OrthodoxChristianity.net

General Forums => Christian News => Topic started by: Basil 320 on May 10, 2011, 12:59:28 AM

Title: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on May 10, 2011, 12:59:28 AM
Does anyone have any information or a basis for speculation as to who will succeed Metropolitan Nicholas, of blessed memory?  A friend who is in ACROD told me there is no obvious candidate of whom he is aware.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on May 10, 2011, 04:38:01 AM
No information from the several priests with whom I have spoken (and they ARE going to have to make the decision, after all). Speculation is, well, just that -speculation (something I'd rather avoid).
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on May 10, 2011, 10:01:59 AM
No information from the several priests with whom I have spoken (and they ARE going to have to make the decision, after all). Speculation is, well, just that -speculation (something I'd rather avoid).

Indeed, speculation is just that. I will try to post information on that when it is released by the Chancery Office as I will likely hear of it before it hits the official diocesan website.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: arimethea on May 10, 2011, 10:22:25 AM
Are there any internal candidates? It would seem to those of us on the outside of ACROD that they would need to go outside to find a candidate.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on May 10, 2011, 10:50:30 AM
Christos anesti!
Are there any internal candidates? It would seem to those of us on the outside of ACROD that they would need to go outside to find a candidate.
I don't know why. Didn't the OCA just consecrate someone from ACROD as the new bishop of Chicago (Many Years!)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on May 10, 2011, 12:16:16 PM
Yes, ialmisry, the OCA's new Bishop of Chicago was from ACROD, likewise the OCA's Bishop of New York had been released to the OCA from ACROD.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: admiralnick on May 10, 2011, 12:21:06 PM
Most likely they'll go to the Ukrainians to get a Bishop like they did with Nicholas (He was in the Ukrainian Church when the See became vacant). The Internal Candidates in ACROD are few and far between and to my knowledge there are few that are under 60.

-Nick
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on May 10, 2011, 12:32:51 PM
Yes, but Metropolitan Nicholas had been in ACROD his entire life, prior to his elevation to the episcopacy and his election to the throne of the UOC of America, a short period of time before  ACROD Bishop John's untimely passing, which caught most everyone by surprise.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on May 10, 2011, 07:58:46 PM
Would the Diocese be open to a non-Ruthenian/Carpatho-Russyn bishop? Does it have any say in the selection process?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Fr. George on May 10, 2011, 08:42:53 PM
Would the Diocese be open to a non-Ruthenian/Carpatho-Russyn bishop? Does it have any say in the selection process?

IIRC they have the most important voice in the selection process; they forward their choice to Constantinople for ratification by the Patriarchal Synod.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on May 10, 2011, 08:47:24 PM
Wonderful! I wasn't sure given how things seem to work in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on May 11, 2011, 08:38:46 AM
Wonderful! I wasn't sure given how things seem to work in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.

It is a common misunderstanding and for some a deliberate misstatement, that the Carpatho-Russian and the two canonical Ukrainian Orthodox jurisdictions in North America are 'in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.' None of us are either structurally or legally part of the Archdiocese. As a matter of general practice we do not commemorate the Archbishop of America. At the present time given our vacant position, he is our Locum Tenens and is being commemorated, however upon the enthronement of a new Bishop,that will no longer be the case.

The three jurisdictions in question, ACROD, the UOCUSA and UOCC, are under the omophor of the ecumenical throne and operate, for lack of a better word (and this is not being used in any canonical reference) autonomously. Bishops are chosen pursuant to the by-laws governing each of these jurisdictions and the choice is forwarded to the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarch for approval. To my knowledge, limited to ACROD, the Synod has never rejected any of the choices submitted since its founding in 1938.


Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on May 11, 2011, 10:00:51 AM
But doesn't ACROD communicate to the Ecumenical Patriarch, technically, through the GO Archbishop of America; isn't its Holy Chrism received from the GO Archbishop of America?  Perhaps due to his personal relationship with Patriarch Bartholomew (and His Holiness' micromanaging style), Metropolitan Nicholas communicated with the Ecumenical Patriarch directly, but I think, although he enjoys "ruling bishop's" authority within ACROD, and the ACROD constitution establishes its relative autonomy (again, not using this term under it's Orthodox ecclesial definition), the ACROD hierarch is an auxiliary bishop to the GO Archbishop of America, just like all the GOAA bishops were between 1930 and 1978.  I'd guess that Bishop John and Metropolitan Orestes communicated with the Ecumenical Throne through Archbishop Iakovos.  Note the title of the sees of their hierarchs, i.e. +Nicholas' was Amissos, (not Johnstown), probably an inactivated see of the Ecumenical Throne.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on May 11, 2011, 10:22:49 AM
Christos anesti!
But doesn't ACROD communicate to the Ecumenical Patriarch, technically, through the GO Archbishop of America; isn't its Holy Chrism received from the GO Archbishop of America?  Perhaps due to his personal relationship with Patriarch Bartholomew (and His Holiness' micromanaging style), Metropolitan Nicholas communicated with the Ecumenical Patriarch directly, but I think, although he enjoys "ruling bishop's" authority within ACROD, and the ACROD constitution establishes its relative autonomy (again, not using this term under it's Orthodox ecclesial definition), the ACROD hierarch is an auxiliary bishop to the GO Archbishop of America, just like all the GOAA bishops were between 1930 and 1978.  I'd guess that Bishop John and Metropolitan Orestes communicated with the Ecumenical Throne through Archbishop Iakovos.  Note the title of the sees of their hierarchs, i.e. +Nicholas' was Amissos, (not Johnstown), probably an inactivated see of the Ecumenical Throne.
Ah, therein less the rub.  IIRC, Abp. Demetrios is also the exarch for the US (North America?)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: admiralnick on May 11, 2011, 10:24:19 AM
Wonderful! I wasn't sure given how things seem to work in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.

It is a common misunderstanding and for some a deliberate misstatement, that the Carpatho-Russian and the two canonical Ukrainian Orthodox jurisdictions in North America are 'in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.' None of us are either structurally or legally part of the Archdiocese. As a matter of general practice we do not commemorate the Archbishop of America. At the present time given our vacant position, he is our Locum Tenens and is being commemorated, however upon the enthronement of a new Bishop,that will no longer be the case.

The three jurisdictions in question, ACROD, the UOCUSA and UOCC, are under the omophor of the ecumenical throne and operate, for lack of a better word (and this is not being used in any canonical reference) autonomously. Bishops are chosen pursuant to the by-laws governing each of these jurisdictions and the choice is forwarded to the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarch for approval. To my knowledge, limited to ACROD, the Synod has never rejected any of the choices submitted since its founding in 1938.





So that's why Metropolitan Nicholas went on so many trips to represent the Ecumenical Patriarch. Got it.....

-Nick
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on May 11, 2011, 10:59:18 AM
Within the world of Byzantium, there is reality, and there is perceived reality. This is not limited to the vicinity of the Phanar and the Ecumenical Throne but is pervasive across Orthodoxy.

The reality from within ACROD, at least from its founding in 1938 through the recent death of +Metropolitan Nicholas, is that we are a 'self-ruling' entity with no interference from the Phanar in our daily affairs. The only time I can remember the EP and his Exarch stepping in was when the late Bishop John presumed to make chrism during Holy Week. That only happened once and would not happen again.

I suspect that the perceived reality from the point of view of some within the OCA is that ACROD is not really self-ruling. (Certainly that is the argument that the UOC-KP factions advance against the UOC-USA.) On the other hand, the perceived reality from the point of view of the Phanar is to tread carefully lest the 'natives' get restless and attempt to move, probably towards the OCA or be unduly influenced by Moscow. (Certainly the recent enthronements of Bishops Michael and Matthias by the OCA would add 'fuel' to that perception, yet within our reality (that of ACROD) these acts are not viewed that way.)

Yes, Metropolitan Nicholas had a special bond of friendship with His All Holiness and he did act as his emissary on a number of occasions over the years. He had a particular role to play in relations with the Orthodox Church of the Czech and Slovak lands and with the Greek Catholics in Slovakia, Transcarpathia and the United States. So be it and so what - Bishops have various roles to fulfill in their mission to the Church.

I was at the Divine Liturgy in Perth Amboy, New Jersey at the late Metropolitan's home parish where His Eminence, Archbishop Demetrios celebrated the Liturgy in his capacity as locum tenens to commemorate the 40th day. It should be noted that the pastor, Fr. Michael Rosco noted that this marked the first and only time that any of the Greek Archbishops of New York had ever celebrated liturgy in one of our Churches during its entire seventy three years of existence. (Of course, the various  Archbishops have participated in liturgical events such as enthronements, consecrations and funerals over the years, but not as celebrant.)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on May 11, 2011, 11:21:54 AM
I remember seeing Archbishop Demetrios (or possibly Archbishop Spyridon?) referred to as 'Exarch of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.' I'm glad this hasn't been turned into an actual jurisdiction over the ACROD, the UOCC, or the UOCUSA (beyond being a locum tenens and/or installing new primates).
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on May 11, 2011, 11:24:02 AM
I remember seeing Archbishop Demetrios (or possibly Archbishop Spyridon?) referred to as 'Exarch of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.' I'm glad this hasn't been turned into an actual jurisdiction over the ACROD, the UOCC, or the UOCUSA (beyond being a locum tenens and/or installing new primates).

I should note that he was very precise in his language regarding the Diocese and the vacancy during his homily so as not to fuel any conspiracy minded folks.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: AMM on May 11, 2011, 11:58:17 AM
I think many jurisdictions are going to be in scramble mode when looking for candidates given how few (at least as far as I can tell) monastics or unmarried and/or widowed priests there are around as potential candidates.  I think it's unfortunate that one of the main criteria may be whether the candidate is unmarried, as opposed to being a potential successful leader, but it is what it is.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ICXCNIKA on May 11, 2011, 12:41:14 PM
I have a question that perhaps you can answer since you seem to be a long time and active member of the Carpatho Rusyn Diocese. There has been talk among the Ruthenians (at least among the ones in Europe) to join the UGCC and form one jurisdiction. Has there ever been any discussions or desire to join the UOC-USA? Or are there significant differences whereby the Rusyns would lose their identity?

Wonderful! I wasn't sure given how things seem to work in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.

It is a common misunderstanding and for some a deliberate misstatement, that the Carpatho-Russian and the two canonical Ukrainian Orthodox jurisdictions in North America are 'in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.' None of us are either structurally or legally part of the Archdiocese. As a matter of general practice we do not commemorate the Archbishop of America. At the present time given our vacant position, he is our Locum Tenens and is being commemorated, however upon the enthronement of a new Bishop,that will no longer be the case.

The three jurisdictions in question, ACROD, the UOCUSA and UOCC, are under the omophor of the ecumenical throne and operate, for lack of a better word (and this is not being used in any canonical reference) autonomously. Bishops are chosen pursuant to the by-laws governing each of these jurisdictions and the choice is forwarded to the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarch for approval. To my knowledge, limited to ACROD, the Synod has never rejected any of the choices submitted since its founding in 1938.



Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Fr. George on May 11, 2011, 01:11:38 PM
I remember seeing Archbishop Demetrios (or possibly Archbishop Spyridon?) referred to as 'Exarch of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.' I'm glad this hasn't been turned into an actual jurisdiction over the ACROD, the UOCC, or the UOCUSA (beyond being a locum tenens and/or installing new primates).

It was never intended to be an extension of actual jurisdiction, merely a title indicating that The Archbishop of America is a representative of the Ecumenical Patriarchate (EP + Synod) in the Western Hemisphere (incl. oceans/islands).  If the Patriarchate, for example, wanted a representative at an event (say, the funeral for His Eminence NICHOLAS of blessed memory), then the Archbishop of America would be "it."
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on May 11, 2011, 02:30:26 PM
I have a question that perhaps you can answer since you seem to be a long time and active member of the Carpatho Rusyn Diocese. There has been talk among the Ruthenians (at least among the ones in Europe) to join the UGCC and form one jurisdiction. Has there ever been any discussions or desire to join the UOC-USA? Or are there significant differences whereby the Rusyns would lose their identity?

Wonderful! I wasn't sure given how things seem to work in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.

It is a common misunderstanding and for some a deliberate misstatement, that the Carpatho-Russian and the two canonical Ukrainian Orthodox jurisdictions in North America are 'in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.' None of us are either structurally or legally part of the Archdiocese. As a matter of general practice we do not commemorate the Archbishop of America. At the present time given our vacant position, he is our Locum Tenens and is being commemorated, however upon the enthronement of a new Bishop,that will no longer be the case.

The three jurisdictions in question, ACROD, the UOCUSA and UOCC, are under the omophor of the ecumenical throne and operate, for lack of a better word (and this is not being used in any canonical reference) autonomously. Bishops are chosen pursuant to the by-laws governing each of these jurisdictions and the choice is forwarded to the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarch for approval. To my knowledge, limited to ACROD, the Synod has never rejected any of the choices submitted since its founding in 1938.




There are differences in chant and Rusyns have historically lacked a sense of cultural kinship with Ukraine. To the outside observer the differences may appear subtle, but nothing regarding Church and culture is always what it seems!

As you move from what is now eastern Slovakia into Transcarpathian Ukraine the Rusyns gradually give way to the western Ukrainians who are predominantly Greek Catholic. The Greek Catholics around the Slovak border and the cities of Uzhorod and Muchachevo are within the historic boundaries of the Greek Catholic Eparchy of Munkacs/Muchachevo which is a designated as a 'sui juris' church by Rome. They are not part of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Synod based in L'vov with pretensions upon Kiev. It is my understanding that this is a source of irritation to some Ukrainian nationalists who do not recognize the Rusyns as a separate group. Rusyns in Slovakia would have no desire to join the UGCC as they have their own 'sui juris' church with their own episcopacy.

The Orthodox Rusyns of Slovakia have their own parallel dioceses to those of the Greek Catholics and to my memory all of the Bishops of the Orthodox Church of the Czech and Slovak lands are at least partially Rusyn in ethnic background. The Orthodox were influenced by the presence of the White Russians who relocated to Ladimirova in Slovakia following the Revolution and remained there until Czechoslovakia came under Soviet domination. The late Metropolitan Laurus of ROCOR was born in Ladimirova and was of Rusyn heritage.

In Transcarpathia, the Orthodox Rusyns do not have their own Bishop as they were made part of the Russian Church following the USSR's annexation of Transcarpathia following World War II. They have a large presence in the Uzhorod area and the leading Orthodox Rusyn priest, Father Dymytry Sydor, is a 'thorn' in the side of the local Ukrainian authorities - most of whom are sympathetic to the UGCC or the UOC-KP. The Rusyns are aligned there with the UOC-MP. To those of you who have been to Uzhorod, you may have seen the massive Orthodox Church in the City constructed during the 1990's and yet unfinished in the upper church. This is the Cathedral Church of the Exhaltation of the Holy Cross built through  Fr. Dymytry's vision and will power. I believe it is intended to be the second or third largest Orthodox Church of the MP when completed.

As to the United States, ACROD and UOC-USA and Canada are on very friendly terms both on the hierarchical, clerical and lay side of things. Bishop Daniel of Toronto shares both Ukrainian and Rusyn heritage as did the late Archbishop Vsevelod. However, I do not see the possibility of there being any desire on either part to formalize things outside of the overall potential for change in our American Church per se.

A more detailed summary may be found here:  http://www.simkovich.org/religion.htm

Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on May 11, 2011, 02:59:58 PM
There are two hierarchs of the UOC-MP in Transcarpathia - are neither of them of Rusyn heritage?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on May 11, 2011, 03:01:03 PM
I think the UOC-KP has a bishop in Transcarpathia as well, but I'm assuming he's ethnically Ukrainian...
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on May 11, 2011, 03:06:03 PM
There are two hierarchs of the UOC-MP in Transcarpathia - are neither of them of Rusyn heritage?

I don't think so, but I will check this Sunday with one of our parishioners who is a good friend of Fr. Dymyti.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on May 11, 2011, 03:06:41 PM
Coolness! :-)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ICXCNIKA on May 11, 2011, 07:39:24 PM
podkarpatska,

Thank you for your very informative response. I will look at the website as well.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on May 11, 2011, 07:55:27 PM
I just found the biographies on the Moscow Patriarchate's website - Archbishop Mark of Khust (who used to serve in the patriarchal exarchate in Canada) was born in Transcarpathia and Archbishop Theodore of Mukachevo was born in Galicia.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Irish Melkite on May 12, 2011, 05:44:55 AM
I have a question that perhaps you can answer since you seem to be a long time and active member of the Carpatho Rusyn Diocese. There has been talk among the Ruthenians (at least among the ones in Europe) to join the UGCC and form one jurisdiction.

Although tangential to the main topic, I'd agree with my friend and brother, podkarpatska, that there is no interest among the Ruthenians of the Eparchy of Muchachevo to become one with the UGCC. If there is interest in such, it runs the other way, i.e., there are undoubtedly those within the UGCC who would like to absorb the Ruthenian jurisdiction into the larger sister Church.

Muchachevo sits as an observer at the UGCC Synod (and is annotated as such in minutes, etc) and while there are assuredly matters of common interest and concern that are jointly addressed, that is the extent of it.

Many years,

Neil
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Orest on May 12, 2011, 10:47:34 AM
Archbishop Mark of Khust was in Canada and came to one of our UOCC banquets for a celebration in Winnipeg.  Can't remember the occasion but he spoke in fluent Ukrainian and got along with the Orthodox in Canada.
Who is Bishop Daniel of Toronto?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on May 12, 2011, 10:54:22 AM
Archbishop Mark of Khust was in Canada and came to one of our UOCC banquets for a celebration in Winnipeg.  Can't remember the occasion but he spoke in fluent Ukrainian and got along with the Orthodox in Canada.
Who is Bishop Daniel of Toronto?

Me bad, Bishop Daniel is in Chicago!  I meant  Bishop Andriy (Peshko) who is the acting Bishop of the Eastern Eparchy of the UOCC. Please accept my apologies, my fingers were faster than my brain!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on June 14, 2011, 03:25:20 PM
Is anyone aware of any developments as to who might be nominated as Metropolitan Nicholas' successor?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 14, 2011, 03:35:30 PM
Is Bishop Andriy not officially Bishop of Toronto to give the eparchy time to adjust to him or does the Ecumenical Patriarchate have an issue with his move from Western Europe to Canada?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: John of the North on June 14, 2011, 03:46:15 PM
Is Bishop Andriy not officially Bishop of Toronto to give the eparchy time to adjust to him or does the Ecumenical Patriarchate have an issue with his move from Western Europe to Canada?

Bishop Andriy has yet to be enthroned as Bishop for the Eastern Eparchy, but he has been chosen as the Eparchy's next hierarch.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 14, 2011, 03:48:21 PM
Apparently he has, but why hasn't the Holy Synod of the Church of Constantinople at least recognized his election as auxiliary Bishop of Saskatoon by the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: John of the North on June 14, 2011, 03:55:57 PM
Apparently he has, but why hasn't the Holy Synod of the Church of Constantinople at least recognized his election as auxiliary Bishop of Saskatoon by the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada?

I'm confused. How do you know they didn't recognise his election to Saskatoon??
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 14, 2011, 04:34:37 PM
There's been no news of it since then - God knows in this day and age it would have been posted somewhere :-). As it is, everything available (that I can find anyway) says his election as Bishop of Saskatoon is still pending the Holy Synod's approval although he's already moved :-).
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Fr. George on June 14, 2011, 10:01:01 PM
the ACROD hierarch is an auxiliary bishop to the GO Archbishop of America, just like all the GOAA bishops were between 1930 and 1978.

