|
0 members (),
722
guests, and
81
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,506
Posts417,454
Members6,150
| |
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 Likes: 6
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 Likes: 6 |
Bishop Basil was not guilty of disobeying Patriarch Alexei, another bishop, but of disobeying the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church, his lawful authority.
Alexandr
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
Bishop Basil was not guilty of disobeying Patriarch Alexei, another bishop, but of disobeying the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church, his lawful authority.
Alexandr But clearly it was the Patriarch who took action. Are you saying the Patriarch has now power to act apart from the direct authorization of the synod? Set aside the case of Bishop Basil then (because I do not want to argue the specifics of that case here), the Patriarch of Moscow exercising jurisdiction over any bishop outside of the diocese of Moscow...how is this not a violation of this principle? Gordo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
Bishop Basil was not guilty of disobeying Patriarch Alexei, another bishop, but of disobeying the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church, his lawful authority.
Alexandr But clearly it was the Patriarch who took action. Are you saying the Patriarch has now power to act apart from the direct authorization of the synod? Set aside the case of Bishop Basil then (because I do not want to argue the specifics of that case here), the Patriarch of Moscow exercising jurisdiction over any bishop outside of the diocese of Moscow...how is this not a violation of this principle? Gordo Gordo, If a Patriarch acts on his own then he is indeed violating canons. No patriarch individually has any authority over anyone else. "Patriarch" is only an honorary title and it entitles him to sit at the head of the synod. That uncanonical things happen in Orthodoxy does not mean that they represent the true teaching and practice of Orthodoxy. A Bishop (no matter his title) who tries to flex his muscle and command a brother bishop is acting uncanonically, even if he is successful and the Church tacitly complies. True Orthodox ecclesiology specifies that each Bishop is autonomous in his own Church and that only synods and councils have authority over individual Bishops. Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 Likes: 6
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 Likes: 6 |
The Patriarch is the Figurehead of the Russian Church, just as the Pope is the figurehead of the Roman Church. A patriarch is responsible to the Synod, the supreme hierarchal authority. Patriarch Nikon was even deposed by the Synod.
For example, Patriarch Alexei cannot override Metropolitan Vladimir of St Petersburg and the Ladoga in the affairs of St Peterburg and Lagoda. But the synod can override him if necessary.
In the case of Bishop Basil, +Alexei was the voice of the synod.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
Joe and Alexandr,
Then help me to understand the Estonian situation. If Estonia wants to be under the Patriarch of Constantinople, why should it then matter to Moscow since it is the internal affairs of the Church of Estonia and thus technically not within the purview of the Patriarch of Moscow?
Gordo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 Likes: 6
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 Likes: 6 |
Constantinople violated Orthodox rule of order and openly set up an autocephalous Church where a Church already existed, under Moscow.
Are you aware Gordo that there are now 2 Churches in Estonia, the canonical one under Moscow and the other under Constantinople. it would be like +Alexei starting a Church of Greece under Moscow.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
Alexandr probably knows more than me. I have no clue myself. Although I suspect that being "under" a patriarchate is really being under and within a particular synodical jurisdiction. It is not being under the Patriarch as if he were an authority over them. In my Church we are "under" the Patriarch of Antioch but we are not subject to the Patriarch of Antioch, but rather to the holy synod of Antioch. There is a big difference here. No patriarch has any authority other than to be the spokesman for the synod.
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,398 |
Constantinople violated Orthodox rule of order and openly set up an autocephalous Church where a Church already existed, under Moscow.
Are you aware Gordo that there are now 2 Churches in Estonia, the canonical one under Moscow and the other under Constantinople. it would be like +Alexei starting a Church of Greece under Moscow. This is exactly the problem we have in the United States. In the Atlanta area we have about 10 or so Orthodox Churches under at least 4 different jurisdictions. These are all Churches within 2 hours of one another. It is absurd. The last thing we need to do is to export this situation into Estonia and other countries. If anything we need to be doing the opposite and have only one pan-Orthodox jurisdiction for each country or territory. Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 Likes: 6
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 Likes: 6 |
Exactly. A Russian bishop would commemorate +Alexei, but would be responsible to the Holy Synod. As a Greek bishop in America would commemorate +Bartholemew, but be under the authority of his Holy synod. This concept of a bishop wielding authority over other bishops is a western concept.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 87
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 87 |
Constantinople violated Orthodox rule of order and openly set up an autocephalous Church where a Church already existed, under Moscow.
