www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Byzantine Titles and Terms

You might find some help on this page:

http://www.crosslink.net/~hrycak/vestment.html

Dear Fr. Joe, that is interesting. I have not previously heard a distinction between archimandrite and mitered archimandrite before. At least historically on Athos or in Russia there was no distinction, and all archimandrites if officiating liturgically could wear the miter.

Your post goes to show that every jurisdiction, whether Greek Catholic or Orthodox, has its own spin on vesture related to honorific titles. And even within each jurisdiction there seems to be variations between eparchies. If it was all the same usage, it just wouldn't be Byzantine...

Thanks so much. I could guess some of those things, given the context, but mainly wanted to alert all to the phenomenon. It is hard to remember that familiar things may be complete mysteries to the uninitiated.
-dn

Daniel,

Thank you! A suggestion I was too timid (or proud) to make. As one of those former protestants, my head spins from the terminology sometimess. But I'm catching on.

Our Archemidrite was recently elevated to Exarch. What is an Exarch? None of the dictionary defintions make sense interms of the Melkite Church

Shlomo Lkhoolkhoon,
Also a mitred archpriest or archimandrite would be comparable to a Chor-Bishop in the Syriac Churches.

Poosh BaShlomo Lkhoolkhoon,
Yuhannon

Among the Melkites, one may distinguish between an "Exarch" who simply holds this honorific title but has no authority attached to that title, and an Exarch who actually governs an ecclesiastical circumscription in the capacity of Exarch. In the second case,the Exarch may be a bishop, or may be an Archimandrite. Governing Exarchs are either patriarchal (in which case the Exarch governs in the name of the Patriarch) or Apostolic (in which case the Exarch governs in the name of the Pope). Incognitus

Ron wrote:

"Our Archemidrite was recently elevated to Exarch. What is an Exarch? None of the dictionary definitions make sense in terms of the Melkite Church"

Ron,

You're talking about the conferral of the title of Patriarchal Exarch on Father Joe Haggar at the Melkite Convention this past summer.

Incognitus wrote:

"Among the Melkites, one may distinguish between an "Exarch" who simply holds this honorific title but has no authority attached to that title, and an Exarch who actually governs an ecclesiastical circumscription in the capacity of Exarch."

I'd agree with Incognitus' first sentence (above), but feel a need to clarify and expand on the latter ones in the spirit of the request that replies offer as much clarity as possible. As Incognitus says (in the case of Father Joe) "Patriarchal Exarch" is an honorific title conferred to show the esteem in which a priest is held because of his significant contributions to the Church. The title is conferred rarely and is a mark of great honor, which Father Joe rightly deserved, not only because of his courage and success in reviving the Convention, but the many responsibilities that he has assumed and carried out, both in the days of the U.S. Melkite jurisdiction as an Exarchate and since its elevation to an Eparchy.

Incognitus then wrote:

"In the second case,the Exarch may be a bishop, or may be an Archimandrite. Governing Exarchs are either patriarchal (in which case the Exarch governs in the name of the Patriarch) or Apostolic (in which case the Exarch governs in the name of the Pope)."

In my experience (except in one instance), Exarchs who have canonical jurisdiction are all of the order of Bishop. As Incognitus says, they are styled either "Patriarchal Exarch" or "Apostolic Exarch".

A Patriarchal Exarch who governs a canonical juridiction (an exarchate) does so in the name of the Patriarch, to whom he reports directly. The jurisdiction must be within the territory historically subject to the rule of the Patriarch. The jurisdiction is ordinarily one that is not so large in numbers of ecclesiatical institutions or faithful that it merits being designated as an eparchy (a diocese).

Apostolic Exarchs always govern a canonical jurisdiction (i.e., the title is never granted honorifically) and do so in the name of the Pope. Such jurisdictions (exarchates) are situated in the diaspora (outside the territory that is historically subject to the rule of the Patriarch). They are "exempt" jurisdictions, (i.e., directly subject to the Holy See). Jurisdictions in the diaspora are subject to the Patriarch only as to matters liturgical; they are subject to the Holy See in all other matters. Again, the jurisdiction is ordinarily one that is not sufficiently large in numbers of faithful or institutions to be elevated to an eparchy (diocese); frequently, designation of an exarchate is a step on the road to becoming an eparchy.

I don't know which Churches sui iuris, other than ours, grant the honorific title of Exarch. Both the Maronites and Syrians have Patriarchal Exarchs with jurisdictional authority and the Ukrainians have one Archepiscopal Exarch with jurisdictional authority. Most of the Churches sui iuris have one or more Apostolic Exarchs. In a few instances, an Apostolic Exarch is actually the presiding hierarch of a Church sui iuris (only the Byzantine Greek Catholic Church comes to mind immediately).

The sole instance, of which I am aware, of an Exarch who is an Archimandrite, rather than a Bishop, is that of the Abbott vere nullius dioecesis (subject to no diocese) of the Exarchic Abbey and Territorial Monastery sui iuris of Santa Maria di Grottaferrata [Italy] for Byzantine Italo-Greek Catholics. The abbey/monastery is a free-standing jurisdiction, subject to no diocese, as was often the case in earlier times; it is the only extant Eastern Catholic one of which I know.

That's probably more than you wanted to know, but ...

btw, if by "dictionary definitions" you were referring to the online Catholic Dictionary definition, you are right on the money. It is historically accurate, but makes little or no sense in terms of today's church.

Many years,

Neil

How does the title Canon fit in with Archpriests?
I recently saw A UGCC priest referred to As the Very Reverend Canon.

Unfortunately some words are nearly untranslatable (how do you say "eclair" in English? - for that matter, how do you say "borshch" in English?). This applies to certain honorifics.
"Vysokopreosviashchenyishyi" is an excellent example (this is a standard honorific for a bishop). Litterally it would mean "highly exalted and most super consecrated", which doesn't help much!
"Epitrachelion" - a particular vestment - literally means "the thing that goes around the neck". Well, so it does, but in English that's not altogether helpful.
Then, of course, the same person may have different titles. The Ecumenical Patriarch refers to himself as "Our Mediocrity", but I couldn't honestly advise addressing His Divine All-Holiness as "Your Mediocrity", tempting thought though that might be.
And so forth. By the way, this problem is by no means peculiar to the Christian East. In the Western Church, it is not unusual to find the form "Amplitudinis Tuae" used in addressing a bishop. Who would have the nerve to call a bishop "Your Amplitude"? We've all known one or two who might qualify, but nevertheless . . . !!!
Incognitus