I'm sorry I missed this earlier.  No, the ACROD hierarch is not an auxiliary bishop to the Archbishop; he is (was) a ruling bishop who happened to have as a see a city in Asia.  The Archbishop has/had no direct ecclesiastical authority over him, and only acted in relation to him as a brother hierarch or, when the occasion called for it, as the local exarch of the Patriarchate.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: JamesRottnek on June 14, 2011, 10:41:39 PM
That is, then, the same setup as the Metropolises, right?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on June 15, 2011, 03:50:32 AM
For many years, but not in recent years, the GOAA Yearbook used to print the following language, in fine print, on the page that listed the SCOBA member ecclesiastical jurisdictions.

"Our relationship to the Ukrainian Orthodox Diocese and to the Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese (see above) differs slightly to that which we have with other jurisdictions.  In both cases, since each were established by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, our Archdiocese, as Exarchate of the Ecumenical Patriarchate is entrusted with the direct spiritual supervision of their diocese.  This means that when they relate to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, for reception of Holy Chrism or the election of a new bishop, this must be submitted to the Archbishop, who in turn after reviewing the matter transmits it to the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate for action.  In all other matters these two dioceses function totally independent of this Archdiocese.

In addition, the Albanian Orthodox Diocese and the Byelorussian Orthodox Diocese are also under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.  Each of these diocese is headed by a vicar priest who is directly responsible to the Archbishop."
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 15, 2011, 04:16:13 AM
The Belarusian Orthodox parishes are completely with the Belarusian Autocephalous Orthodox Church now, aren't they?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on June 15, 2011, 07:57:50 AM
The Belarusian Orthodox parishes are completely with the Belarusian Autocephalous Orthodox Church now, aren't they?

There are a few within ACROD.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 15, 2011, 08:46:20 AM
That is, then, the same setup as the Metropolises, right?

Excepting that the Ruling Bishop of ACROD is not the Bishop of Johnstown, PA just as Metropolitan Constantine of the UOCUSA is not the Bishop of Bound Brook, NJ. Also, these two jurisdictions have their own internal by-laws and regulations and are not subject to the Archdiocesan regulations which have been the subject of some discussion here recently.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: username! on June 15, 2011, 09:29:20 AM
Rusyns are Ukrainians.  That's my new bumpersticker, or at least Rusyn is a term/idea invented by second generation children of immigrant Ukrainian parents from Galicia.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Schultz on June 15, 2011, 09:43:35 AM
Rusyns are Ukrainians.  That's my new bumpersticker, or at least Rusyn is a term/idea invented by second generation children of immigrant Ukrainian parents from Galicia.

And here we go again... ;)

The Lemko-Rusyn Republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemko-Rusyn_Republic), founded at the end of WWI.

Kind of ruins your argmument that Rusyn is an immigrant idea, doesn't it?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 15, 2011, 11:08:46 AM
Rusyns are Ukrainians.  That's my new bumpersticker, or at least Rusyn is a term/idea invented by second generation children of immigrant Ukrainian parents from Galicia.

And here we go again... ;)

The Lemko-Rusyn Republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemko-Rusyn_Republic), founded at the end of WWI.

Kind of ruins your argmument that Rusyn is an immigrant idea, doesn't it?

Here is my story and I am sticking to it. First of all I feel the closest affinity to my Ukrainian brothers and sisters. They share many of the same folk customs and religious pieties that my ancestors brought with them to the United States. In many ways, the language spoken by the western Ukrainians, the Galicians, the Lemkos, the Rusyns, the peoples of Maramarosh (now in Romania and Ukraine)  and Voivodina ( in Northern Serbia) are dialectical variations of what is now known as Ukrainian. However....Rusyns are distinct from Ukrainians. An American analogy is that all of the native American tribes of the Iroquois  were 'similar' and probably came from the same root, but a Seneca still knows to this day that he or she is not a Cayuga or Onondaga.

Sigh: It depends upon when you or your ancestors immigrated to the new world as borders changed radically during the lifetime of persons born between say, 1870 and 1944 and again following 1991.

If you can follow this, you are a better person than me, but here it goes:

My grandparents, as well as my wife's maternal grandmother and paternal granparents, were born in the former Austria-Hungary, all in areas which became part of the cobbled together land formerly known as Czechoslovakia following WW I. Her maternal grandfather came from a village on the north ridge of the Dukla Pass in what is now Poland and was 'Galician' and came here prior to WW I.

He settled in NE PA and was a founder of the Metropolia church in Frackville, PA which came into existence because>>>>>the people there didn't feel at home in the Ukrainian Greek Catholic parishes which pre-existed them in Shenandoah and Frackville. (the parish in Frackville was Metropolia because no Greek Catholic priest was available and the priests who served were affiliated with the Russian mission church and were followers of St. Alexis. No Ukrainian minded folks there.)

Ironically, all of her paternal grandfather's family, but for him, settled near Hamilton, Ontario and guess what? They are insistent Ukrainians two generations later! Most of his American family still thinks they are Russian?

His wife, my wife's grandmother, came from a cluster of villages just south of the Polish/Slovak border and she self-identified as a 'Rusnak' as opposed to a Ukrainian. She was a ward of the Greek Catholic priest in Chem'lova which served the villages of Becherov and Stebnik (the ancestral home of my maternal grandparents.) (The same parish to which my second cousin, a Greek Catholic priest ordained in the early 1990's was assigned as his first parish. Small world...)  The Greek Catholic priest arranged for her marriage to my wife's grandfather who was a widower with children following the influenza epidemic of 1918 - even though the priest knew that they were nominally Orthodox at that time. Even though she dutifully attended the church up the street, until the end of her life, 'her church' was the Metropolia parish of St. Michael's in neighboring St. Clair, PA which retained its Rusyn customs rather than shedding them as did the parish in Frackville. (Today that parish is in ACROD.) (Her cousin was the late Bishop Stephen Koscisko of the Byzantine Catholic Diocese of Passaic, NJ who was also related to the Hanas family of cantors, choir directors and priests in the Metropolia and ACROD.) 

Many of the people from those parishes were in the vanguard of those who became Orthodox, in Minneapolis and Buffalo both Metropolia parishes were primarily founded by Rusyns from Stebnik and Becherov in Saris County, Slovakia who by the middle of the 20th century were convinced they were 'real' Russians. (all relatives, on both my wife's and my families!)

My wife's paternal family came from what is now Transcarpathia, Ukraine from the village of Suchij, outside of Uzhorod and are now Orthodox and friends of Fr. Dymitry Sydor, the dean of the Uzhorod Orthodox (UOC-MP) cathedral and a Rusyn activist.

My family came from Stebnik, Slovakia on mother's side and Cigelka, Slovakia on father's side, both being near Bardejev and Dukla and all were Greek Catholics. (Cigelka is the home town of Blessed Pavel Goidich, another relative, although distant.) My mother's aunts,uncles and cousins who settled in Minneapolis and Buffalo were Orthodox by 1920 while her family settled in Bayonne, NJ where they were remained Greek Catholic until the schisms of the 1930's. There were pre-existing Russian Orthodox (Patriarchal and Metropolia) and Ukrainian Orthodox parishes in both Bayonne and Jersey City, NJ but like many of the Rusnaks, my grandfather went his own way and with a handful of others founded their own Orthodox Church to 'ensure the preservation of their rites and customs' which they knew had been abrogated in most of the Metropolia parishes and were somewhat different than those of the Ukrainians.

Same as to my dad's family in Elizabeth, NJ where his father left the Greek Catholic parish of which he was a founder and the parish president (before Bishop Takach abolished lay control in the 1920's) and founded a Rusyn church, adjacent to an existing Serbian Orthodox church and a few blocks removed from a Metropolia parish (where some of his more distant relatives attended) and the two Ukrainian churches.

Now, I recognize that all of this is anecdotal but I ask the question, if these people felt an affinity to Ukrainian nationalism and Ukrainian tradition, why did they bother to set out and establish their own parishes and hierarchy?

First and foremost was the fact that the Rusyns had established their own, unique liturgical chant tradition which is distinct from the Ukrainian tradition. Secondly, they had their own fraternal organizations (Liberty) which was distinct from the UROBA and others. Thirdly, they were well aware of the reality that many of their brothers and sisters had lost their identity within the Metropolia parishes and were identifying themselves as Russian.

Many a small town soldier returned after the war to complain to their babas in Pennsylvania and New Jersey about how stupid the Russian soldiers were as they didn't understand a word they were saying or sing or dance to any of the folk tunes they learned growing up.

Anyway, today we realize that the differences that seemed so monumental to our grandparents are not so great. I tell the story of how the UOC, my parish and the UGCC parishes in town all set up ethnic Christmas traditions at the local museum a few years ago and the curator located us in a row. As we were setting up we couldn't stop laughing as to how we had virtually the same stuff on display and how our grandfathers would have been rolling on the floor beating the daylights out of each other!

For a more detailed and factually sourced article see: CARPATHO-RUSYN AMERICANS   http://www.everyculture.com/multi/Bu-Dr/Carpatho-Rusyn-Americans.html
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 15, 2011, 11:46:15 AM
The Spirit is descended!
Rusyns are Ukrainians.  That's my new bumpersticker, or at least Rusyn is a term/idea invented by second generation children of immigrant Ukrainian parents from Galicia.

And here we go again... ;)

The Lemko-Rusyn Republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemko-Rusyn_Republic), founded at the end of WWI.

Kind of ruins your argmument that Rusyn is an immigrant idea, doesn't it?
I am always amuzed when Ukrainians look at the Rusyn/Carpatho-Russians/Lemko the same way the Ukrainians complain that the Russians look down on the Ukrainians.

Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Schultz on June 15, 2011, 11:51:57 AM
The Spirit is descended!
Rusyns are Ukrainians.  That's my new bumpersticker, or at least Rusyn is a term/idea invented by second generation children of immigrant Ukrainian parents from Galicia.

And here we go again... ;)

The Lemko-Rusyn Republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemko-Rusyn_Republic), founded at the end of WWI.

Kind of ruins your argmument that Rusyn is an immigrant idea, doesn't it?
I am always amuzed when Ukrainians look at the Rusyn/Carpatho-Russians/Lemko the same way the Ukrainians complain that the Russians look down on the Ukrainians.

Exactly.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 15, 2011, 12:32:56 PM
The Spirit is descended!
Rusyns are Ukrainians.  That's my new bumpersticker, or at least Rusyn is a term/idea invented by second generation children of immigrant Ukrainian parents from Galicia.

And here we go again... ;)

The Lemko-Rusyn Republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemko-Rusyn_Republic), founded at the end of WWI.

Kind of ruins your argmument that Rusyn is an immigrant idea, doesn't it?
I am always amuzed when Ukrainians look at the Rusyn/Carpatho-Russians/Lemko the same way the Ukrainians complain that the Russians look down on the Ukrainians.

Exactly.

I try to refrain from using that argument, saving it for the 'two minute drill.' It usually provokes one of two answers:

a.) Gee, I never thought of it that way, you're right, or the always more popular:

b.) It's not like that at all. You don't know what you are talking about! 

Either way, it usually ends the discussion. :)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Fr. George on June 15, 2011, 12:37:04 PM
For many years, but not in recent years, the GOAA Yearbook used to print the following language, in fine print, on the page that listed the SCOBA member ecclesiastical jurisdictions.

"Our relationship to the Ukrainian Orthodox Diocese and to the Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese (see above) differs slightly to that which we have with other jurisdictions.  In both cases, since each were established by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, our Archdiocese, as Exarchate of the Ecumenical Patriarchate is entrusted with the direct spiritual supervision of their diocese.  This means that when they relate to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, for reception of Holy Chrism or the election of a new bishop, this must be submitted to the Archbishop, who in turn after reviewing the matter transmits it to the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate for action.  In all other matters these two dioceses function totally independent of this Archdiocese.

In addition, the Albanian Orthodox Diocese and the Byelorussian Orthodox Diocese are also under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.  Each of these diocese is headed by a vicar priest who is directly responsible to the Archbishop."

Right - this is the Archbishop acting in his role as local exarch.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Fr. George on June 15, 2011, 12:40:14 PM
The Spirit is descended!
Rusyns are Ukrainians.  That's my new bumpersticker, or at least Rusyn is a term/idea invented by second generation children of immigrant Ukrainian parents from Galicia.

And here we go again... ;)

The Lemko-Rusyn Republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemko-Rusyn_Republic), founded at the end of WWI.

Kind of ruins your argmument that Rusyn is an immigrant idea, doesn't it?
I am always amuzed when Ukrainians look at the Rusyn/Carpatho-Russians/Lemko the same way the Ukrainians complain that the Russians look down on the Ukrainians.

Exactly.

+1
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: John of the North on June 15, 2011, 02:11:45 PM
There's been no news of it since then - God knows in this day and age it would have been posted somewhere :-). As it is, everything available (that I can find anyway) says his election as Bishop of Saskatoon is still pending the Holy Synod's approval although he's already moved :-).

I can assure you it has been quite official for some time. Unfortunately, Orthodoxy is not exactly media savvy when it comes to updating websites and such.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Orest on June 15, 2011, 03:28:11 PM
There's been no news of it since then - God knows in this day and age it would have been posted somewhere :-). As it is, everything available (that I can find anyway) says his election as Bishop of Saskatoon is still pending the Holy Synod's approval although he's already moved :-).

I can assure you it has been quite official for some time. Unfortunately, Orthodoxy is not exactly media savvy when it comes to updating websites and such.

The Sobor of the UOCC took place in July when Bishop Andrij was elected to the Eparchy of Toronto and Eastern Canada.  And he moved to Toronto in the fall.  What is under discussion is the name change of the Eparchy from Toronto and Eastern Canada to another name such as Hamilton and the Eastern Eparchy for example, at the request of the EP.
The Greek Orthodox want to use the see of Toronto for their Metropolitan of Canada, but under the official agreement the see of Toronto was promised to the UOCC.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 15, 2011, 04:19:57 PM
John, it sounds official from the UOCC's end, but not the Ecumenical Patriarchate's.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: John of the North on June 15, 2011, 04:50:41 PM
John, it sounds official from the UOCC's end, but not the Ecumenical Patriarchate's.

If the Ecumenical Patriarchate had any issues with it, I'm sure it would have been addressed when Metropolitan Yurij visited the Patriarch last year. As Orest points out, the only real issue is where the episcopal seat of the Eparchy should be.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 15, 2011, 04:57:57 PM
So if I'm not mistaken the hierarchs of the UOCC actually bear the names of their sees, whereas those of the UOCUSA have those of extinct cities in Anatolia. Is there a reason for the difference?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Monk Vasyl on June 15, 2011, 05:10:17 PM
So if I'm not mistaken the hierarchs of the UOCC actually bear the names of their sees, whereas those of the UOCUSA have those of extinct cities in Anatolia. Is there a reason for the difference?

You might be confusing their titles with their sees.  Metr.  Constantine is bishop of the Central Eparchy, Archbishop Antony is bishop of the Eastern Eparchy, and Bishop Daniel is bishop of the Western Eparchy.   Just as Bishop Andrij is bishop of the Eparchy of Toronto and Eastern Canada.  I'm not sure if the UOCC hierarchs also have titles to extinct cities.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 15, 2011, 05:48:11 PM
If they do, then they're never listed, whereas the UOCUSA hierarchs are always called after their extinct cities and rarely (never?) "of Parma," "of Chicago," et cetera.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: JamesRottnek on June 15, 2011, 07:19:03 PM
That is, then, the same setup as the Metropolises, right?

Excepting that the Ruling Bishop of ACROD is not the Bishop of Johnstown, PA just as Metropolitan Constantine of the UOCUSA is not the Bishop of Bound Brook, NJ. Also, these two jurisdictions have their own internal by-laws and regulations and are not subject to the Archdiocesan regulations which have been the subject of some discussion here recently.

Thank you.

I only asked, because sometimes what seems to be the case in how the Church operates, is so impossibly far from what actually happens.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on June 15, 2011, 07:24:49 PM
The Belarusian Orthodox parishes are completely with the Belarusian Autocephalous Orthodox Church now, aren't they?

There are a few within ACROD.

I think there are two (maybe four, but two seems right) parishes from the Byelorussian Council which are now within the ACROD.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 15, 2011, 08:48:26 PM
The Belarusian Orthodox parishes are completely with the Belarusian Autocephalous Orthodox Church now, aren't they?

There are a few within ACROD.

I think there are two (maybe four, but two seems right) parishes from the Byelorussian Council which are now within the ACROD.

I think they were placed under the omophorion of the late Metropolitan, but were not legally integrated into the structure of ACROD, but I could be wrong.....
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: John of the North on June 15, 2011, 11:43:59 PM
If they do, then they're never listed, whereas the UOCUSA hierarchs are always called after their extinct cities and rarely (never?) "of Parma," "of Chicago," et cetera.

My hierarch mentions his "extinct" city from time to time, and is listed as such on the EP website. I'm not sure what Bp. Andriy does. In the UOCC, they are always referred to by the seat of their eparchy jere in Canada proper, and are commemorated as such at the DL.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on June 16, 2011, 02:54:55 AM
Yet again I ask, does anyone have any information as to who might be a possible successor to Metropolitan Nicholas?  A friend of mine in ACROD, who is close to an ACROD priest, told me there is no one.  I told him that I am on a church forum and would be able to get information to him.  Doesn't anyone know what is going on in this regard?  Is this diocese to be left widowed for the foreseeable future?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on June 16, 2011, 03:13:49 AM
The Belarusian Orthodox parishes are completely with the Belarusian Autocephalous Orthodox Church now, aren't they?

There are a few within ACROD.

I think there are two (maybe four, but two seems right) parishes from the Byelorussian Council which are now within the ACROD.

I think they were placed under the omophorion of the late Metropolitan, but were not legally integrated into the structure of ACROD, but I could be wrong.....

AFAIR they were listed in the ACROD's online directory. Now it's broken so I can't check it for sure.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on June 16, 2011, 07:39:19 AM
Yet again I ask, does anyone have any information as to who might be a possible successor to Metropolitan Nicholas?  A friend of mine in ACROD, who is close to an ACROD priest, told me there is no one.  I told him that I am on a church forum and would be able to get information to him.  Doesn't anyone know what is going on in this regard?  Is this diocese to be left widowed for the foreseeable future?

I understand that the group of clerics which Met. Nicholas had prearranged to pick a new bishop (whether this is a slate or an outright choice is not known by me) is still at work.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 16, 2011, 07:57:37 AM
If they do, then they're never listed, whereas the UOCUSA hierarchs are always called after their extinct cities and rarely (never?) "of Parma," "of Chicago," et cetera.

My hierarch mentions his "extinct" city from time to time, and is listed as such on the EP website. I'm not sure what Bp. Andriy does. In the UOCC, they are always referred to by the seat of their eparchy jere in Canada proper, and are commemorated as such at the DL.

Metropolitan Nicholas was always formally listed as 'of Amissos' and his predecessor, Bishop John was listed as 'of Nyssa' in all of our Diocesan publications whenever their pictures were printed.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 16, 2011, 08:07:17 AM
Yet again I ask, does anyone have any information as to who might be a possible successor to Metropolitan Nicholas?  A friend of mine in ACROD, who is close to an ACROD priest, told me there is no one.  I told him that I am on a church forum and would be able to get information to him.  Doesn't anyone know what is going on in this regard?  Is this diocese to be left widowed for the foreseeable future?

