The stack seems to have been heavily stacked in their favor. Why does the EP’s Albanian bishop (note, not Tirana’s) have a seat on SCOBA and it would seem would have one on the executive committee of Chambesy with 2 parishes, while the primate of the OCA Albanian episcopacy, Fan Noli’s successor over the Mother Church of Albanian autocephaly with dozens of parishes, does not and will not?
]]>The words of Ronald Reagan are echoing in my ears..
TRUST….but verify.
Best Regards,
Dean
I just (finally) had a chance to listen to Fr Mark’s interview. To be honest, while I’m attempting to retain an open mind, the rewriting of history and the arrogance it implies is astonishing to me.
I particularly liked his comment about “It’s easy to talk about Orthodox unity when you don’t have to do it,” implying that he, the GOA and SCOBA have been advocates of unity all along, but for the heavy lifting involved in the practical considerations.
I guess it’s even easier not to talk about Orthodox unity at all, which is the strategy that his jurisdiction has pursued, having prevented even the discussion of unity at more than one SCOBA meeting. Let’s not forget that the GOA has been the chairman of SCOBA throughout it’s 50 years.
That said, I’m attempting to digest his comments as objectively as possible – at the same time, not allowing nice words to erase years of antipathy (at best) or hostility (at worst) toward Orthodox unity by his jurisdiction on this continent.
It should be a compliment to this forum that this was the first place I came to, to read the opinions of others, as to their thinking about the interview. And, as usual, I was not disappointed. Nick, George and Isa…great comments all…very thought provoking as usual.
On the one hand, I suppose this may be a serious effort by the Old World patriarchates to address the problems of overlapping jurisdictions throughout the world…problems which I would add have been caused, or at least tolerated, due to a lack of leadership by the same Old World patriarchates.
On the other hand, one must be at least cautious about the possibility of deceit, duplicity and the self serving nature of these comments – coming as they do from groups (such as the GOA) which have done everything humanly possible to prevent the same unity they now claim to support.
There is clearly a lot to think about. We must pray about this – and not be swayed, for good or bad, by the lack of bona fides of the messenger.
Best Regards,
dean
all this jockeying for position is so sad. It makes evangelism very difficult. I pray that the Lord forgives our hierarchs and us laity for allowing this nonsense to continue.
]]>There is the MP. There is NO EP jurisdiction (not at least that he will admit), but there are several in category 3 (which I, and the rest of Orthodoxy call uncharitably “uncanonical”) who want to be in the EP’s jurisdiction to get away from Moscow. Several Ukrainian groups in the US became canonical (as far as the EP’s presence in the US is canonical) that route. The largest of number three is the “Kievan Patriarchate,” which rivals the MP in size and influence in Ukraine.
There is much dispute over the numbers: the MP has the largest number of actually church buildings etc, a fact not disputed.
This EP struck the late Archbishop of Athens from the diptychs 5 years ago for a similar infraction that he himself committed in Estonia 8 years before, for which the PoM Alexei of blessed memory (himself born, baptized ordained and consecrated Estonian) struck the EP’s name from the diptychs. As PoM Kyrill’s remarks in Kiev calling it Jerusalem for Moscow show, Ukraine isn’t Estonia.
]]>1. MP’s jurisdiction
2. EP’s jurisdiction
3. independent(?)
what are the populations of each? I understand that the MP’s jurisdiction is by far the largest, but I don’t know for sure.
]]>Hate to burst your bubble, but certain rumblings which ostensively have nothing to do with Chambesy might sink it: the UAOC has petitioned the EP to be joined to Constantinople with autonomy. The UAOC is in Ukraine, i.e. within the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Moscow.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,23093.msg352232/topicseen.html#msg352232
Rather than rejecting it outright, the EP’s Chief Secretary, our friend Arch. Elpidophoros Lambriniadis told the Ukrainian Press (not, as far as I can tell, the PoM or the Met. of Kiev, that the Holy Synod
http://www.risu.org.ua/eng/news/article;31319/
The Metropolitan of Kiev Volodymyr stated “The UAOC has practically no chances – during Patriarch Bartholomew’s visit to Kyiv he clearly made it understood that he will only converse with a canonical Church, thus with us.” Read: take this up, and you will pay.