Are you aware Gordo that there are now 2 Churches in Estonia, the canonical one under Moscow and the other under Constantinople. it would be like +Alexei starting a Church of Greece under Moscow. why did the Church exist under Moscow?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 Likes: 6
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735 Likes: 6 |
The Church has existed there since the time of Ivan the Awesome in the 16th Century. Patriarch Alexei is himself an ethnic Estonian!
Alexandr
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 580
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 580 |
Bishop Hilarion neglects to mention in his interview posted previously that it is not only the P of C that does not recognise the autocephaly of the OCA but the rest of the Orthodox world outside of the MP. Here is the second part: ITV: What is the role of the "Petrine office" in Orthodox theology and practice?
ALFEYEV: We do not have any theology of the Petrine office on the level of the Universal Church. Our ecclesiology does not have room for such a concept. This is why the Orthodox Church has for centuries opposed the idea of the universal jurisdiction of any bishop, including the Bishop of Rome.
We recognize that there is a certain order in which the primates of the Local Churches should be mentioned. In this order the Bishop of Rome occupied the first place until 1054, and then the primacy of order in the Orthodox Church was shifted to the Patriarch of Constantinople, who until the schism had been the second in order. But we believe that all primates of
the Local Churches are equal to one another, and none of them has
jurisdiction over any other.
ITV: Did the week of discussion that continued without you yield anything interesting or useful?
ALFEYEV: I do not know to what conclusion the meeting came, since the document remains unpublished. Once it is published, the Moscow Patriarchate will study it.
ITV: Was there something you intended or planned to say at Ravenna?
ALFEYEV: My intention was to work hard in Ravenna both as a member of the Mixed Commission and as a member of its Drafting Committee. In the spring of this year, the Drafting Committee met in Rome, and we successfully resolved the problems that had been created during the plenary meeting of the Commission in Belgrade in 2006. I had every reason to believe that, if our
proposals were accepted in Ravenna, we would have moved forward and finished the document. Apparently, the document is now finished, but since I did not take part in the discussions I am not qualified to say whether its conclusions will be acceptable for my Church.
The absence of the Moscow Patriarchate from this stage of the work of the Mixed Commission, in my opinion, makes the whole work of the Commission problematic. I know that the Patriarchate of Constantinople does not share this opinion. Metropolitan John (Zizioulas) said very clearly to me in front of all other Orthodox delegates: �If one Orthodox Church leaves, the others
will continue the dialogue�. But the Moscow Patriarchate represents more than a half of world Orthodox Christianity. Without it, the Catholic-Orthodox dialogue will in fact be a dialogue of the Catholic Church with less than a half of the Orthodox Church.
I am aware that the Catholics regard the whole situation as an
�inter-Orthodox problem.� This is a comfortable position. I believe, however, that the situation should be a matter of concern also for our Catholic partners, if they want this dialogue to be truly legitimate and inclusive. Some common efforts should be made in order to avoid similar
situations in the future.
-
Last edited by Miller; 10/18/07 11:24 PM. Reason: did not notice previously posted
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,411 |
such a view is difficult to reconcile with the history of the Bishop of Rome vis-a-vis other Churches. History is a double edged sword.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 580
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 580 |
Patriarch Alexei is himself an ethnic Estonian! How can he be called an "ethnic" Estonian. He may have been born in Estonia and his family, of German origins, may have been there for a number of generations, but he is culturally Russian. We all know of the current conflict in Estonia between ethnic Estonians and ethnic Russians. There is a difference between ethnicity and citizenship in many countries, especially in Eastern Europe, that have a history of different cultural groups and ethnicities living side by side. For example, the Volks Deustch Germans throughout Eastern Rurope. There were mutlicultural empires with many cultural groups even before the present process of globalization.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
Constantinople violated Orthodox rule of order and openly set up an autocephalous Church where a Church already existed, under Moscow.
Are you aware Gordo that there are now 2 Churches in Estonia, the canonical one under Moscow and the other under Constantinople. it would be like +Alexei starting a Church of Greece under Moscow. Alexandr, I was not aware of that. I assumed that the Estonian Church left Moscow for Constantinople. Thank you for clarifying. God bless, Gordo
|
|
|
|
|