I understand that the group of clerics which Met. Nicholas had prearranged to pick a new bishop (whether this is a slate or an outright choice is not known by me) is still at work.

That would be the Diocesan Consistory and they met with the locum tenens, Archbishop Demetrios last month in New York. http://www.acrod.org/index.php?id=4816 At the point when a candidate or candidates are to be considered, the Diocesan by-laws mandate the convening of a special Sobor/Diocesan Council, during which the next Bishop will be selected for confirmation by the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. 
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 16, 2011, 10:50:28 AM
"Metropolitan Nicholas was always formally listed as 'of Amissos' and his predecessor, Bishop John was listed as 'of Nyssa' in all of our Diocesan publications whenever their pictures were printed."

Do the Greeks have plans to set up a metropolis someday in Johnstown then? :-)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 16, 2011, 10:51:55 AM
"Metropolitan Nicholas was always formally listed as 'of Amissos' and his predecessor, Bishop John was listed as 'of Nyssa' in all of our Diocesan publications whenever their pictures were printed."

Do the Greeks have plans to set up a metropolis someday in Johnstown then? :-)

No. The Sobor of the diocese would never accept the assessment policies of the Archdiocese. (BTW, I am not being inconsistent with my defense of those policies last week. They were duly adopted in council by the Greeks, hence their parishes were bound to their rightful enforcement. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, as they say.)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 16, 2011, 10:54:12 AM
Why the different treatment in naming of Greek dioceses versus the non-Greeks ones then?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 16, 2011, 11:29:37 AM
Why the different treatment in naming of Greek dioceses versus the non-Greeks ones then?

Don't know, perhaps Fr. Chris or Fr. George can answer this one. I think though that they don't want to imply that the non-Greek Bishops in the diaspora have any jurisdictional claims over Greek parishes in their cities and the surroundings and vice versa....
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on June 16, 2011, 03:09:31 PM
Why the different treatment in naming of Greek dioceses versus the non-Greeks ones then?

The Constantinople has (in their opinion) the jurisdiction over the whole are that is not under the canonical jurisdiction of other Churches (North and South America, Western Europe, Eastern Asia, Australia and Oceania). The Greek ethnicity is the dominant one in the Church of Constantinople so the parallel Churches (ACROD, UOC, Russian Exarchate, Albanian) that exist on the territories of the Greek Dioceses (GOA, Western European Dioceses) are considered to be extra jurisdictions (like jurisdictions of the other Churches) in contrary to the canonical (one territory - one Bishop) Greek jurisdiction. Hierarchs from the non-Greek EP jurisdictions cannot be named after the real cities because they would have the authority over the lands that already have EP Bishops.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 17, 2011, 09:57:16 AM
Why the different treatment in naming of Greek dioceses versus the non-Greeks ones then?

The Constantinople has (in their opinion) the jurisdiction over the whole are that is not under the canonical jurisdiction of other Churches (North and South America, Western Europe, Eastern Asia, Australia and Oceania). The Greek ethnicity is the dominant one in the Church of Constantinople so the parallel Churches (ACROD, UOC, Russian Exarchate, Albanian) that exist on the territories of the Greek Dioceses (GOA, Western European Dioceses) are considered to be extra jurisdictions (like jurisdictions of the other Churches) in contrary to the canonical (one territory - one Bishop) Greek jurisdiction. Hierarchs from the non-Greek EP jurisdictions cannot be named after the real cities because they would have the authority over the lands that already have EP Bishops.

That sounds accurate to me as it has been explained by others over the years.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 17, 2011, 11:24:01 AM
The Spirit is descended!
Why the different treatment in naming of Greek dioceses versus the non-Greeks ones then?

The Constantinople has (in their opinion) the jurisdiction over the whole are that is not under the canonical jurisdiction of other Churches (North and South America, Western Europe, Eastern Asia, Australia and Oceania). The Greek ethnicity is the dominant one in the Church of Constantinople so the parallel Churches (ACROD, UOC, Russian Exarchate, Albanian) that exist on the territories of the Greek Dioceses (GOA, Western European Dioceses) are considered to be extra jurisdictions (like jurisdictions of the other Churches) in contrary to the canonical (one territory - one Bishop) Greek jurisdiction. Hierarchs from the non-Greek EP jurisdictions cannot be named after the real cities because they would have the authority over the lands that already have EP Bishops.
I wonder, now that the Phanar didn't get its hands on the titular see of Sourozh (interesting in and of itself, as Sourozh/Sudak isn't in Constatinople's jurisdiction, but Moscow's: hence the renaming Bp. Basil Osborn to another, Greek, see of Amphipolis?), how did they organize the Russians who went over?  I know they have the same set up in the New World in the Patriarchal Exarchate for Russian Orthodox Exarchate in Western Europe, where the present bishop is "bishop of Komana," succeeding the "bishop of Evkarpia," who succeeded the "bishop of Syracuse," who succeeded Met.  Vladimir Tikhonicky whom the Phanar installed as a rival to the successor of Met. Evolgiy "of Chersonese" (installed by Moscow)-although all have been in Paris.

Oddly enough, the Tomos that the EP issued in 1931
http://exarchat.eu/spip.php?article857
doesn't say anything about any super jurisdiction of the Phanar, just about exceptional circumstances.   The present master of the Phanar, of course, in 1999 "rectified" that, starting its new Tomos with the canon 28 myth in the first sentence.

I seem to recall the Phanar having some Russians in Latin America. Is there any ethnic dioceses (and, despite the Phanar's protest to the contrary invoking its 1871 phyletist decree, that is what they are) in Australia and New Zealand? Are there any alongside the Greek jurisdictions (themselves alongside the jurisidcion of Moscow and Antioch)?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on June 17, 2011, 11:29:35 AM
There is an Ukrainian Dioceses in South America.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on June 17, 2011, 01:56:12 PM
There is (are) Ukrainian parishes in Australia.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ag_vn on June 17, 2011, 02:36:56 PM
The parishes of the Ukrainian Diocese of Australia and NZ headed by Archbishop John. Strangely they call themselves Autocephalous, although not connected with the UAOC obviously.

http://www.uaoc-diaspora.com/Austr.htm (http://www.uaoc-diaspora.com/Austr.htm)





Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on June 17, 2011, 07:11:45 PM
The parishes of the Ukrainian Diocese of Australia and NZ headed by Archbishop John. Strangely they call themselves Autocephalous, although not connected with the UAOC obviously.

http://www.uaoc-diaspora.com/Austr.htm (http://www.uaoc-diaspora.com/Austr.htm)







With whom are they in communion, if I may ask?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on June 17, 2011, 07:34:48 PM
With whom are they in communion, if I may ask?

With you?

They are in Metropolitan Constantine's Synod.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 17, 2011, 07:55:47 PM
The Spirit is descended!
With whom are they in communion, if I may ask?

With you?

They are in Metropolitan Constantine's Synod.
LOL. And they complained about the OCA being in Australia.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on June 19, 2011, 04:54:58 AM
Boring Saturday night, huh? You've failed to persuade me. Again, ACROD discussion (your closing comment does rise to that level)?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 19, 2011, 09:10:02 AM
I remember seeing Archbishop Demetrios (or possibly Archbishop Spyridon?) referred to as 'Exarch of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.' I'm glad this hasn't been turned into an actual jurisdiction over the ACROD, the UOCC, or the UOCUSA (beyond being a locum tenens and/or installing new primates).

I should note that he was very precise in his language regarding the Diocese and the vacancy during his homily so as not to fuel any conspiracy minded folks.
Typical it seems of HE +Archbishop Demetrios.  Many years!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 19, 2011, 09:30:56 AM
I have a question that perhaps you can answer since you seem to be a long time and active member of the Carpatho Rusyn Diocese. There has been talk among the Ruthenians (at least among the ones in Europe) to join the UGCC and form one jurisdiction. Has there ever been any discussions or desire to join the UOC-USA? Or are there significant differences whereby the Rusyns would lose their identity?

Wonderful! I wasn't sure given how things seem to work in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.

It is a common misunderstanding and for some a deliberate misstatement, that the Carpatho-Russian and the two canonical Ukrainian Orthodox jurisdictions in North America are 'in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.' None of us are either structurally or legally part of the Archdiocese. As a matter of general practice we do not commemorate the Archbishop of America. At the present time given our vacant position, he is our Locum Tenens and is being commemorated, however upon the enthronement of a new Bishop,that will no longer be the case.

The three jurisdictions in question, ACROD, the UOCUSA and UOCC, are under the omophor of the ecumenical throne and operate, for lack of a better word (and this is not being used in any canonical reference) autonomously. Bishops are chosen pursuant to the by-laws governing each of these jurisdictions and the choice is forwarded to the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarch for approval. To my knowledge, limited to ACROD, the Synod has never rejected any of the choices submitted since its founding in 1938.




There are differences in chant and Rusyns have historically lacked a sense of cultural kinship with Ukraine. To the outside observer the differences may appear subtle, but nothing regarding Church and culture is always what it seems!

As you move from what is now eastern Slovakia into Transcarpathian Ukraine the Rusyns gradually give way to the western Ukrainians who are predominantly Greek Catholic. The Greek Catholics around the Slovak border and the cities of Uzhorod and Muchachevo are within the historic boundaries of the Greek Catholic Eparchy of Munkacs/Muchachevo which is a designated as a 'sui juris' church by Rome. They are not part of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Synod based in L'vov with pretensions upon Kiev. It is my understanding that this is a source of irritation to some Ukrainian nationalists who do not recognize the Rusyns as a separate group. Rusyns in Slovakia would have no desire to join the UGCC as they have their own 'sui juris' church with their own episcopacy.

The Orthodox Rusyns of Slovakia have their own parallel dioceses to those of the Greek Catholics and to my memory all of the Bishops of the Orthodox Church of the Czech and Slovak lands are at least partially Rusyn in ethnic background. The Orthodox were influenced by the presence of the White Russians who relocated to Ladimirova in Slovakia following the Revolution and remained there until Czechoslovakia came under Soviet domination. The late Metropolitan Laurus of ROCOR was born in Ladimirova and was of Rusyn heritage.

In Transcarpathia, the Orthodox Rusyns do not have their own Bishop as they were made part of the Russian Church following the USSR's annexation of Transcarpathia following World War II. They have a large presence in the Uzhorod area and the leading Orthodox Rusyn priest, Father Dymytry Sydor, is a 'thorn' in the side of the local Ukrainian authorities - most of whom are sympathetic to the UGCC or the UOC-KP. The Rusyns are aligned there with the UOC-MP. To those of you who have been to Uzhorod, you may have seen the massive Orthodox Church in the City constructed during the 1990's and yet unfinished in the upper church. This is the Cathedral Church of the Exhaltation of the Holy Cross built through  Fr. Dymytry's vision and will power. I believe it is intended to be the second or third largest Orthodox Church of the MP when completed.

As to the United States, ACROD and UOC-USA and Canada are on very friendly terms both on the hierarchical, clerical and lay side of things. Bishop Daniel of Toronto shares both Ukrainian and Rusyn heritage as did the late Archbishop Vsevelod. However, I do not see the possibility of there being any desire on either part to formalize things outside of the overall potential for change in our American Church per se.

A more detailed summary may be found here:  http://www.simkovich.org/religion.htm


Btw, what is now the Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia was originally a Old Catholic Church which became WRO, which switched to Eastern Rite when the Rusyn Orthodox in what had been of Transleithania (Hungary) joined those in Cisleithania (Austria) in joining up with the WRO Church of St. Gorazd in Prague in the new CzS Republic and saturating it.
Quote
At the time of its independence in 1918, Czechoslovakia was a preponderantly Catholic nation. In 1920, a group of progressive Catholic priests and faithful broke away and formed a National Czechoslovak Church. Some of these were sympathetic to Orthodoxy, and when the church held a congress in 1921 it heard an appeal from a Serbian bishop to unite with the Orthodox Church. In September of that year, the Serbian Patriarch ordained Fr. Matej Pavlik, the administrator of one of the National Catholic dioceses, as an Orthodox bishop and leader of the emerging community. He took the name Gorazd. Only a minority of the National Catholics became Orthodox; the larger group eventually formed a Protestant church. At this point there were about 40,000 Orthodox in the country, but the numbers soon increased when a group of Greek Catholics in Transcarpathia became Orthodox.

Subsequent developments led to divisions within the Orthodox community. On March 3, 1923, the Patriarchate of Constantinople issued a Tomos granting autonomy to the Czechoslovak church, and sent Metropolitan Sabbazd to look after the Orthodox faithful there. And in 1930 the Serbian Patriarchate sent a bishop of its own to Transcarpathia. Most Orthodox Czechoslovaks, however, remained within Bishop Gorazd’s jurisdiction. In the 1931 census, there were 145,583 Orthodox in Czechoslovakia, with 117,897 of them in Transcarpathia.
http://www.cnewa.us/default.aspx?ID=26&pagetypeID=9&sitecode=US&pageno=1
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 19, 2011, 10:00:28 AM
There's been no news of it since then - God knows in this day and age it would have been posted somewhere :-). As it is, everything available (that I can find anyway) says his election as Bishop of Saskatoon is still pending the Holy Synod's approval although he's already moved :-).

I can assure you it has been quite official for some time. Unfortunately, Orthodoxy is not exactly media savvy when it comes to updating websites and such.

The Sobor of the UOCC took place in July when Bishop Andrij was elected to the Eparchy of Toronto and Eastern Canada.  And he moved to Toronto in the fall.  What is under discussion is the name change of the Eparchy from Toronto and Eastern Canada to another name such as Hamilton and the Eastern Eparchy for example, at the request of the EP.
The Greek Orthodox want to use the see of Toronto for their Metropolitan of Canada, but under the official agreement the see of Toronto was promised to the UOCC.
If so, the Phanar broke its promose long ago
http://www.gocanada.org/metropolitan/index.htm
Quote
Ο Σεβασμιώτατος Μητροπολίτης Τορόντο κ.κ. ΣΩΤΗΡΙΟΣ

Υπέρτιμος και Έξαρχος παντός Καναδά

His Eminence Metropolitan SOTIRIOS of Toronto

Exarch of all Canada
I replicate their order of priority.

It also has an interesting bit now that I don't think was there before:
Quote
Πρόεδρος του Καναδικού Συμβουλίου Ορθοδόξων Επισκόπων

Chairman of the Canadian Conference of Orthodox Bishops
Has there been any official set up of an Episcopal Assembly in Canada, seperate from the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of North and Central America?

Btw, it has an interesting address:
Quote
The Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Toronto, 1 Patriarch Bartholomew Way, Toronto, Ontario, M4H 1C6)
http://www.gocanada.org/metropolis/index.htm

For the rest of the world, it is 86 Overlea Blvd.
http://www.orthodox-canada.com/canadian-conference-of-orthodox-bishops-held-a-meeting-in-toronto/

Given that ACROD has parishes in Canada, I'm curious, does it ever have to deal with Met. Sotirios, "Exarch of All Canada"?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 19, 2011, 10:08:41 AM
Boring Saturday night, huh? You've failed to persuade me. Again, ACROD discussion (your closing comment does rise to that level)?
Since neither of us is in ACROD, of what was I supposed to persuade you in particular?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 19, 2011, 01:19:47 PM
I have a question that perhaps you can answer since you seem to be a long time and active member of the Carpatho Rusyn Diocese. There has been talk among the Ruthenians (at least among the ones in Europe) to join the UGCC and form one jurisdiction. Has there ever been any discussions or desire to join the UOC-USA? Or are there significant differences whereby the Rusyns would lose their identity?

Wonderful! I wasn't sure given how things seem to work in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.

It is a common misunderstanding and for some a deliberate misstatement, that the Carpatho-Russian and the two canonical Ukrainian Orthodox jurisdictions in North America are 'in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.' None of us are either structurally or legally part of the Archdiocese. As a matter of general practice we do not commemorate the Archbishop of America. At the present time given our vacant position, he is our Locum Tenens and is being commemorated, however upon the enthronement of a new Bishop,that will no longer be the case.

The three jurisdictions in question, ACROD, the UOCUSA and UOCC, are under the omophor of the ecumenical throne and operate, for lack of a better word (and this is not being used in any canonical reference) autonomously. Bishops are chosen pursuant to the by-laws governing each of these jurisdictions and the choice is forwarded to the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarch for approval. To my knowledge, limited to ACROD, the Synod has never rejected any of the choices submitted since its founding in 1938.




There are differences in chant and Rusyns have historically lacked a sense of cultural kinship with Ukraine. To the outside observer the differences may appear subtle, but nothing regarding Church and culture is always what it seems!

As you move from what is now eastern Slovakia into Transcarpathian Ukraine the Rusyns gradually give way to the western Ukrainians who are predominantly Greek Catholic. The Greek Catholics around the Slovak border and the cities of Uzhorod and Muchachevo are within the historic boundaries of the Greek Catholic Eparchy of Munkacs/Muchachevo which is a designated as a 'sui juris' church by Rome. They are not part of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Synod based in L'vov with pretensions upon Kiev. It is my understanding that this is a source of irritation to some Ukrainian nationalists who do not recognize the Rusyns as a separate group. Rusyns in Slovakia would have no desire to join the UGCC as they have their own 'sui juris' church with their own episcopacy.

The Orthodox Rusyns of Slovakia have their own parallel dioceses to those of the Greek Catholics and to my memory all of the Bishops of the Orthodox Church of the Czech and Slovak lands are at least partially Rusyn in ethnic background. The Orthodox were influenced by the presence of the White Russians who relocated to Ladimirova in Slovakia following the Revolution and remained there until Czechoslovakia came under Soviet domination. The late Metropolitan Laurus of ROCOR was born in Ladimirova and was of Rusyn heritage.

In Transcarpathia, the Orthodox Rusyns do not have their own Bishop as they were made part of the Russian Church following the USSR's annexation of Transcarpathia following World War II. They have a large presence in the Uzhorod area and the leading Orthodox Rusyn priest, Father Dymytry Sydor, is a 'thorn' in the side of the local Ukrainian authorities - most of whom are sympathetic to the UGCC or the UOC-KP. The Rusyns are aligned there with the UOC-MP. To those of you who have been to Uzhorod, you may have seen the massive Orthodox Church in the City constructed during the 1990's and yet unfinished in the upper church. This is the Cathedral Church of the Exhaltation of the Holy Cross built through  Fr. Dymytry's vision and will power. I believe it is intended to be the second or third largest Orthodox Church of the MP when completed.

As to the United States, ACROD and UOC-USA and Canada are on very friendly terms both on the hierarchical, clerical and lay side of things. Bishop Daniel of Toronto shares both Ukrainian and Rusyn heritage as did the late Archbishop Vsevelod. However, I do not see the possibility of there being any desire on either part to formalize things outside of the overall potential for change in our American Church per se.