This is enough for the Patriarch of Moscow to hold a synod, officially declare the UAOC schismatic and force the EP’s resignation.
As EP Sophronios III found out, such uncanonical actions can cost you.
Needless to say, any nominal support of the PoM for Chambesy will be the first causualty.
]]>I really liked your essay, very erudite and thought-provoking. My own ruminations regarding IV Chambesy will hopefully be posted soon. People can make their own decisions. However, I don’t intend to say that mine own upcoming essay will be the last word on the subject. If anything, I caution us from being too hasty in accepting anything. We’re big boys and we’ve started churches here and building programs without an ounce of help from the Old World.
Having said that, there is no reason why we have to wait with baited breath for a perhaps chimerical episcopal synod, or an even more fanciful “Great and Holy Synod.” Why not go ahead and meet now? But wait, we did that already, at Ligonier in 1994 and had our hats handed to us. Then again in 2006, at a specially convened episcopal assembly in which any talk of unity was embargoed. How demeaning for our bishops to accede to such a demand. If anything, it showed that they acted like a bunch of castrati unworthy of the title “bishop.”
There are so many other things we can do without having to wait for approval from the Old World. The “clearing house” for all priests that Arey proposed can be set up immediately. That’s just a start. The question is: why not already?
One reason said clearing house doesn’t exist is because of cases like Fr Daniel Byantaro who was defrocked unjustly by the Phanar because he blew the whistle on the Greek metropolitan of Hong Kong. Had such a clearing house existed, he’d still be a layman. Instead, he was accepted by the MP into ROCOR, safe from the clutches of the GOA.
(This of course leads us into perilous territory [or at least myself]: do we really want administrative unity, especially if one or more of the constituent jurisdictions are themselves corrupt?)
Arey of course is sincere when he says that the episcopal assembly will have to deal with matters of real estate, endowments, pension plans, etc. The question is not whether Arey is sincere but whether his superiours are. And he says we have Orthodox attorneys, to which I concur. But let’s be honest with ourselves, one reason the OCA didn’t pursue unification with Antioch in the recent (pre-Jonah) past was because the financial skeletons would have come hurtling out of the closet. (They did anyway.) The OCA wasn’t the only ones with their hands dirty. Philip and his gang of merry men tried their dead level best to put the kibosh on hiring an auditor for the AOCNA. So far they’ve succeeded but it may blow up in Troy, Michigan. And we still don’t know the true financial health of the GOA with the five recent pedophile scandals and the multi-million dollar payouts. (Also the “$24 million in pledges” to the Endowment for Orthodoxy and Hellenism raises more than a few eyebrows. I’ve been involved in church fundraising and I know the difference between a “pledge” and cash on hand.)
Forgive for going off on a tangent, but we must be very realistic about our prospects and about the good faith of our hierarchs. And the money men behind them. I still have this sinking feeling in my gut that the real purpose for any episcopal assembly will be to covertly frustrate real unity and most definately, autocephaly.
]]>https://www.trustedpartner.com/docs/library/000139/Katich%20-%20IV%20Chambesy.pdf
]]>The low point may have been Pope Christopher’s banning of Arabic in the 50’s. (btw, are friend Meletios is reported to have spoken Arabic)
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1088&dat=19501124&id=CXwMAAAAIBAJ&sjid=f2UDAAAAIBAJ&pg=1611,2259129
Pope Nicholas VI had an Arab vicarate and an Arab bishop in Tanta (or was it Mansura). He had ordered that all DL, in Greek or Arab Churches be half in each language. Btw, HDH had an exarchate in the New World at the time, targeted to African Americans. Under Pope Parthenios III, there was a noticible Arabization in some places: some Churches had the entire DL in Arabic. The situation was something like the non-Greeks under in the EP’s North American exarchate. The Patriarchate used to have an Arabic version of its website, up unto this year. Some work is done in Arabic, e.g.
http://www.orthodox-mitropolitan-of-antinoes-panteleimon.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54%3Avisit-to-egypt&catid=36%3Anews&Itemid=57&lang=en
I get the impression all is not well as it may have been before. Hasn’t sunk to the level of Jerusalem, though. Were are your African Orthodox from, and what do they say? I’ve heard some good things about the missions, but that was under Pope Peter VII.
