of accomplishment – epic failure.