A more detailed summary may be found here:  http://www.simkovich.org/religion.htm


Btw, what is now the Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia was originally a Old Catholic Church which became WRO, which switched to Eastern Rite when the Rusyn Orthodox in what had been of Transleithania (Hungary) joined those in Cisleithania (Austria) in joining up with the WRO Church of St. Gorazd in Prague in the new CzS Republic and saturating it.
Quote
At the time of its independence in 1918, Czechoslovakia was a preponderantly Catholic nation. In 1920, a group of progressive Catholic priests and faithful broke away and formed a National Czechoslovak Church. Some of these were sympathetic to Orthodoxy, and when the church held a congress in 1921 it heard an appeal from a Serbian bishop to unite with the Orthodox Church. In September of that year, the Serbian Patriarch ordained Fr. Matej Pavlik, the administrator of one of the National Catholic dioceses, as an Orthodox bishop and leader of the emerging community. He took the name Gorazd. Only a minority of the National Catholics became Orthodox; the larger group eventually formed a Protestant church. At this point there were about 40,000 Orthodox in the country, but the numbers soon increased when a group of Greek Catholics in Transcarpathia became Orthodox.

Subsequent developments led to divisions within the Orthodox community. On March 3, 1923, the Patriarchate of Constantinople issued a Tomos granting autonomy to the Czechoslovak church, and sent Metropolitan Sabbazd to look after the Orthodox faithful there. And in 1930 the Serbian Patriarchate sent a bishop of its own to Transcarpathia. Most Orthodox Czechoslovaks, however, remained within Bishop Gorazd’s jurisdiction. In the 1931 census, there were 145,583 Orthodox in Czechoslovakia, with 117,897 of them in Transcarpathia.
http://www.cnewa.us/default.aspx?ID=26&pagetypeID=9&sitecode=US&pageno=1

Like much in our Orthodox world, what you state is 'technically' true regarding the Orthodox Church of the Czech and Slovak lands. However, prior to the forced liquidation of the Greek Catholic Church in 1947, the composition (at least on paper) changed as to the Slovak republic, particularly since Transcarpathia was ceded to the USSR following the War. The slow re-legalization of the Greek Catholics within CzS following 1968 had a major impact on numbers, but the Orthodox have held their own, particularly in those regions where they had a pre-war presence (around Ladimirova) and in regions where the Greek Catholic clergy were engaged in 'westernizing' to differentiate them from the Orthodox. A review of websites and youtube postings from eastern Slovakia and Transcarpathia (part of Slovak lands prior to WW2) will show you a dizzying range of practice among the both the  Orthodox and the Greek Catholics ranging from very Latin (somewhat so for some Orthodox, very much so for some Greek Catholics) to very Orthodox externally (both Greek Catholics and Orthodox.)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: username! on June 19, 2011, 02:07:33 PM
Ok, to Re-Rail this thread;  I don't know who would be a candidate within the ACROD diocese.  I'm sure there is one or two.  I'm sure there are candidates, but finding one who is actually willing to move and live in Johnstown is another issue.  The diocese headquarters are nice but Johnstown is the definition of a rust belt city.  It has its nice parts, like Richland and Westmont and my favourite part, driving out of Johnstown (adjusting the rear-view so I can't use it, then fixing it so I can use it when I hit route 219 about 5 miles out of the city).  If you've ever taken Amtrak into Johnstown, all you see is defunct steel mills for miles and industrial waste.  It's sad. 
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 19, 2011, 02:33:31 PM
Since the subject came up, there was a nice article posted Friday on ACROD.com about St. Gorazd... http://acrod.org/readingroom/saints/gorazd
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 19, 2011, 02:45:31 PM
"I'm sure there are candidates, but finding one who is actually willing to move and live in Johnstown is another issue. The diocese headquarters are nice but Johnstown is the definition of a rust belt city."

Would someone worthy of election as a bishop really balk on the location of his cathedral rather than the responsibilities of the episcopacy itself? (As they say on SNL, "Really? Really?" ;-) )
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 19, 2011, 03:56:14 PM
Since the subject came up, there was a nice article posted Friday on ACROD.com about St. Gorazd... http://acrod.org/readingroom/saints/gorazd
Very nice indeed!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on June 19, 2011, 07:07:46 PM
Boring Saturday night, huh? You've failed to persuade me. Again, ACROD discussion (your closing comment does rise to that level)?
Since neither of us is in ACROD, of what was I supposed to persuade you in particular?

Er..Old buddy, I am "in" the ACROD. My wife refused to give up her "little old ladies with the doilies on their heads" and after several years of supporting two parishes - her CR and my Greek one, well...you get the picture.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 19, 2011, 08:03:24 PM
Boring Saturday night, huh? You've failed to persuade me. Again, ACROD discussion (your closing comment does rise to that level)?
Since neither of us is in ACROD, of what was I supposed to persuade you in particular?

Er..Old buddy, I am "in" the ACROD. My wife refused to give up her "little old ladies with the doilies on their heads" and after several years of supporting two parishes - her CR and my Greek one, well...you get the picture.
My apologies for [my] error.  I went by what your avatar said.  Being in ACROD by marriage is enough.

That said, I still don't know what I am supposed to persuade you in particular.  Bottom line, whoever is picked, he still won't be the bishop of Johnstown I expect, won't be drawn from either Subcarpathia or Slovakia or even the Czech Republic, and still will be dealing with the Metropolitan of the Czech Lands and Slovakia not as his Mother Church, but as representative of the Phanar.  (had the OCA not made a similar mistake with Russia, there may not have been any ACROD).
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 19, 2011, 08:42:26 PM
Boring Saturday night, huh? You've failed to persuade me. Again, ACROD discussion (your closing comment does rise to that level)?
Since neither of us is in ACROD, of what was I supposed to persuade you in particular?

Er..Old buddy, I am "in" the ACROD. My wife refused to give up her "little old ladies with the doilies on their heads" and after several years of supporting two parishes - her CR and my Greek one, well...you get the picture.

And these 'little old ladies', they are different from yiayias exactly how?   ;)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 19, 2011, 08:47:51 PM
Boring Saturday night, huh? You've failed to persuade me. Again, ACROD discussion (your closing comment does rise to that level)?
Since neither of us is in ACROD, of what was I supposed to persuade you in particular?

Er..Old buddy, I am "in" the ACROD. My wife refused to give up her "little old ladies with the doilies on their heads" and after several years of supporting two parishes - her CR and my Greek one, well...you get the picture.

And these 'little old ladies', they are different from yiayias exactly how?   ;)
Accent.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: username! on June 19, 2011, 08:49:09 PM
"I'm sure there are candidates, but finding one who is actually willing to move and live in Johnstown is another issue. The diocese headquarters are nice but Johnstown is the definition of a rust belt city."

Would someone worthy of election as a bishop really balk on the location of his cathedral rather than the responsibilities of the episcopacy itself? (As they say on SNL, "Really? Really?" ;-) )

I'm a realist.  The Cathedral complex is nice but Johnstown is scary.  Also ACROD has 80 parishes all handled by one bishop. That is a lot of parishes to visit if you are a bishop. 
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 19, 2011, 09:10:15 PM
Given how the parishes are spread (if my memory serves me well anyways) Johnstown is pretty central...
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: username! on June 19, 2011, 09:23:04 PM
Given how the parishes are spread (if my memory serves me well anyways) Johnstown is pretty central...
Most parishes are in Pennsylvania, NJ, and NY, some in MD/dc area, some in Ohio, pretty much follow interstate 80 to indiana and that's the diocese.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 19, 2011, 09:32:26 PM
Si :-).
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: username! on June 19, 2011, 09:48:40 PM
Si :-).

Ok, well there are two in WV, creo que, y 1 in Canada, 1 in Manassas, VA, one in Florida, one in NC, then CT, RI, I don't think there are any in Mass. and then of course PA, Ohio, Indiana, Ill., that should cover it.
Oh NY and NJ.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 19, 2011, 10:21:18 PM
Given how the parishes are spread (if my memory serves me well anyways) Johnstown is pretty central...
Most parishes are in Pennsylvania, NJ, and NY, some in MD/dc area, some in Ohio, pretty much follow interstate 80 to indiana and that's the diocese.
you mean "to Chicago"
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ilyazhito on June 19, 2011, 10:25:36 PM
Why not ordain carpathian hieromonks and create auxiliaries, if the diocese is so big?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 19, 2011, 10:32:15 PM
Why not ordain carpathian hieromonks and create auxiliaries, if the diocese is so big?
Wonder if its not covered in the terms of its union. Does anyone know where you can get the Constitution/Charter/Statute that ACROD operates under?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on June 20, 2011, 07:44:05 AM
Why not ordain carpathian hieromonks and create auxiliaries, if the diocese is so big?

Or make a metropolitanate and divide it into 2-3 normal dioceses?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 20, 2011, 09:59:25 AM
Why not ordain carpathian hieromonks and create auxiliaries, if the diocese is so big?

Or make a metropolitanate and divide it into 2-3 normal dioceses?
Again, I wonder if that isn't allowed under its union agreement.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 20, 2011, 10:18:30 AM
Why not ordain carpathian hieromonks and create auxiliaries, if the diocese is so big?

Or make a metropolitanate and divide it into 2-3 normal dioceses?
Again, I wonder if that isn't allowed under its union agreement.

The number of actual faithful is relatively small and the ability to support two or three 'dioceses' is problematic. The late Metropolitan Orestes had several vicar Bishops over the years (i.e. auxiliaries, the late Peter (Shymansky )a widower from the Metropolia), Methodios (Kanchuka) (from the Czechoslovak Church) and John (Martin)  (a convert from the Greek Catholic church) ) but the late Metropolitan Nicholas did not want one.

It seems to me that under the current 'set up ' of the Orthodox Church in the USA, that the last thing we need are more Bishops and more dioceses. None of us can find appropriate candidates to fill the existing vacant positions. This is not limited to the Carpatho-Russians. The OCA's last two Bishops came from the ranks of ACROD. In all honesty, the OCA has had problems in finding quality men for vacancies for the past two decades or more.(Does Alaska come to mind?)  They are lucky, IMHO, that Bishops Michael and Matthias are good men, seasoned veteran priests and were good pastors and administrators.

A true National Synod with a rational, logical reorganization of the country into a manageable number of Sees and a sufficient number of Vicar Bishops (on the Russian model) to assist the sitting Bishops would seem to be the answer to the problem. We have all said something like that and paid lip service to the ideal for generations, but our Bishops have represented their constituents well in the sense that most of us talk that talk, but really want to continue walking our own walk with a fear that a national Church would rob us of our cultural patrimonies. I plead guilty and most of us probably would do so as well.

Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 20, 2011, 11:47:54 AM
"It seems to me that under the current 'set up ' of the Orthodox Church in the USA, that the last thing we need are more Bishops and more dioceses."

I know Bishop Matthias came directly from the ACROD, but hadn't Bishop Michael been a clergyman of the OCA for years? (Even decades?) Perhaps if we had smaller dioceses (under 50 parishes, mission, and monastic communities?) there'd be more nurturing of the vocations we need.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 20, 2011, 12:25:57 PM
"It seems to me that under the current 'set up ' of the Orthodox Church in the USA, that the last thing we need are more Bishops and more dioceses."

I know Bishop Matthias came directly from the ACROD, but hadn't Bishop Michael been a clergyman of the OCA for years? (Even decades?) Perhaps if we had smaller dioceses (under 50 parishes, mission, and monastic communities?) there'd be more nurturing of the vocations we need.

No, about ten years.

Bishop Michael is a graduate of Christ the Saviour Seminary in Johnstown, having been married at the Cathedral in Johnstown, PA and later ordained there by the late Bishop John (Martin) in 1973. His wife was killed in a tragic car accident shortly after his ordination in the late winter of 1973.  He grew up in Binghamton, NY; his dad's family remained Greek Catholic and his mom's stayed with St. Michael's as it became Orthodox in the 1930's. Following his ordination, he served several ACROD parishes in western PA and became pastor of Holy Ghost Orthodox Church in Phoenixville, PA in 1985 where he remained through about 2002. Prior to 2002 he was on the faculty of Christ the Savior Seminary at various times and also served for a time as the Seminary Dean. Metropolitan Nicholas also made him Dean of the Mid-Atlantic deanery of ACROD while he was pastor of Holy Ghost.

He was presented as a candidate within ACROD for the episcopacy upon the death of Bishop John in 1984 and lost by a small margin in the vote which selected Metropolitan Nicholas. At that time then Father Michael was only 34 and many felt he was not old enough to be Bishop. (For what it is worth, and I think it is instructive for a number of reasons, my family were staunch advocates of then Father Michael's election in 1984. It was not to be and we obediently accepted the selection of Metropolitan Nicholas, a good man in his own right and a family friend as well.)

On the 25th anniversary of his ordination in 1998 at a celebration in Phoenixville, he was elevated to the honor of Protopresbyter by Metropolitan Nicholas. (Upon joining the OCA, he was entitled to retain and use the title of Archpriest as that is equivalent to Protopresbyter.) He obtained his release from ACROD after several years of requesting the same from Metropolitan Nicholas, and upon the urging of Metropolitan Herman, to assume the position of Dean of St. Tikhon's from which he was selected Bishop of New York and New Jersey in 2009.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 20, 2011, 12:38:53 PM
He was already in the OCA then. Interesting about his service in the ACROD - I'd read most of it before, but hadn't realized he was an episcopal candidate at one point.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ilyazhito on June 21, 2011, 10:18:53 AM
Shouldn't ACROD combine with the OCA, if the situation is already non-canonical (2 bishops for one city)?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 21, 2011, 10:27:03 AM
I don't think anyone else has a bishop in Johnstown...
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ilyazhito on June 21, 2011, 10:28:45 AM
I don't believe that parallel hierarchies are canonical.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 21, 2011, 10:30:56 AM
Who does? No one (Romanians aside perhaps :-) ), yet they exist...
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 21, 2011, 11:15:31 AM
A couple of the comments here made me reflect upon the sad reality that within American Orthodoxy, we just talk the talk about a unified Church. The truth is that many lay people have little recognition or understanding about the diversity that exists here in terms of jurisdictions and sitting Bishops. Pittsburgh, Pa, for example has several Orthodox Bishops, Bishop Melchizedek of the OCA, Metropolitan Constantine of the UOC-USA, Bishop Mitrophan of the Serbs (His address is Mars, PA but....really partof metro Pgh.) and Metropolitan Maximos of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. This in addition to those nearby, including the vacancy in Johnstown, PA (although that see is not geographic in the  traditional sense.) as well as the Antiochian Bishop in Charlestown, West Va. These are just the Episcopal Assembly/SCOBA hierarchs. There may be others there who are not EA.

Even among involved parishioners, cradle and convert alike, many tend to view the 'other' Orthodox in town as being like Lutherans are to Methodists are to Baptists etc....rather than being representatives of the Same Faith. How do we get beyond that before we unite?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: username! on June 22, 2011, 02:58:50 PM
Given how the parishes are spread (if my memory serves me well anyways) Johnstown is pretty central...
Most parishes are in Pennsylvania, NJ, and NY, some in MD/dc area, some in Ohio, pretty much follow interstate 80 to indiana and that's the diocese.
you mean "to Chicago"

Oh how could I forget Chicago, well, Illinois is half Indian territory, at least in the antiquated poorly funded public schools in my state. lol.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: username! on June 22, 2011, 03:03:49 PM
Shouldn't ACROD combine with the OCA, if the situation is already non-canonical (2 bishops for one city)?

Whoa, you've never been to an ACROD parish have you?  Mearly mentioning the ACROD and the OCA unifying would give 98% of the ACROD folks a heart-attack.  The history of the diocese was rife with not unifying with the then "Metropolia."  Like Podkarpatska said, you have to come to Pennsylvania to really explore how the different little traditions define each parish and how the people (I'm one of them) like their style and wouldn't trade it for the world. 
the only way we'd unify would be to do it adminstrative level and let the parishes keep their own liturgical/small traditions intact.  Orthodoxy is more complex than it can be perceived on the internet.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 22, 2011, 03:11:43 PM
Shouldn't ACROD combine with the OCA, if the situation is already non-canonical (2 bishops for one city)?

Whoa, you've never been to an ACROD parish have you?  Mearly mentioning the ACROD and the OCA unifying would give 98% of the ACROD folks a heart-attack.  The history of the diocese was rife with not unifying with the then "Metropolia."  Like Podkarpatska said, you have to come to Pennsylvania to really explore how the different little traditions define each parish and how the people (I'm one of them) like their style and wouldn't trade it for the world. 
the only way we'd unify would be to do it adminstrative level and let the parishes keep their own liturgical/small traditions intact.  Orthodoxy is more complex than it can be perceived on the internet.
Yes, ACROD shouldn't be coming into the OCA except as a national diocese
Quote
Article XII - National Groups
 
When the good of the Church requires that particular national groups receive an assurance of identity, the Holy Synod may establish dioceses and/or deaneries and set standards for their participation in the life of the Orthodox Church in America by mutual agreement with the group and until such time as the diocesan structure of the Church can be organized on an exclusively territorial basis. If a given group is organized as a diocese, the bishop of this diocese is a member of the Holy Synod and receives an episcopal title defined territorially. The Statute shall constitute the fundamental law for the existence of all such groups within the Orthodox Church in America. 
The OCA would have to erect a [Great] Russian Diocese to make that clear (something perhaps they should do anyways, or leave to a reception of the Patriarchal parishes and/or ROCOR in North America).
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 22, 2011, 03:27:08 PM
"The OCA would have to erect a [Great] Russian Diocese to make that clear (something perhaps they should do anyways, or leave to a reception of the Patriarchal parishes and/or ROCOR in North America)."

That could be problematic given that the OCA's territorial dioceses are comprised of its Russian/Ukrainian/Belorussian/Ruthenian heritage and WASO/convert parishes (with the exception of the Diocese of Mexico City of course). If a "Russian Orthodox Diocese of North America" came into existence within the OCA, then would parishes using Slavonic 50% of the time or more be eligible to join? If not, then why not?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 22, 2011, 03:58:34 PM
Shouldn't ACROD combine with the OCA, if the situation is already non-canonical (2 bishops for one city)?

Whoa, you've never been to an ACROD parish have you?  Mearly mentioning the ACROD and the OCA unifying would give 98% of the ACROD folks a heart-attack.  The history of the diocese was rife with not unifying with the then "Metropolia."  Like Podkarpatska said, you have to come to Pennsylvania to really explore how the different little traditions define each parish and how the people (I'm one of them) like their style and wouldn't trade it for the world. 
the only way we'd unify would be to do it adminstrative level and let the parishes keep their own liturgical/small traditions intact.  Orthodoxy is more complex than it can be perceived on the internet.

Username is quite right. And the inside joke is that in most of the towns and small cities of the good old rust belt, not just PA, but Ohio, New Jersey, upstate New York and Connecticut,  the four or five churches play their own game of 'six degrees of Kevin Bacon' in that everyone is related to someone who is related to someone from the 'other' church and the answer you will get is, "My Baba said we do it THIS way, and that's that!" (Do you remember the wedding party in the Deer Hunter where they all go out back and beat the crap out of each other, get up and continue the party? That's been going on for nearly 100 years for better or probably worse!)  ;D
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 22, 2011, 04:07:44 PM
Shouldn't ACROD combine with the OCA, if the situation is already non-canonical (2 bishops for one city)?