In Jerusalem, the old Patriarchal school was opened to the Palestinians when the Greek students from Greece dried up from the Infifadah. Instead of switching to Arabic, they made them learn Greek, and modern Greek at that (so no “language of the NT” excuse). I was befriended by a number of the monks, who knew I was Arab (though I don’t “look” it), and I was suprised to find out that the bishops actually could conduct a conversation in Arabic. But I was an international Arab, and not a local. There had been an Arab bishop (of Tabor?), but more a token. There were about 500 Greeks from Greece or Cyprus who lived there, and they were like Americans abroad: totally fixed on what was going on back home, not aware of anything going on next door. They seemed quite fine with the idea of it become a museum for pilgrims. The Arab Orthodox were doing well in Jordan, but I was told that the Crown Prince (who, as it turned out, didn’t succeed his brother) took a liking to them. In general, the situation of the Christians in Jordan is better then elsewhere in the neighborhood.
Constantinople, well, it can be depressing. And it is not just being a minority: I went to Antioch and it was a totally different feeling (although they too feared for their future). There are Turks who convert, but they say that there is some suspicion from the Greeks towards them, which can be understandable. Once the Russians take over, perhaps Greeks buying summer homes can repopulate it.
Jerusalem and Constantinople definitely have not gotten that the Ottoman empire is gone, and moving the absentee Phanariot to Jerusalem doesn’t change much. Alexandria could do more, but at least it’s not (at least wasn’t when I was in Egypt) strangling the Church.
The point I make is that Alexandria, Jerusalem and the CoG all expanded their juridictions in defiance to the EP, even into the New World. If they don’t follow Meletios’ interpretation of canon 28 (and his expansion of his title as Pope of Alexandria and All Africa, without the EP’s OK shows he dropped it as he dropped the 1908 Tomos), why should we?
]]>I’d like to try another tack however, one that is seemingly ingonred by the phanariotes: since the EP zealots like to talk about all the churches that don’t recognize the OCA, let’s examine the legitimacy of some of these Greek-dominated churches.
First of all, let’s give the Church of Greece a pass –it really is made up of Greek Christians.
As for the C’pole, it’s a dying diocese. Truth be told, the Russians in Istanbul outnumber the native Greeks by at least 5 to 1. Unlike the Arabs, they’ll take over, until then, nada moral authority.
Alexandria: Greek-dominated but almost as small as C’pole. How many of that patriarchate are Egyptian and/or Arab Christian? I honestly don’t know. I fear it’s just another Greek colony in a foreign land. By Greeks, for Greeks. I’d love to be proven wrong, but I actually know some African Orthodox and what they tell me ain’t pretty.
Jerusalem: Greek-dominated but 98% Arab with few Arab priests, and NO Arab bisops. (I may be wrong, but I believe that the Israelis forced the previous patriarch to consecrate an Arab priest as bishop. If true, how pathetic is that? The Israelis forcing the Greeks to appoint an Arab as bishop.) Also, because it’s caught in the tug of war between Israel and the Palestinians, withering on vine as we speak. Anyway, the indiginous Arabs are definately second class.
Cyprus: like the CofG. Made up of Greeks, give them a pass.
So, when the Phanariotes like to talk up “all the churches” that don’t recognize the OCA, three of the most venerable (C’pole, Alexandira, Jerusalem) are basically old boys clubs that have astonishingly little moral authority, as can can be gleaned by their treatment of the majority of their flocks.
]]>