Whoa, you've never been to an ACROD parish have you?  Mearly mentioning the ACROD and the OCA unifying would give 98% of the ACROD folks a heart-attack.  The history of the diocese was rife with not unifying with the then "Metropolia."  Like Podkarpatska said, you have to come to Pennsylvania to really explore how the different little traditions define each parish and how the people (I'm one of them) like their style and wouldn't trade it for the world. 
the only way we'd unify would be to do it adminstrative level and let the parishes keep their own liturgical/small traditions intact.  Orthodoxy is more complex than it can be perceived on the internet.
Yes, ACROD shouldn't be coming into the OCA except as a national diocese
Quote
Article XII - National Groups
 
When the good of the Church requires that particular national groups receive an assurance of identity, the Holy Synod may establish dioceses and/or deaneries and set standards for their participation in the life of the Orthodox Church in America by mutual agreement with the group and until such time as the diocesan structure of the Church can be organized on an exclusively territorial basis. If a given group is organized as a diocese, the bishop of this diocese is a member of the Holy Synod and receives an episcopal title defined territorially. The Statute shall constitute the fundamental law for the existence of all such groups within the Orthodox Church in America. 
The OCA would have to erect a [Great] Russian Diocese to make that clear (something perhaps they should do anyways, or leave to a reception of the Patriarchal parishes and/or ROCOR in North America).

The inside joke is that all of the non-Russians who comprise the backbone of the old rust belt parishes would be really confused by that one! They've been thinking they were ethnic Russians for the past century. ;)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 22, 2011, 04:10:27 PM
It's a pity there's not an easier way in English (or Russian for that matter) to indicate someone being "of Rus'" ("из Руси") versus "of Russia" ("из России"). That exists in Ukrainian, no? (As always, carefully delineating between Rus' and Muscovite Rus' ;-).)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 22, 2011, 04:40:49 PM
Shouldn't ACROD combine with the OCA, if the situation is already non-canonical (2 bishops for one city)?

Whoa, you've never been to an ACROD parish have you?  Mearly mentioning the ACROD and the OCA unifying would give 98% of the ACROD folks a heart-attack.  The history of the diocese was rife with not unifying with the then "Metropolia."  Like Podkarpatska said, you have to come to Pennsylvania to really explore how the different little traditions define each parish and how the people (I'm one of them) like their style and wouldn't trade it for the world.  
the only way we'd unify would be to do it adminstrative level and let the parishes keep their own liturgical/small traditions intact.  Orthodoxy is more complex than it can be perceived on the internet.
Yes, ACROD shouldn't be coming into the OCA except as a national diocese
Quote
Article XII - National Groups
 
When the good of the Church requires that particular national groups receive an assurance of identity, the Holy Synod may establish dioceses and/or deaneries and set standards for their participation in the life of the Orthodox Church in America by mutual agreement with the group and until such time as the diocesan structure of the Church can be organized on an exclusively territorial basis. If a given group is organized as a diocese, the bishop of this diocese is a member of the Holy Synod and receives an episcopal title defined territorially. The Statute shall constitute the fundamental law for the existence of all such groups within the Orthodox Church in America.  
The OCA would have to erect a [Great] Russian Diocese to make that clear (something perhaps they should do anyways, or leave to a reception of the Patriarchal parishes and/or ROCOR in North America).

The inside joke is that all of the non-Russians who comprise the backbone of the old rust belt parishes would be really confused by that one! They've been thinking they were ethnic Russians for the past century. ;)
(http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/ruthenia2.jpg)
Quote
Subcarpathian Russia

For many, the concept of an independent 'Subcarpathian Russia' is no more than a Ruritanian dream. This territory, which has never formed a State in its history, is too small and impoverished to survive alone. Of which country then does history tell us that it could become a federal part? Let us look at some theoretical possibilities.

a) The Ukraine

The most obvious choice would be that 'Transcarpathian Ukraine', a name invented by Stalin's lackeys in 1944-5, should cease to exist and be called and governed autonomously as Subcarpathian Russia.

True, this would not reunite the Rusins there with those in Slovakia and elsewhere. Above all, this is not a realistic option. Although Rusin activists have pressed their case for such a change again and again since the early 1990s, the Ukraine is dominated by an old Soviet-style centralized bureaucracy, which is profoundly corrupt. For Subcarpathian Russia to exist in the Ukraine, it would require a federal Ukraine to come into existence. At present the Ukraine understands nothing of federalism, only Mafia-run Unionism, insisting that Rusins are Ukrainians! Yet, their whole tradition, including Orthodoxy, comes from the south and the Rusins were Orthodox long before Kievan Rus, now the Ukraine. Indeed, Rusins were probably among those who helped bring the Light of Orthodox to Kievan Rus.

The 'ex-Communist' anti-Rusin nationalism in the north-western Ukraine, especially Galicia, wants to ukrainianize everything within its grasp, so suppressing everything Rusin. Its Mafia gangster regime and attacks on Rusin activists since the fall of Communism have hardly endeared it to Rusins. Moreover, the older generation cannot forget how they suffered under the selfsame Galician Ukrainian nationalism before 1939. Then, the Czechoslovak State, taking Ukrainian nationalist refugees from the Communist north into Subcarpathian Russia after 1919, accepted their attacks on Rusin national identity and Ukrainianization. When the Second World War came, many of these same unprincipled Ukrainian nationalists sided with the Nazis, becoming Fascists, denouncing Rusins and Jews alike. In 1944, many who did not flee with the Nazis, often became virulent Communists.

Today, Ukrainian nationalists do not recognize Rusin as a separate language. Moreover, their religious sympathies are with virulent Uniatism, the natural religion of Ukrainian nationalists. Thus, the continued domination of Subcarpathian Russia by the Ukraine would simply prolong the agony of what Rusins have already suffered under Communism since 1944; the suppression of their spiritual and national identity, their language and the continued ecological rape of the Carpathians.

Furthermore, what can the Ukraine offer? Like Subcarpathian Russia itself, it has no history of its own as an independent nation, rather it has a history of anarchy. Who wants to belong to a country, whose very name is unrecognized by its own population in its eastern half and in the Crimea, and means 'the borderland'? Does the Ukraine actually have a future? It certainly has no past.

To the anti-Rusin Ukraine, we must say No.

d) Russia

In the nineteenth century and up until the First World War, Russia, the Protector of Orthodox Slavdom, showed its favour to the Rusins. However, it never managed to free Subcarpathian Russia from Austro-Hungarian tyranny. Though Russophilia and Russian Messianism were strong in Subcarpathian Russia right up until 1944, Soviet enslavement then traumatized Rusins. The Soviets of Moscow attached the Rusins to the Ukraine. Ukrainianization followed, the name 'Rusin' was banned. For Soviet Russia, Subcarpathian Russia was merely an outlying province of the Ukraine - 'Transcarpathian Ukraine'.

Thus, even though today Soviet Russia is no more, the historical experience of Rusins has been traumatic. Moreover, there is yet another problem here: Subcarpathian Russia has no borders with Russia. How could it belong to today's Russian Federation, when it has no borders with it?

Unless the Ukraine, 'the Borderland', breaks apart and is dismembered (not impossible), most of it becoming an Autonomous Republic of the Russian Federation, at the present time, to Russia, we must say No.

f) Slovakia

The rejection of Czechia as a possibility (and no doubt the rejection of Subcarpathian Russia by Czechia) leaves us with only one solution - Slovakia. True, Slovakia fell under a Nazi puppet regime during the Second World War - but then so did all of Roman Catholic Europe, from Ireland to Poland, from Portugal to Vichy France, from Belgium to Hungary, from Spain to Italy. True, Slovak Communism equated Rusins with Ukrainians and Slovakization of the Rusins took place under the Slovak Communist regime, but this was under pressure from Moscow.

The Rusins in Slovakia have prospered more than the Rusins anywhere else. The new Slovak government has been generous to the Orthodox Church in Slovakia, centred in Presov. Over sixty new churches have been built there since the fall of Communism. Even the Uniats there wish to delatinize their rites - to become 'like the Orthodox', though, true, they have Slovakized their services in terms of language and gone over to the papal calendar. But that is the policy of the Uniat hierarchy, not of the Slovak government. The EU also provides protection for the Rusin minority in today's Slovakia.

Now that Communism is gone and the Slovak economy is beginning to revive, having entered the EU, perhaps 'Transcarpathian Ukraine' should be looking to Slovakia. After all, the Rusins of north-eastern Slovakia, in Subcarpathian 'Presov Rus', and the Rusins of the Ukraine together form over 90% of Subcarpathian Russia, both in territory and population. Although 'ex-Communist' Ukraine would not want to give up any of the territory Stalin stole for it after 1944, the Slovak government might on the other hand wish to expand eastwards. With a federal constitution, Slovakia with an autonomous region called Subcarpathian Russia, looks like a possible valid political option. The only questions - and what enormous ones they are! - are whether Slovakia would indeed want it and the Ukraine would grant it.
www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/ruthenia.htm
I seem to recall the Slovak government handing over Church properties to the Vatican.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 22, 2011, 05:23:43 PM
Btw, Galicia/Ruthenia/Carpatorus'/Carpatho-Russia does have its own independent history:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Kingdom_of_Galicia_Volhynia_Rus%27_Ukraine_1245_1349.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Alex_K_Halych-Volhynia_3.png)
details here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Galicia%E2%80%93Volhynia#History
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/eb/001_Kievan_Rus%27_Kyivan_Rus%27_Ukraine_map_1220_1240.jpg)
IIRC St. Peter brought the Metropolitinate of Kiev from Halych to Moscow.

{Edited image width, no more - Fr. George, GM}
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on June 22, 2011, 06:08:45 PM
"Ruthenian" was used to refer to Ukrainians and Rusyns at one time, wasn't it?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on June 22, 2011, 06:11:19 PM
It was discussed a bit: http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,23646.0.html
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on June 23, 2011, 09:12:00 PM
Boring Saturday night, huh? You've failed to persuade me. Again, ACROD discussion (your closing comment does rise to that level)?
Since neither of us is in ACROD, of what was I supposed to persuade you in particular?

Er..Old buddy, I am "in" the ACROD. My wife refused to give up her "little old ladies with the doilies on their heads" and after several years of supporting two parishes - her CR and my Greek one, well...you get the picture.

And these 'little old ladies', they are different from yiayias exactly how?   ;)
Accent.
Naw,  just the doilie.  :D
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: smithakd on June 26, 2011, 06:23:21 PM
This was a while ago, but:
I seem to recall the Phanar having some Russians in Latin America. Is there any ethnic dioceses (and, despite the Phanar's protest to the contrary invoking its 1871 phyletist decree, that is what they are) in Australia and New Zealand? Are there any alongside the Greek jurisdictions (themselves alongside the jurisidcion of Moscow and Antioch)?

There are about 9 jurisdictions in Australia.  The only 'double up' is the Ukrainian parishes, who are under Constantinople but not the local Greek Orthodox Archdiocese.
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Orthodoxy_in_Australia#Jurisdictions

(I say 'about 9' because although a Polish Orthodox parish was established in 1971, I am not sure if it is still functioning)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on September 20, 2011, 03:41:17 AM
Have there been any developments yet in the selection process of a hierarch for ACROD?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Theodoros on September 21, 2011, 07:37:17 PM
Have there been any developments yet in the selection process of a hierarch for ACROD?

Nothing yet.  BTW, we have 3 parishes in Canada not 1.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 26, 2011, 06:34:46 PM
Shouldn't ACROD combine with the OCA, if the situation is already non-canonical (2 bishops for one city)?

Whoa, you've never been to an ACROD parish have you?  Mearly mentioning the ACROD and the OCA unifying would give 98% of the ACROD folks a heart-attack.  The history of the diocese was rife with not unifying with the then "Metropolia."  Like Podkarpatska said, you have to come to Pennsylvania to really explore how the different little traditions define each parish and how the people (I'm one of them) like their style and wouldn't trade it for the world. 
the only way we'd unify would be to do it adminstrative level and let the parishes keep their own liturgical/small traditions intact.  Orthodoxy is more complex than it can be perceived on the internet.
Yes, ACROD shouldn't be coming into the OCA except as a national diocese
Quote
Article XII - National Groups
 
When the good of the Church requires that particular national groups receive an assurance of identity, the Holy Synod may establish dioceses and/or deaneries and set standards for their participation in the life of the Orthodox Church in America by mutual agreement with the group and until such time as the diocesan structure of the Church can be organized on an exclusively territorial basis. If a given group is organized as a diocese, the bishop of this diocese is a member of the Holy Synod and receives an episcopal title defined territorially. The Statute shall constitute the fundamental law for the existence of all such groups within the Orthodox Church in America. 
The OCA would have to erect a [Great] Russian Diocese to make that clear (something perhaps they should do anyways, or leave to a reception of the Patriarchal parishes and/or ROCOR in North America).
http://oca.org/DOCstatute.asp?SID=12&ID=12
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Orest on October 03, 2011, 10:58:25 AM
Why not ordain Carpathian hieromonks and create auxiliaries, if the diocese is so big?
Wonder if its not covered in the terms of its union. Does anyone know where you can get the Constitution/Charter/Statute that ACROD operates under?
I don't think the eparchy it self is "so big" but is spread out geographically little missions.  The heart of the church in PA.  That is also where its historical roots are.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on October 03, 2011, 03:23:57 PM
(I say 'about 9' because although a Polish Orthodox parish was established in 1971, I am not sure if it is still functioning)

It's not active now and I doubt it ever was. It looks too strange.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on October 03, 2011, 10:02:10 PM
"(I say 'about 9' because although a Polish Orthodox parish was established in 1971, I am not sure if it is still functioning)
It's not active now and I doubt it ever was. It looks too strange."

Perhaps this is off topic, but isn't there a Polish Orthodox mission under the OCA worshiping at St. Joseph's Church in Wheaton, Illinois?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on October 04, 2011, 12:56:41 AM
"(I say 'about 9' because although a Polish Orthodox parish was established in 1971, I am not sure if it is still functioning)
It's not active now and I doubt it ever was. It looks too strange."

Perhaps this is off topic, but isn't there a Polish Orthodox mission under the OCA worshiping at St. Joseph's Church in Wheaton, Illinois?
Yes, and it is functioning.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on October 04, 2011, 12:11:34 PM
How much Polish is that 'Polish' Mission?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on October 04, 2011, 05:38:24 PM
If I'm not mistaken it's Polish enough to feel the need to differentiate itself from the Ukrainian Orthodox community also associated with St. Joseph's. Beyond that it's been a few years, so I don't remember much about it.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on October 05, 2011, 12:58:05 PM
How much Polish is that 'Polish' Mission?
It's in Polish.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on October 05, 2011, 04:22:54 PM
How much Polish is that 'Polish' Mission?
It's in Polish.

Services?

BTW:

Quote from: http://www.goarch.org/news/carpathorussianmtg-10052011
NEW YORK – His Eminence Archbishop Demetrios of America met yesterday with the Consistory of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of the Ecumenical Patriarchate at the Archdiocese Headquarters in New York City. The Consistory requested the meeting from the Archbishop who is the Locum Tenens for the Diocese since the passing of the late Metropolitan Nicholas of Amissos earlier this year. The members are Protopresbyter Frank P. Miloro, Chancellor; Protopresbyter Michael S. Rosco, Vice Chancellor; Protopresbyter Ronald A. Hazuda; Protopresbyter Michael Polanichka; Protopresbyter Lawrence R. Barriger; Protopresbyter Mark Leasure, and Protopresbyter Kenneth Bachofsky. Protopresbyter Mark Arey of the Department of Inter-Orthodox Relations, was also present in the meeting. Following the meeting, the Consistory attended a luncheon hosted by the Archbishop...
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on October 05, 2011, 06:40:30 PM
May as well post the entire communique. The second paragraph:
Quote
This meeting is the second of its kind since the repose of the late Metropolitan. Among the items for discussion were the following: the search for a new presiding bishop for the Diocese, administrative issues affecting various parishes, and representation of the Diocese at the celebrations at the Ecumenical Patriarchate in honor of His All Holiness’s Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew’s 20th Anniversary of election and enthronement as Ecumenical Patriarch. Archbishop Demetrios offered thanks the Consistory for their offering of stable, decisive stewardship during this season of “widowhood” of the Diocese. The Archbishop also offered a substantial contribution to the two Carpatho-Russian parishes affected by the recent floods in New Jersey. For their part, the clergy of the Consistory expressed their gratitude to the Archbishop for his leadership, generosity and pastoral care for the Diocese.

In other words, no news.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on October 06, 2011, 08:48:43 AM
May as well post the entire communique. The second paragraph:
Quote
This meeting is the second of its kind since the repose of the late Metropolitan. Among the items for discussion were the following: the search for a new presiding bishop for the Diocese, administrative issues affecting various parishes, and representation of the Diocese at the celebrations at the Ecumenical Patriarchate in honor of His All Holiness’s Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew’s 20th Anniversary of election and enthronement as Ecumenical Patriarch. Archbishop Demetrios offered thanks the Consistory for their offering of stable, decisive stewardship during this season of “widowhood” of the Diocese. The Archbishop also offered a substantial contribution to the two Carpatho-Russian parishes affected by the recent floods in New Jersey. For their part, the clergy of the Consistory expressed their gratitude to the Archbishop for his leadership, generosity and pastoral care for the Diocese.

In other words, no news.

Nothing heard on my front.....
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: FatherGiryus on October 06, 2011, 09:56:25 AM
Are their any Carpatho-Russian celibate/monastic clergy here in the US?  The only one I was aware of is now an OCA bishop.

May as well post the entire communique. The second paragraph:
Quote
This meeting is the second of its kind since the repose of the late Metropolitan. Among the items for discussion were the following: the search for a new presiding bishop for the Diocese, administrative issues affecting various parishes, and representation of the Diocese at the celebrations at the Ecumenical Patriarchate in honor of His All Holiness’s Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew’s 20th Anniversary of election and enthronement as Ecumenical Patriarch. Archbishop Demetrios offered thanks the Consistory for their offering of stable, decisive stewardship during this season of “widowhood” of the Diocese. The Archbishop also offered a substantial contribution to the two Carpatho-Russian parishes affected by the recent floods in New Jersey. For their part, the clergy of the Consistory expressed their gratitude to the Archbishop for his leadership, generosity and pastoral care for the Diocese.

In other words, no news.

Nothing heard on my front.....

Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on October 06, 2011, 10:04:07 AM
Are their any Carpatho-Russian celibate/monastic clergy here in the US?  The only one I was aware of is now an OCA bishop.

May as well post the entire communique. The second paragraph:
Quote
This meeting is the second of its kind since the repose of the late Metropolitan. Among the items for discussion were the following: the search for a new presiding bishop for the Diocese, administrative issues affecting various parishes, and representation of the Diocese at the celebrations at the Ecumenical Patriarchate in honor of His All Holiness’s Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew’s 20th Anniversary of election and enthronement as Ecumenical Patriarch. Archbishop Demetrios offered thanks the Consistory for their offering of stable, decisive stewardship during this season of “widowhood” of the Diocese. The Archbishop also offered a substantial contribution to the two Carpatho-Russian parishes affected by the recent floods in New Jersey. For their part, the clergy of the Consistory expressed their gratitude to the Archbishop for his leadership, generosity and pastoral care for the Diocese.

In other words, no news.

Nothing heard on my front.....


There are several widowed and one or two celibate priests in ACROD. Word on the street is that those are not interested for any number of reasons. (age, family etc...)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on October 06, 2011, 10:45:46 AM
Two thoughts:

What about that OCA baishop from ACROD? Can he not change dioceses, in order to become bishop of ACROD?

That about getting someone from the old country? (Slovakia)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on October 06, 2011, 02:24:10 PM
Two thoughts:

What about that OCA baishop from ACROD? Can he not change dioceses, in order to become bishop of ACROD?

That about getting someone from the old country? (Slovakia)
Given the present snags that the Phanar has tripped on by being too clever by half with the implementation of Chambesy here, and the desperation over salvaging the canon 28 myth, neither translated a bishop from the OCA, nor getting someone from the Old Country (Slovakia OR ZAKARPATTIA OBLAST, UK), neither is an option (on the last part, besides the insistence of the Phanar that it is the only "Mother Church," there is the problem of what its Ukrainian flock would think of it. Those non-existent Ruthenians will NOT take a Ukrainian bishop).

I also suspect that the jelling of The Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of North and Central America (the fact that Met. Sotirios refuses to participate and his Metropolitanate (although its bishops are on the list of canonical bishops) is not listed on the official website, although the UOCC is, as a jurisdiction, and a non-existent "Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North America is listed, and the official request IIRC went out to join Mexico and Central America to the South American Episcopal Assembly, etc. shows that that jelling hasn't solidified) is doing its part to delay things: had SCOBA still been up and running, which gave the Phanar another vote with ACROD-the executive committee for the ACOBNCA, which would also give I notice is not listed, and there is still the wrangling over the OCA on that.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on October 06, 2011, 06:00:16 PM
Isa, that is the most convoluted post you've ever made. I can't make sense of it. Try again as if to be read by a person with little patience and with meager mental abilities, such as I.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Irish Melkite on October 07, 2011, 02:21:33 AM
Isa, that is the most convoluted post you've ever made. I can't make sense of it. Try again as if to be read by a person with little patience and with meager mental abilities, such as I.

Isa, my brother,

I have to agree with Aristokles. As conversant as I am with the ecclesial politics involved, you pretty much lost me except for your point that a Ukrainian bishop from the Old Country would be an unacceptable choice. (Have to say, my friend, that 'non-existent Ruthenians' - whatever point it is intended to convey - comes across as an unwarranted insult to the Carpatho-Rusyn faithful of ACROD.)

Many years,

Neil
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on October 07, 2011, 08:12:14 AM
nor getting someone from the Old Country (Slovakia OR ZAKARPATTIA OBLAST, UK), neither is an option
The abbreviation for Ukraine is UA. UK means United Kingdom.
Anyway, I mentioned only Slovakia,  because a bishop from the MP serving under the EP is something I would not even consider nowadays...
But the ties between ACROD and the Czechoslovak Church are cordial, so I could imagine someone coming from there.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: John of the North on October 07, 2011, 08:50:48 AM
Isa, that is the most convoluted post you've ever made. I can't make sense of it. Try again as if to be read by a person with little patience and with meager mental abilities, such as I.

Isa, my brother,

I have to agree with Aristokles. As conversant as I am with the ecclesial politics involved, you pretty much lost me except for your point that a Ukrainian bishop from the Old Country would be an unacceptable choice. (Have to say, my friend, that 'non-existent Ruthenians' - whatever point it is intended to convey - comes across as an unwarranted insult to the Carpatho-Rusyn faithful of ACROD.)

Many years,

Neil

The 'non-existent Ruthenians' comment was not intended by Isa as a slight on Ruthenians, rather it was a jab at those who claim that Ruthenians are not a distinct people in and of themselves.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on October 07, 2011, 10:54:48 AM
Isa, that is the most convoluted post you've ever made. I can't make sense of it. Try again as if to be read by a person with little patience and with meager mental abilities, such as I.

Isa, my brother,

I have to agree with Aristokles. As conversant as I am with the ecclesial politics involved, you pretty much lost me except for your point that a Ukrainian bishop from the Old Country would be an unacceptable choice. (Have to say, my friend, that 'non-existent Ruthenians' - whatever point it is intended to convey - comes across as an unwarranted insult to the Carpatho-Rusyn faithful of ACROD.)

Many years,

Neil

The 'non-existent Ruthenians' comment was not intended by Isa as a slight on Ruthenians, rather it was a jab at those who claim that Ruthenians are not a distinct people in and of themselves.

That's how I took it, he has always been respectful and understanding of the Rusyn point of view in these matters.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on October 07, 2011, 04:08:48 PM
Isa, that is the most convoluted post you've ever made. I can't make sense of it. Try again as if to be read by a person with little patience and with meager mental abilities, such as I.

Isa, my brother,

I have to agree with Aristokles. As conversant as I am with the ecclesial politics involved, you pretty much lost me except for your point that a Ukrainian bishop from the Old Country would be an unacceptable choice. (Have to say, my friend, that 'non-existent Ruthenians' - whatever point it is intended to convey - comes across as an unwarranted insult to the Carpatho-Rusyn faithful of ACROD.)
LOL. Sorry, I should have put that in quotation marks, as it was sarcasm: I've been defending the existence of Ruthenians on a number of threads lately against those who deny it.  Which is why I think that a Ukrainian bishop would be unacceptable (a ("Great") Russian bishop would be unwise, and given the history of why ACROD isn't in the OCA (bishops confusing Russophilia with the desire to be Russified), perhaps also unacceptable).  Unacceptable to the Ruthenian faithful, who do exist, and of whom I see no difference in opinion with the public opinion in Zakarpattia.

Major Archbishop Sviatoslav speaks of Bp. Milan of Mukacheve as if he is a member of the UGCC synod.  He's there as an observer, a point that many Ruthenians do not see emphasized enough.  Given the near absolute adherence to the PoM in Zakarpattia >95% in the furthest West region of West Ukraine, I don't see any difference on the other side of Uzhhorod.  So a bishop from there might please the Ruthenians here,  though given the present state of affairs between the PoM and the EP, I don't see that happening. Particularly as it might raise the issue that if the bishop is from the PoM, why isn't ACROD under it in North America as its Mother Church, and not the EP? (which would also stir up the canonical question of the UOCUSA and UOCC, its Mother Church and the PoM and EP).

Given that most Ukrainians of whatever stripe look at the Ruthenians the way the Ukrainians claim the Russians look on the Ukrainians, a Ukrainian bishop from the rest of the Ukraine would bring that problem in, along with the issues of the PoM/EP.

Receiving someone from the UOC-KP or UAOCC etc., do I need to spell out the problems with that?
(http://milmogame.wikispaces.com/file/view/powder_keg.png/195143854/powder_keg.png)
but just to be clear
Quote
Kiev, Ukraine
The Synod of dissident Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Kyiv Patriarchate, led by the former Russian Orthodox Metropolitan of Kiev, Filaret, has published a letter to Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and Patriarch Kyrill of Moscow concerning the work of the Inter-Orthodox Preparatory Commission that dealt with the issues of autocephaly and autonomy. The letter has an interesting reference to the OCA. The Ukrainian Synod points out:

“In fact, the participants of the session in Chambésy, among the other, took the trouble of determining the future destiny of the Orthodox Churches of Ukraine, Macedonia and Montenegro, Orthodox Church in America, as well as the destiny of the Orthodox Church in Japan, Moldavia, and Estonia. But no representatives of these Churches were involved either officially or unofficially in elaboration of the decisions which are of importance for their further being. It is obvious that such way of discussion of important issues of ecclesiastical life does not comply either with the spirit of the God’s justice and of the Gospel’s brotherly love (?f. John 7:51), or with the practice of the Ecumenical and pious Local Councils, where at even indubitable heretics had a chance to express their stance.” (emphasis in the original)
http://www.ocanews.org/news/NewsFromAroundtheOCA.html
Quote
The Councils of the Kyiv Patriarchate have repeatedly turned to the Church of Constantinople, which is historically the Mother for the Ukrainian Church, with a request to consider the question of recognition of autocephaly of the Ukrainian Church. But these requests have been also left without due consideration and response by the present.
http://www.cerkva.info/en/documents/12/104-chambesy.html

On top of all these problems is that the successor of Bp. Nicholas would have had a seat on SCOBA, which is only in the process of obsolescence it seems and where Met. Jonah of the OCA has a seat, and supposedly would have a seat on the Executive Committee of the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of North and Central America, which seems not to have been ironed out, as said committee is nowhere to be found on the ACOBNCA official website.

Despite protestations of Fr. Arey to the contrary, we do know that there is a controversy about the executive committee lacking the first/primatial hierarch of the OCA, which has been downplayed, e.g. by the Secratary of the ACOBNCA
Quote
Matthew: We’ve heard various things, reports, about the Executive Committee of the assembly, but my understanding is that the voting is actually done by the whole assembly. Is that right? The assembly itself is where the power lies essentially.

Bishop Basil: The word “Executive Committee” was not even mentioned. You didn’t hear those words at all during the whole Episcopal Assembly. What constitutes the members of the Executive Committee—there’s a lot of speculation and a lot of talk going on about it, but those words were not even mentioned at the Episcopal Assembly because it is so secondary. Its importance is so secondary, or even tertiary to the work of the assembly and its committees. Unlike what we Americans generally think of as an Executive Committee being just the officers, the chair, the vice-chairs, the secretary, and treasurer, that’s not what the Chambesy document defines as the Executive Committee. It’s that: it’s the officers, but then the heads of the Mother Churches representatives in this country. So that those who are not officers—for instance, Metropolitan Christopher is the senior hierarch of the Serbian Orthodox Church, he’s not an officer of the Episcopal Assembly, but as the senior hierarch of the Serbian Orthodox Patriarchate, he would be a member of the Executive Committee. But it’s really just for consultation, no decisions will be made by the executive committee, everything has to be referred back to the Episcopal Assembly. That’s why I believe it wasn’t even discussed at this meeting at all.

I don’t want to say it’s not important because it did come from Chambesy so I assume it has some function...
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?rlz=1T4TSHB_enUS238US238&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=12022l24145l0l24591l14l14l1l12l0l0l220l220l2-1l1l0&hl=en&q=cache:nN86M_PAAyEJ:http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/features/bishop_basil_and_the_episcopal_assemblies+executive+committee+assembly+of+orthodox+bishops+Justinian&ct=clnk
His Grace goes on, but the executive committee is never fleshed out, although we know, as HG says, that it is mandated by Chambesy.  Were it not for Met. Jonah's non-membership, we would have have nothing definite on the composition of it.  We can assume that Arbp. Demetrios is on it, as well as Met. Philip.  But beyond that, it gets murky.  You would think that Abp. Justinian would be on it, but since he commemorates Met. Jonah (along with Pat. Kiril) that just underlines the oddity of Met. Jonah not being on.  Is Met. Hilarion on it?  He didn't have a seat on SCOBA, but with Act of Canonical Communion, Abp. Justinian (or rather, his predecessor) got a seat:how different is Met. Hilarion's self rule from ACROD's?  

Which brings up the issue that ACROD and the other EP jurisdictions, including UOCUSA, had a seat on SCOBA, do they have one on the Executive Committee?  And if they do, why doesn't Met. Jonah?  The enthronement of the successor to Bp. Nicholas will force an answer to this question, as he has to take up all the new duties, and will be seen doing so.  It that means taking his place on the executive committe, it will be noticed (whereas Bp. Nicholas, predating the Executive Committee, was not). So to if one of Met. Jonah's suffragans is translated to ACROD and takes a seat on the executive committee.

Then there is the problem that Met. Sotirios of Toronto wants no part of ACOBNCA, and is taking Canada out of it (at least trying, so far he has just boycotted it), but ACROD has parishes in Canada as well as the US.  Not many, but since Bishop Iliya of Philomelion has two Albanian parishes to earn him a seat on SCOBA, how many do you need?  That issue hasn't been resolved.  If the relations between ACROD and UOC-C are anything like the UGCC and the Vatican's Ruthenians, given the larger share of the Ukrainians of the Canadian Orthodox pie and the fraternal relations with the UOCUSA, that is another piece of the puzzle no one wants to put together.

As for Slovakia, it has a sympathy with the OCA: the EP denied its autocephaly for decades, interfered in its affairs, had to depend on support from the PoM, etc.  Being also a minority faith in its country, the Church of CzLS (which recognizes the OCA) has a lot of ties to the OCA which a bishop from Slovakia might strengthen, which many would not like to see.  Further it would strengthen the ties of ACROD to a "Mother Church" not the Phanar, something the Phanar doesn't want (one reason it won't recognize a UOC seperate from the PoM  in Ukraine, to which UOCC and UOCUSA would attache themselves over Constantinople).

I don't know if the delay is intentional, with an eye to ACROD going down with the rest of PA and "solving" the problem that way (a final solution a bishop will stop), but circumstances do not favor speeding up a successor being in enthroned for many interests not the Carpatho-Russians.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Irish Melkite on October 08, 2011, 05:16:15 AM
Isa, that is the most convoluted post you've ever made. I can't make sense of it. Try again as if to be read by a person with little patience and with meager mental abilities, such as I.

Isa, my brother,

I have to agree with Aristokles. As conversant as I am with the ecclesial politics involved, you pretty much lost me except for your point that a Ukrainian bishop from the Old Country would be an unacceptable choice. (Have to say, my friend, that 'non-existent Ruthenians' - whatever point it is intended to convey - comes across as an unwarranted insult to the Carpatho-Rusyn faithful of ACROD.)
LOL. Sorry, I should have put that in quotation marks, as it was sarcasm: I've been defending the existence of Ruthenians on a number of threads lately against those who deny it.  Which is why I think that a Ukrainian bishop would be unacceptable (a ("Great") Russian bishop would be unwise, and given the history of why ACROD isn't in the OCA (bishops confusing Russophilia with the desire to be Russified), perhaps also unacceptable).  Unacceptable to the Ruthenian faithful, who do exist, and of whom I see no difference in opinion with the public opinion in Zakarpattia.

Major Archbishop Sviatoslav speaks of Bp. Milan of Mukacheve as if he is a member of the UGCC synod.  He's there as an observer, a point that many Ruthenians do not see emphasized enough.

Much clearer, my friend  ;D

I probably should have picked up on the sarcasm - because, as others have observed, I've also never seen you badmouth or dismiss the Rusyns out-of-hand, as others often do. It would help if I hadn't read it at the crack of dawn or thereabouts.

Although it's a side note, you are right on track in noting the parallel involved in the situation vis-a-vis the UGCC Synod and the relationship of Bishop Milan to it. I've pointed his observer status to my UGCC brethren any number of times over the years. It's pretty clear that, the UGCC would like absorb his jurisdiction - which they can't do w/o Rome's blessing (I suppose one of those rare occasions on which one can be truly grateful for Rome's place in the game). Otoh, his presence as an observer is not something that I imagine he'd like to give up. It does have its benefits, if nothing else than to have a venue in which to converse with one's peers about common issues that beset all the Churches.

HB Melkite Patriarch Maximos V, of blessed memory, once told me that the rest of the Catholic and Orthodox worlds could not seem to understand or accept the fraternal and collegial relationships that exist among the 5 Antiochian Patriarchs. 'We are the brothers of one another. We must be. Where we live, to whom else do we have to turn? Who better understands the issues that our bishops, our priests, our faithful, face every day?'

Many years,

Neil
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on October 09, 2011, 12:49:26 AM
Isa, that is the most convoluted post you've ever made. I can't make sense of it. Try again as if to be read by a person with little patience and with meager mental abilities, such as I.

Isa, my brother,

I have to agree with Aristokles. As conversant as I am with the ecclesial politics involved, you pretty much lost me except for your point that a Ukrainian bishop from the Old Country would be an unacceptable choice. (Have to say, my friend, that 'non-existent Ruthenians' - whatever point it is intended to convey - comes across as an unwarranted insult to the Carpatho-Rusyn faithful of ACROD.)
LOL. Sorry, I should have put that in quotation marks, as it was sarcasm: I've been defending the existence of Ruthenians on a number of threads lately against those who deny it.  Which is why I think that a Ukrainian bishop would be unacceptable (a ("Great") Russian bishop would be unwise, and given the history of why ACROD isn't in the OCA (bishops confusing Russophilia with the desire to be Russified), perhaps also unacceptable).  Unacceptable to the Ruthenian faithful, who do exist, and of whom I see no difference in opinion with the public opinion in Zakarpattia.

Major Archbishop Sviatoslav speaks of Bp. Milan of Mukacheve as if he is a member of the UGCC synod.  He's there as an observer, a point that many Ruthenians do not see emphasized enough.

Much clearer, my friend  ;D

I probably should have picked up on the sarcasm - because, as others have observed, I've also never seen you badmouth or dismiss the Rusyns out-of-hand, as others often do. It would help if I hadn't read it at the crack of dawn or thereabouts.
Sorry about the confusion.

Although it's a side note, you are right on track in noting the parallel involved in the situation vis-a-vis the UGCC Synod and the relationship of Bishop Milan to it. I've pointed his observer status to my UGCC brethren any number of times over the years. It's pretty clear that, the UGCC would like absorb his jurisdiction - which they can't do w/o Rome's blessing (I suppose one of those rare occasions on which one can be truly grateful for Rome's place in the game). Otoh, his presence as an observer is not something that I imagine he'd like to give up. It does have its benefits, if nothing else than to have a venue in which to converse with one's peers about common issues that beset all the Churches.
Nothing wrong about being neighborly, but good fences make good neighbors: sitting on their porch doesn't mean you want them to forclose on your house.

HB Melkite Patriarch Maximos V, of blessed memory, once told me that the rest of the Catholic and Orthodox worlds could not seem to understand or accept the fraternal and collegial relationships that exist among the 5 Antiochian Patriarchs. 'We are the brothers of one another. We must be. Where we live, to whom else do we have to turn? Who better understands the issues that our bishops, our priests, our faithful, face every day?
Part of it is we don't see any reason to get involved in Old Rome and New Rome's (and sometimes the Third Rome's) squabbles of whose on first.  It also helps that the submission of the Melkite patriarch wasn't imposed: less bitter weeds sown yields no bitter fruit to eat.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: IreneOlinyk on October 09, 2011, 11:30:21 AM
Quote
Given the near absolute adherence to the PoM in Zakarpattia >95% in the furthest West region of West Ukraine, I don't see any difference on the other side of Uzhhorod.

I don't understand these statistics Ialmisry:
Do you mean that 95% of the whole population belongs to the UOC-MP?
or that 95% of the orthodox believers in Zakarpatia belong to the UOC-MP?

What is the basis of your statistics?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on October 09, 2011, 07:45:21 PM
Quote
Given the near absolute adherence to the PoM in Zakarpattia >95% in the furthest West region of West Ukraine, I don't see any difference on the other side of Uzhhorod.

I don't understand these statistics Ialmisry:
Do you mean that 95% of the whole population belongs to the UOC-MP?
or that 95% of the orthodox believers in Zakarpatia belong to the UOC-MP?

What is the basis of your statistics?
95% of the Orthodox population, which is at least half of the population.

And statistic, from any quarter, I've ever seen.  The link above, for instance.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Orest on October 11, 2011, 10:18:30 AM
Quote
Given the near absolute adherence to the PoM in Zakarpattia >95% in the furthest West region of West Ukraine, I don't see any difference on the other side of Uzhhorod.

I don't understand these statistics Ialmisry:
Do you mean that 95% of the whole population belongs to the UOC-MP?
or that 95% of the orthodox believers in Zakarpatia belong to the UOC-MP?

What is the basis of your statistics?
95% of the Orthodox population, which is at least half of the population.

And statistic, from any quarter, I've ever seen.  The link above, for instance.

I doubt that statistic is accurate.  The UAOC Church for example has a lot of parishes in the area.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on October 12, 2011, 12:14:48 AM
All this time without a name or a plan surfacing, is amazing to me.  Hasn't anyone heard what is the plan of the ACROD leadership for the naming of a new hierarch for their diocese?  This is supposedly the most visited Orthodox Christian internet forum and there is no one who knows what is going on in terms of a permanent replacement for Metropolitan Nicholas of Blessed Memory?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on October 12, 2011, 01:28:35 AM
Quote
Given the near absolute adherence to the PoM in Zakarpattia >95% in the furthest West region of West Ukraine, I don't see any difference on the other side of Uzhhorod.

I don't understand these statistics Ialmisry:
Do you mean that 95% of the whole population belongs to the UOC-MP?
or that 95% of the orthodox believers in Zakarpatia belong to the UOC-MP?

What is the basis of your statistics?
95% of the Orthodox population, which is at least half of the population.

And statistic, from any quarter, I've ever seen.  The link above, for instance.

I doubt that statistic is accurate.  The UAOC Church for example has a lot of parishes in the area.
I just came across this, corroborating bit of evidence that the area is unlike the rest of West Ukraine
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/26/%D0%94%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D1%82%D1%83%D1%80_2010_%D0%BF%D0%BE_%D0%BE%D0%BA%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%85-en.png)
I'm not talking about the relative merits or demerits of the two candidates, just to indicate on a sociological level that Zakarpattia sees that matter very differently from its nearest neighbors, and resembles more Eastern Ukraine, the stronghold of the UOC.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on October 12, 2011, 06:53:18 PM
All this time without a name or a plan surfacing, is amazing to me.  Hasn't anyone heard what is the plan of the ACROD leadership for the naming of a new hierarch for their diocese?  This is supposedly the most visited Orthodox Christian internet forum and there is no one who knows what is going on in terms of a permanent replacement for Metropolitan Nicholas of Blessed Memory?


A sobor is set for June, 2012. Presumably candidates will be presented at that time.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on October 14, 2011, 08:46:33 AM
All this time without a name or a plan surfacing, is amazing to me.  Hasn't anyone heard what is the plan of the ACROD leadership for the naming of a new hierarch for their diocese?  This is supposedly the most visited Orthodox Christian internet forum and there is no one who knows what is going on in terms of a permanent replacement for Metropolitan Nicholas of Blessed Memory?


A sobor is set for June, 2012. Presumably candidates will be presented at that time.

That is the triennial , regularly scheduled Diocesan Council/Sobor, as required by the Diocesan constitution. God willing, the issue of the vacant episcopacy will be resolved well before that date.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on October 14, 2011, 08:54:51 AM
Quote
Given the near absolute adherence to the PoM in Zakarpattia >95% in the furthest West region of West Ukraine, I don't see any difference on the other side of Uzhhorod.

I don't understand these statistics Ialmisry:
Do you mean that 95% of the whole population belongs to the UOC-MP?
or that 95% of the orthodox believers in Zakarpatia belong to the UOC-MP?

What is the basis of your statistics?
95% of the Orthodox population, which is at least half of the population.

And statistic, from any quarter, I've ever seen.  The link above, for instance.

I doubt that statistic is accurate.  The UAOC Church for example has a lot of parishes in the area.
I just came across this, corroborating bit of evidence that the area is unlike the rest of West Ukraine
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/26/%D0%94%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D1%82%D1%83%D1%80_2010_%D0%BF%D0%BE_%D0%BE%D0%BA%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%85-en.png)
I'm not talking about the relative merits or demerits of the two candidates, just to indicate on a sociological level that Zakarpattia sees that matter very differently from its nearest neighbors, and resembles more Eastern Ukraine, the stronghold of the UOC.


With an understanding of history and sociology, both of which Isa is versed in, it is simply a demographic fact that in spite of the protestations of Ukrainian nationalists, the ethnic and religious composition of the region is far more diverse that is that of most western and central Ukraine. Under the Hapsburghs, Uzhorod/Ungvar was one of the great 'multi-cultural' centers of east central Europe. It always strikes me as funny, yes funny, that the same nationalists who proclaim the inviolability of the Ukrainian borders as cynically devised by the despised Russian communists have absolutely no problem with the western powers' sell-out of Transcarpathia and the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on October 14, 2011, 09:25:41 AM
All this time without a name or a plan surfacing, is amazing to me.  Hasn't anyone heard what is the plan of the ACROD leadership for the naming of a new hierarch for their diocese?  This is supposedly the most visited Orthodox Christian internet forum and there is no one who knows what is going on in terms of a permanent replacement for Metropolitan Nicholas of Blessed Memory?


A sobor is set for June, 2012. Presumably candidates will be presented at that time.

That is the triennial , regularly scheduled Diocesan Council/Sobor, as required by the Diocesan constitution. God willing, the issue of the vacant episcopacy will be resolved well before that date.

One would hope so!
However my conjecture is founded on other data from a consistory member as related to me by a priest. Me? I'm just a rumor passer.  :D
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: admiralnick on October 14, 2011, 09:32:24 AM
ACROD is too disorganized as an entity to end this in the near future. One of 3 things will happen:

1) A Ukrainian will become bishop
2) A Greek will become bishop
3) Someone will become a "temporary" bishop.

-Nick
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on October 14, 2011, 11:48:21 AM
ACROD is too disorganized as an entity to end this in the near future. One of 3 things will happen:

1) A Ukrainian will become bishop
2) A Greek will become bishop
3) Someone will become a "temporary" bishop.

-Nick

Pot: The kettle is black! Oh my!.......

And BTW, there is a 'temporary' bishop, i.e., the Locum Tenens, Archbishop Demetrios.  I, and many others, refrain from letting our personal feelings or experiences with other jurisdictions and clergy color our remarks or observations. I have much I could say, but I was taught not to do so and I will not other than my opening observation.

Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on October 14, 2011, 03:23:48 PM
What if no bishop is found? Can the Greek Archbishop continue as locum tenens indefinitely?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: admiralnick on October 14, 2011, 03:27:10 PM
ACROD is too disorganized as an entity to end this in the near future. One of 3 things will happen:

1) A Ukrainian will become bishop
2) A Greek will become bishop
3) Someone will become a "temporary" bishop.

-Nick

Pot: The kettle is black! Oh my!.......

And BTW, there is a 'temporary' bishop, i.e., the Locum Tenens, Archbishop Demetrios.  I, and many others, refrain from letting our personal feelings or experiences with other jurisdictions and clergy color our remarks or observations. I have much I could say, but I was taught not to do so and I will not other than my opening observation.



I meant Temporary bishop as in ruling hierarch of the diocese until they find someone permanent, not as in a Locum Tenens arrangement. There was no malice intended in my post. I was merely sharing the truth of the situation. ACROD as a whole is not well organized and therefore will have problems finding a hierarch. If you think that I am being disingenuous you are free to prove to me the organization of ACROD. Of course it's tough to do when the position has been vacant this long with basically no action being taken. Hardly an example of good organization.

-Nick
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on October 14, 2011, 03:55:51 PM
ACROD is too disorganized as an entity to end this in the near future. One of 3 things will happen:

1) A Ukrainian will become bishop
2) A Greek will become bishop
3) Someone will become a "temporary" bishop.

-Nick

Pot: The kettle is black! Oh my!.......

And BTW, there is a 'temporary' bishop, i.e., the Locum Tenens, Archbishop Demetrios.  I, and many others, refrain from letting our personal feelings or experiences with other jurisdictions and clergy color our remarks or observations. I have much I could say, but I was taught not to do so and I will not other than my opening observation.



I meant Temporary bishop as in ruling hierarch of the diocese until they find someone permanent, not as in a Locum Tenens arrangement. There was no malice intended in my post. I was merely sharing the truth of the situation. ACROD as a whole is not well organized and therefore will have problems finding a hierarch. If you think that I am being disingenuous you are free to prove to me the organization of ACROD. Of course it's tough to do when the position has been vacant this long with basically no action being taken. Hardly an example of good organization.

-Nick

I appreciate that you meant no malice.

I merely was alluding to the reality that in many ways the ACROD vacancy dilemma mirrors that of our divided Orthodox house in the Americas as a whole. The difficulties of finding capable and wise Bishops from 'within' one jurisdiction or another are well known to us all. For that matter even finding them within our own continent becomes problematic for many!

For the record though, for an organization with is 'not well organized', the history of then ACROD bears a different witness. From its founding in 1938 through the current 'inter-regnum', succession was never a problem. A successor was found for the late Metropolitan Orestes Chornock in 1966 some years prior to his becoming incapable of discharging the duties of his office in the late 1960's. That Bishop (+John) died suddenly in dramatic fashion as a young man at the end of a banquet in his early 50's. In spite of that, the ACROD immediately had two viable candidates to replace him and that transition occurred within a few months of his sudden death. (It should be noted that one of those candidates was at the time a Bishop in a sister-jurisdiction and the other, a young man at the time, is now an OCA bishop.)

Perhaps the dearth of young men becoming either monastic priests or celibate pastors over the past generation has contributed to the problems of 'bishop-search' across the Orthodox Americas!

Getting back to your three main points, as to a 'Ukrainian' becoming bishop, I suppose that is possible, particularly if one gets into the entire Rusyn/Ukrainian ethnology. (One could argue, for example, that several of the UOC bishops in the US and Canada are at least in part, Rusyn.....One could make the same argument about the last three men to be chosen Bishop in the OCA for that matter.....not to mention the late Archbishop Job, of thrice blessed memory...) As to a Greek, I think such a proposal would not be accepted by the still independent minded body of parishes, although it would be far less of a problem than it would have been a generation ago. As to a 'temporary bishop', I am not sure what you mean by that other than the appointment of a different LT.

Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: admiralnick on October 14, 2011, 04:08:19 PM
ACROD is too disorganized as an entity to end this in the near future. One of 3 things will happen:

1) A Ukrainian will become bishop
2) A Greek will become bishop
3) Someone will become a "temporary" bishop.

-Nick

Pot: The kettle is black! Oh my!.......

And BTW, there is a 'temporary' bishop, i.e., the Locum Tenens, Archbishop Demetrios.  I, and many others, refrain from letting our personal feelings or experiences with other jurisdictions and clergy color our remarks or observations. I have much I could say, but I was taught not to do so and I will not other than my opening observation.



I meant Temporary bishop as in ruling hierarch of the diocese until they find someone permanent, not as in a Locum Tenens arrangement. There was no malice intended in my post. I was merely sharing the truth of the situation. ACROD as a whole is not well organized and therefore will have problems finding a hierarch. If you think that I am being disingenuous you are free to prove to me the organization of ACROD. Of course it's tough to do when the position has been vacant this long with basically no action being taken. Hardly an example of good organization.

-Nick

I appreciate that you meant no malice.

I merely was alluding to the reality that in many ways the ACROD vacancy dilemma mirrors that of our divided Orthodox house in the Americas as a whole. The difficulties of finding capable and wise Bishops from 'within' one jurisdiction or another are well known to us all. For that matter even finding them within our own continent becomes problematic for many!

For the record though, for an organization with is 'not well organized', the history of then ACROD bears a different witness. From its founding in 1938 through the current 'inter-regnum', succession was never a problem. A successor was found for the late Metropolitan Orestes Chornock in 1966 some years prior to his becoming incapable of discharging the duties of his office in the late 1960's. That Bishop (+John) died suddenly in dramatic fashion as a young man at the end of a banquet in his early 50's. In spite of that, the ACROD immediately had two viable candidates to replace him and that transition occurred within a few months of his sudden death. (It should be noted that one of those candidates was at the time a Bishop in a sister-jurisdiction and the other, a young man at the time, is now an OCA bishop.)

Perhaps the dearth of young men becoming either monastic priests or celibate pastors over the past generation has contributed to the problems of 'bishop-search' across the Orthodox Americas!

Getting back to your three main points, as to a 'Ukrainian' becoming bishop, I suppose that is possible, particularly if one gets into the entire Rusyn/Ukrainian ethnology. (One could argue, for example, that several of the UOC bishops in the US and Canada are at least in part, Rusyn.....One could make the same argument about the last three men to be chosen Bishop in the OCA for that matter.....not to mention the late Archbishop Job, of thrice blessed memory...) As to a Greek, I think such a proposal would not be accepted by the still independent minded body of parishes, although it would be far less of a problem than it would have been a generation ago. As to a 'temporary bishop', I am not sure what you mean by that other than the appointment of a different LT.



I appreciate your response. In terms of a temporary bishop, something like a holding place until a permanent bishop can be found. For example, on the priest level, Fr. Michael Psenechnuk was assigned as the pastor of St. Michael's in Niles, IL. between the passing of Fr. Charles Panchisin and Fr. Mark Leasure (currently of Taylor). Fr. Michael had all the duties of being the pastor and was officially referred to as the pastor of the church, but there was explicit understanding that he was not going to be there long term. In the end I believe he was there a little over a year before Fr. Mark was appointed. I guess that's the best example I can give of what I was trying to imply.

-Nick
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on October 14, 2011, 04:43:15 PM
ACROD is too disorganized as an entity to end this in the near future. One of 3 things will happen:

1) A Ukrainian will become bishop
2) A Greek will become bishop
3) Someone will become a "temporary" bishop.

-Nick

Pot: The kettle is black! Oh my!.......

And BTW, there is a 'temporary' bishop, i.e., the Locum Tenens, Archbishop Demetrios.  I, and many others, refrain from letting our personal feelings or experiences with other jurisdictions and clergy color our remarks or observations. I have much I could say, but I was taught not to do so and I will not other than my opening observation.



I meant Temporary bishop as in ruling hierarch of the diocese until they find someone permanent, not as in a Locum Tenens arrangement. There was no malice intended in my post. I was merely sharing the truth of the situation. ACROD as a whole is not well organized and therefore will have problems finding a hierarch. If you think that I am being disingenuous you are free to prove to me the organization of ACROD. Of course it's tough to do when the position has been vacant this long with basically no action being taken. Hardly an example of good organization.

-Nick

I appreciate that you meant no malice.

I merely was alluding to the reality that in many ways the ACROD vacancy dilemma mirrors that of our divided Orthodox house in the Americas as a whole. The difficulties of finding capable and wise Bishops from 'within' one jurisdiction or another are well known to us all. For that matter even finding them within our own continent becomes problematic for many!

For the record though, for an organization with is 'not well organized', the history of then ACROD bears a different witness. From its founding in 1938 through the current 'inter-regnum', succession was never a problem. A successor was found for the late Metropolitan Orestes Chornock in 1966 some years prior to his becoming incapable of discharging the duties of his office in the late 1960's. That Bishop (+John) died suddenly in dramatic fashion as a young man at the end of a banquet in his early 50's. In spite of that, the ACROD immediately had two viable candidates to replace him and that transition occurred within a few months of his sudden death. (It should be noted that one of those candidates was at the time a Bishop in a sister-jurisdiction and the other, a young man at the time, is now an OCA bishop.)

Perhaps the dearth of young men becoming either monastic priests or celibate pastors over the past generation has contributed to the problems of 'bishop-search' across the Orthodox Americas!

Getting back to your three main points, as to a 'Ukrainian' becoming bishop, I suppose that is possible, particularly if one gets into the entire Rusyn/Ukrainian ethnology. (One could argue, for example, that several of the UOC bishops in the US and Canada are at least in part, Rusyn.....One could make the same argument about the last three men to be chosen Bishop in the OCA for that matter.....not to mention the late Archbishop Job, of thrice blessed memory...) As to a Greek, I think such a proposal would not be accepted by the still independent minded body of parishes, although it would be far less of a problem than it would have been a generation ago. As to a 'temporary bishop', I am not sure what you mean by that other than the appointment of a different LT.



I appreciate your response. In terms of a temporary bishop, something like a holding place until a permanent bishop can be found. For example, on the priest level, Fr. Michael Psenechnuk was assigned as the pastor of St. Michael's in Niles, IL. between the passing of Fr. Charles Panchisin and Fr. Mark Leasure (currently of Taylor). Fr. Michael had all the duties of being the pastor and was officially referred to as the pastor of the church, but there was explicit understanding that he was not going to be there long term. In the end I believe he was there a little over a year before Fr. Mark was appointed. I guess that's the best example I can give of what I was trying to imply.

-Nick


Do I sense that you suspect such an arrangement for one of the existing UOC-USA or perhaps UOC-Canada bishops being 'directed' by the EP is being contemplated? Interesting.....(as Spock would note....)

I did want to add that as to a priest from GOA being considered, any such hypothetical candidate would have to NOT be a Hellenist at heart and would have to possess some sense of Slavic propriety in order to succeed. I am not sure such a person exists!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: serb1389 on October 14, 2011, 05:08:06 PM
^  Pick me!   :o ;D ;D

All I want to know is what a Major Archbishop is.  And, is there a "minor" archbishop? 

(I read it somewhere up above.  too lazy to find & re-post)   :angel:
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: admiralnick on October 14, 2011, 05:09:02 PM
ACROD is too disorganized as an entity to end this in the near future. One of 3 things will happen:

1) A Ukrainian will become bishop
2) A Greek will become bishop
3) Someone will become a "temporary" bishop.

-Nick

Pot: The kettle is black! Oh my!.......

And BTW, there is a 'temporary' bishop, i.e., the Locum Tenens, Archbishop Demetrios.  I, and many others, refrain from letting our personal feelings or experiences with other jurisdictions and clergy color our remarks or observations. I have much I could say, but I was taught not to do so and I will not other than my opening observation.



I meant Temporary bishop as in ruling hierarch of the diocese until they find someone permanent, not as in a Locum Tenens arrangement. There was no malice intended in my post. I was merely sharing the truth of the situation. ACROD as a whole is not well organized and therefore will have problems finding a hierarch. If you think that I am being disingenuous you are free to prove to me the organization of ACROD. Of course it's tough to do when the position has been vacant this long with basically no action being taken. Hardly an example of good organization.

-Nick

I appreciate that you meant no malice.

I merely was alluding to the reality that in many ways the ACROD vacancy dilemma mirrors that of our divided Orthodox house in the Americas as a whole. The difficulties of finding capable and wise Bishops from 'within' one jurisdiction or another are well known to us all. For that matter even finding them within our own continent becomes problematic for many!

For the record though, for an organization with is 'not well organized', the history of then ACROD bears a different witness. From its founding in 1938 through the current 'inter-regnum', succession was never a problem. A successor was found for the late Metropolitan Orestes Chornock in 1966 some years prior to his becoming incapable of discharging the duties of his office in the late 1960's. That Bishop (+John) died suddenly in dramatic fashion as a young man at the end of a banquet in his early 50's. In spite of that, the ACROD immediately had two viable candidates to replace him and that transition occurred within a few months of his sudden death. (It should be noted that one of those candidates was at the time a Bishop in a sister-jurisdiction and the other, a young man at the time, is now an OCA bishop.)

Perhaps the dearth of young men becoming either monastic priests or celibate pastors over the past generation has contributed to the problems of 'bishop-search' across the Orthodox Americas!

Getting back to your three main points, as to a 'Ukrainian' becoming bishop, I suppose that is possible, particularly if one gets into the entire Rusyn/Ukrainian ethnology. (One could argue, for example, that several of the UOC bishops in the US and Canada are at least in part, Rusyn.....One could make the same argument about the last three men to be chosen Bishop in the OCA for that matter.....not to mention the late Archbishop Job, of thrice blessed memory...) As to a Greek, I think such a proposal would not be accepted by the still independent minded body of parishes, although it would be far less of a problem than it would have been a generation ago. As to a 'temporary bishop', I am not sure what you mean by that other than the appointment of a different LT.



I appreciate your response. In terms of a temporary bishop, something like a holding place until a permanent bishop can be found. For example, on the priest level, Fr. Michael Psenechnuk was assigned as the pastor of St. Michael's in Niles, IL. between the passing of Fr. Charles Panchisin and Fr. Mark Leasure (currently of Taylor). Fr. Michael had all the duties of being the pastor and was officially referred to as the pastor of the church, but there was explicit understanding that he was not going to be there long term. In the end I believe he was there a little over a year before Fr. Mark was appointed. I guess that's the best example I can give of what I was trying to imply.

-Nick


Do I sense that you suspect such an arrangement for one of the existing UOC-USA or perhaps UOC-Canada bishops being 'directed' by the EP is being contemplated? Interesting.....(as Spock would note....)

I did want to add that as to a priest from GOA being considered, any such hypothetical candidate would have to NOT be a Hellenist at heart and would have to possess some sense of Slavic propriety in order to succeed. I am not sure such a person exists!

Yes, exactly.

-Nick
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: arimethea on October 14, 2011, 08:23:33 PM
Someone made a bad joke the other day that I was the perfect candidate for ACROD because of my ethnic background and the historical significance of my family in the founding of ACORD and the fact that I am not married. I was not amused.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on October 14, 2011, 09:33:14 PM
Someone made a bad joke the other day that I was the perfect candidate for ACROD because of my ethnic background and the historical significance of my family in the founding of ACORD and the fact that I am not married. I was not amused.

Actually the same bad joke was going around 'warning' single men over thirty five not to answer the phone.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on October 14, 2011, 09:52:35 PM
Funny!  Thanks for the laugh.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on October 15, 2011, 05:06:50 AM
All I want to know is what a Major Archbishop is.  And, is there a "minor" archbishop? 

Major Archbishop is a title used in the Eastern Catholic Churches when the Pope does not want to call a Primate of one of the Eastern Catholic Churches a Patriarch.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: serb1389 on October 15, 2011, 02:39:02 PM
All I want to know is what a Major Archbishop is.  And, is there a "minor" archbishop? 

Major Archbishop is a title used in the Eastern Catholic Churches when the Pope does not want to call a Primate of one of the Eastern Catholic Churches a Patriarch.

how does that work in their hierarchical system?  does that major archbishop have the same jurisdictional authority as a patriarch?  why not just give the title of patriarch out?  political reasons? 
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on October 15, 2011, 05:01:55 PM
All I want to know is what a Major Archbishop is.  And, is there a "minor" archbishop? 

Major Archbishop is a title used in the Eastern Catholic Churches when the Pope does not want to call a Primate of one of the Eastern Catholic Churches a Patriarch.

how does that work in their hierarchical system?  does that major archbishop have the same jurisdictional authority as a patriarch?  why not just give the title of patriarch out?  political reasons? 
The historical reason is that the major archbishop heads a schism from an Orthodox local Church which wasn't autocephalous or a patriarchate at the time of the schism.  The present standoff between Moscow, the Vatican and L'viv (which has moved itself to Kiev and decarled itself a patriarchate) shows how much the Vatican doesn't like to completely burn its bridges.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on October 15, 2011, 05:03:46 PM
does that major archbishop have the same jurisdictional authority as a patriarch?

Yes.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on October 15, 2011, 05:44:14 PM
does that major archbishop have the same jurisdictional authority as a patriarch?

Yes.
Except that the major archbishop's election first has to be approved by the Vatican, rather than just notify the Vatican of the result as with their patriarchs.  Also, if he is named a cardinal, his is a cardinal priest, while a patriarch is a cardinal bishop.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Orest on October 31, 2011, 01:47:49 PM
Quote
Given the near absolute adherence to the PoM in Zakarpattia >95% in the furthest West region of West Ukraine, I don't see any difference on the other side of Uzhhorod.

I don't understand these statistics Ialmisry:
Do you mean that 95% of the whole population belongs to the UOC-MP?
or that 95% of the orthodox believers in Zakarpatia belong to the UOC-MP?

What is the basis of your statistics?
95% of the Orthodox population, which is at least half of the population.

And statistic, from any quarter, I've ever seen.  The link above, for instance.

I doubt that statistic is accurate.  The UAOC Church for example has a lot of parishes in the area.

I am still looking for statistics for the Transkarpatia area of Ukraine with no luck.

The UOC-MP web site is here:

http://m-eparchy.org.ua/

This part only has pictures of some of the old wooden churches.  I wonder why there isn't a list of all the parishes and priests as on other eparchy web sites?
http://m-eparchy.org.ua/fotolitopis/hrami.html
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on October 31, 2011, 04:46:04 PM
I didn't have any luck for the Mukachevo-Uzhhorod Eparchy either, but the overview of the Khust-Vynohradiv Eparchy (http://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/76183.html) in eastern Transcarpathia lists 213 parishes and 16 monasteries.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: IreneOlinyk on November 05, 2011, 10:00:30 AM
Quote
Do I sense that you suspect such an arrangement for one of the existing UOC-USA or perhaps UOC-Canada bishops being 'directed' by the EP is being contemplated? Interesting.....(as Spock would note....)

I did want to add that as to a priest from GOA being considered, any such hypothetical candidate would have to NOT be a Hellenist at heart and would have to possess some sense of Slavic propriety in order to succeed. I am not sure such a person exists!
 
« Last Edit: October 14, 2011, 04:45:23 PM by podkarpatska » 
 

ACROD would be welcome to take Bishop Andrij of Toronto.  He has been moved around so much and he doesn't fit in.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on November 05, 2011, 04:55:40 PM
That sounds like a recipe for success :-P.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: John of the North on November 05, 2011, 05:37:50 PM
Quote
Do I sense that you suspect such an arrangement for one of the existing UOC-USA or perhaps UOC-Canada bishops being 'directed' by the EP is being contemplated? Interesting.....(as Spock would note....)

I did want to add that as to a priest from GOA being considered, any such hypothetical candidate would have to NOT be a Hellenist at heart and would have to possess some sense of Slavic propriety in order to succeed. I am not sure such a person exists!
 
« Last Edit: October 14, 2011, 04:45:23 PM by podkarpatska » 
 

ACROD would be welcome to take Bishop Andrij of Toronto.  He has been moved around so much and he doesn't fit in.

Interesting. How doesn't he fit in??
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: username! on November 05, 2011, 06:18:03 PM
IMHO, I would like to see Admiralnick in full bishop regalia blessing the faithful from the ambo in Johnstown.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: admiralnick on November 10, 2011, 04:41:49 PM
IMHO, I would like to see Admiralnick in full bishop regalia blessing the faithful from the ambo in Johnstown.

Yea, I'd like to see that too actually. *grabs some popcorn.

-Nick
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: username! on November 12, 2011, 07:02:02 PM
If it's a fasting day make sure to use maragrine and not actual butter on that popcorn unless you get a disposition first.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Schultz on November 12, 2011, 07:03:33 PM
If it's a fasting day make sure to use maragrine and not actual butter on that popcorn unless you get a disposition first.

What calendar are you using?!  ;)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ilyazhito on November 15, 2011, 03:57:59 PM
IMHO, I would like to see Admiralnick in full bishop regalia blessing the faithful from the ambo in Johnstown.
Who's that? How does he come into play?
By the way, would ACROD accept Greek/Russian/ OCA monastics as bishops?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Fr. George on November 15, 2011, 04:47:08 PM
If it's a fasting day make sure to use maragrine and not actual butter on that popcorn unless you get a disposition first.

Dispensation; and if he's in hierarchical regalia, then he's the one to give the dispensation ;)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on November 15, 2011, 04:53:52 PM
ACROD is too disorganized as an entity to end this in the near future. One of 3 things will happen:

1) A Ukrainian will become bishop
2) A Greek will become bishop
3) Someone will become a "temporary" bishop.

-Nick

Pot: The kettle is black! Oh my!.......

And BTW, there is a 'temporary' bishop, i.e., the Locum Tenens, Archbishop Demetrios.  I, and many others, refrain from letting our personal feelings or experiences with other jurisdictions and clergy color our remarks or observations. I have much I could say, but I was taught not to do so and I will not other than my opening observation.



I meant Temporary bishop as in ruling hierarch of the diocese until they find someone permanent, not as in a Locum Tenens arrangement. There was no malice intended in my post. I was merely sharing the truth of the situation. ACROD as a whole is not well organized and therefore will have problems finding a hierarch. If you think that I am being disingenuous you are free to prove to me the organization of ACROD. Of course it's tough to do when the position has been vacant this long with basically no action being taken. Hardly an example of good organization.

-Nick

I appreciate that you meant no malice.

I merely was alluding to the reality that in many ways the ACROD vacancy dilemma mirrors that of our divided Orthodox house in the Americas as a whole. The difficulties of finding capable and wise Bishops from 'within' one jurisdiction or another are well known to us all. For that matter even finding them within our own continent becomes problematic for many!

For the record though, for an organization with is 'not well organized', the history of then ACROD bears a different witness. From its founding in 1938 through the current 'inter-regnum', succession was never a problem. A successor was found for the late Metropolitan Orestes Chornock in 1966 some years prior to his becoming incapable of discharging the duties of his office in the late 1960's. That Bishop (+John) died suddenly in dramatic fashion as a young man at the end of a banquet in his early 50's. In spite of that, the ACROD immediately had two viable candidates to replace him and that transition occurred within a few months of his sudden death. (It should be noted that one of those candidates was at the time a Bishop in a sister-jurisdiction and the other, a young man at the time, is now an OCA bishop.)

Perhaps the dearth of young men becoming either monastic priests or celibate pastors over the past generation has contributed to the problems of 'bishop-search' across the Orthodox Americas!

Getting back to your three main points, as to a 'Ukrainian' becoming bishop, I suppose that is possible, particularly if one gets into the entire Rusyn/Ukrainian ethnology. (One could argue, for example, that several of the UOC bishops in the US and Canada are at least in part, Rusyn.....One could make the same argument about the last three men to be chosen Bishop in the OCA for that matter.....not to mention the late Archbishop Job, of thrice blessed memory...) As to a Greek, I think such a proposal would not be accepted by the still independent minded body of parishes, although it would be far less of a problem than it would have been a generation ago. As to a 'temporary bishop', I am not sure what you mean by that other than the appointment of a different LT.



Dear friend--Don't get mad at me but if the issue is to get a bishop who is "nashi," there are already two in the OCA--Bishop Michael and Bishop Matthias. You could go the way of the Albanian, Romanian and Bulgarian Dioceses, split the 81 parishes into two groups of 40 and put each one under the Bishops of Chicago and NY. You get to keep your autonomy and your nashiness (is this a word?).  ;)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: serb1389 on November 15, 2011, 05:06:48 PM
I would have hyphenated it.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on November 15, 2011, 07:44:50 PM
ACROD is too disorganized as an entity to end this in the near future. One of 3 things will happen:

1) A Ukrainian will become bishop
2) A Greek will become bishop
3) Someone will become a "temporary" bishop.

-Nick

Pot: The kettle is black! Oh my!.......

And BTW, there is a 'temporary' bishop, i.e., the Locum Tenens, Archbishop Demetrios.  I, and many others, refrain from letting our personal feelings or experiences with other jurisdictions and clergy color our remarks or observations. I have much I could say, but I was taught not to do so and I will not other than my opening observation.



I meant Temporary bishop as in ruling hierarch of the diocese until they find someone permanent, not as in a Locum Tenens arrangement. There was no malice intended in my post. I was merely sharing the truth of the situation. ACROD as a whole is not well organized and therefore will have problems finding a hierarch. If you think that I am being disingenuous you are free to prove to me the organization of ACROD. Of course it's tough to do when the position has been vacant this long with basically no action being taken. Hardly an example of good organization.

-Nick

I appreciate that you meant no malice.

I merely was alluding to the reality that in many ways the ACROD vacancy dilemma mirrors that of our divided Orthodox house in the Americas as a whole. The difficulties of finding capable and wise Bishops from 'within' one jurisdiction or another are well known to us all. For that matter even finding them within our own continent becomes problematic for many!

For the record though, for an organization with is 'not well organized', the history of then ACROD bears a different witness. From its founding in 1938 through the current 'inter-regnum', succession was never a problem. A successor was found for the late Metropolitan Orestes Chornock in 1966 some years prior to his becoming incapable of discharging the duties of his office in the late 1960's. That Bishop (+John) died suddenly in dramatic fashion as a young man at the end of a banquet in his early 50's. In spite of that, the ACROD immediately had two viable candidates to replace him and that transition occurred within a few months of his sudden death. (It should be noted that one of those candidates was at the time a Bishop in a sister-jurisdiction and the other, a young man at the time, is now an OCA bishop.)

Perhaps the dearth of young men becoming either monastic priests or celibate pastors over the past generation has contributed to the problems of 'bishop-search' across the Orthodox Americas!

Getting back to your three main points, as to a 'Ukrainian' becoming bishop, I suppose that is possible, particularly if one gets into the entire Rusyn/Ukrainian ethnology. (One could argue, for example, that several of the UOC bishops in the US and Canada are at least in part, Rusyn.....One could make the same argument about the last three men to be chosen Bishop in the OCA for that matter.....not to mention the late Archbishop Job, of thrice blessed memory...) As to a Greek, I think such a proposal would not be accepted by the still independent minded body of parishes, although it would be far less of a problem than it would have been a generation ago. As to a 'temporary bishop', I am not sure what you mean by that other than the appointment of a different LT.



Dear friend--Don't get mad at me but if the issue is to get a bishop who is "nashi," there are already two in the OCA--Bishop Michael and Bishop Matthias. You could go the way of the Albanian, Romanian and Bulgarian Dioceses, split the 81 parishes into two groups of 40 and put each one under the Bishops of Chicago and NY. You get to keep your autonomy and your nashiness (is this a word?).  ;)

For a variety of historical and practical reasons, that is not likely to happen.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: username! on November 15, 2011, 09:18:27 PM
Admiralnick for Vladkyo
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: John of the North on November 15, 2011, 09:33:44 PM
IMHO, I would like to see Admiralnick in full bishop regalia blessing the faithful from the ambo in Johnstown.
Who's that? How does he come into play?

A joke. Admiralnick is a user here.

Quote
By the way, would ACROD accept Greek/Russian/ OCA monastics as bishops?

Those may be the only options on the table.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: username! on November 15, 2011, 09:35:43 PM
Admiralnick would be the perfect candidate; he's Ukrainian err. Carpatho-Russian, he's stellar in intelligence, and he loves Johnstown and his dream is to build a summer home there.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: admiralnick on November 16, 2011, 09:59:18 AM
Admiralnick would be the perfect candidate; he's Ukrainian err. Carpatho-Russian, he's stellar in intelligence, and he loves Johnstown and his dream is to build a summer home there.


Are you doing contracting in the greater PA area? I think we can clear out some of the forest at Camp Nazareth for my dream home.

-Nick
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ilyazhito on November 16, 2011, 04:14:49 PM
I get the joke, but he aouldn't be considerable now. He's old enough to be a deacon, but I don't know if he actually wants this.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: username! on November 16, 2011, 05:13:40 PM
Admiralnick would be the perfect candidate; he's Ukrainian err. Carpatho-Russian, he's stellar in intelligence, and he loves Johnstown and his dream is to build a summer home there.


Are you doing contracting in the greater PA area? I think we can clear out some of the forest at Camp Nazareth for my dream home.

-Nick

I can always be doing contracting in the greater pa area.  I think a new bishop's residence could be fast put in order for you.  Eis Polla Eti Despota Vladkyo Nikolai
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on November 17, 2011, 11:31:57 AM
I get the joke, but he aouldn't be considerable now. He's old enough to be a deacon, but I don't know if he actually wants this.

My dad always said that one should not 'want' to be a Bishop!  ;)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on June 04, 2012, 05:17:59 PM
The Consistory of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of the U.S.A., with the permission of Archbishop Demetrios of America, Diocesan Locum Tenens and  Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, is recommending Fr. Gregorios Tatsis, Presiding Priest of the oldest Orthodox parish community in the United States, Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral in New Orleans, Louisiana, as the successor of the beloved Metropolitan Nicholas of Amissos, of blessed memory.  Fr. Gregorios's name will be presented to a Special Assembly which will be convened in July at the Christ the Savior Cathedral in Johnstown, Pennsylvania; other eligible names, after vetting, may be presented to the Assembly also.  The American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese will be celebrating the 75th Anniversary of the founding of the diocese under the omophorion of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 04, 2012, 05:25:41 PM
The Consistory of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of the U.S.A., with the permission of Archbishop Demetrios of America, Diocesan Locum Tenens and  Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, is recommending Fr. Gregorios Tatsis, Presiding Priest of the oldest Orthodox parish community in the United States, Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral in New Orleans, Louisiana, as the successor of the beloved Metropolitan Nicholas of Amissos, of blessed memory.  Fr. Gregorios's name will be presented to a Special Assembly which will be convened in July at the Christ the Savior Cathedral in Johnstown, Pennsylvania; other eligible names, after vetting, may be presented to the Assembly also.  The American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese will be celebrating the 75th Anniversary of the founding of the diocese under the omophorion of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.
How long has Fr. Gregorios been at Holy Trinity Cathedral?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 04, 2012, 05:53:50 PM
The Consistory of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of the U.S.A., with the permission of Archbishop Demetrios of America, Diocesan Locum Tenens and  Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, is recommending Fr. Gregorios Tatsis, Presiding Priest of the oldest Orthodox parish community in the United States, Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral in New Orleans, Louisiana, as the successor of the beloved Metropolitan Nicholas of Amissos, of blessed memory.  Fr. Gregorios's name will be presented to a Special Assembly which will be convened in July at the Christ the Savior Cathedral in Johnstown, Pennsylvania; other eligible names, after vetting, may be presented to the Assembly also.  The American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese will be celebrating the 75th Anniversary of the founding of the diocese under the omophorion of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.
How long has Fr. Gregorios been at Holy Trinity Cathedral?

About a year.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on June 05, 2012, 06:46:20 AM
Does Fr. Gregorios speak any Ukr... I mean Carpatho-Ruthenian?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 05, 2012, 08:41:40 AM
The Consistory of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of the U.S.A., with the permission of Archbishop Demetrios of America, Diocesan Locum Tenens and  Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, is recommending Fr. Gregorios Tatsis, Presiding Priest of the oldest Orthodox parish community in the United States, Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral in New Orleans, Louisiana, as the successor of the beloved Metropolitan Nicholas of Amissos, of blessed memory.  Fr. Gregorios's name will be presented to a Special Assembly which will be convened in July at the Christ the Savior Cathedral in Johnstown, Pennsylvania; other eligible names, after vetting, may be presented to the Assembly also.  The American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese will be celebrating the 75th Anniversary of the founding of the diocese under the omophorion of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.
How long has Fr. Gregorios been at Holy Trinity Cathedral?

About a year.
Ah.  I was there 4 years ago.  Lovely parish.  Fine people.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 05, 2012, 09:44:15 AM
Does Fr. Gregorios speak any Ukr... I mean Carpatho-Ruthenian?

Probably not, but not many of us speak anything other than English. I haven't heard a speech or a sermon in the Rusyn dialect since I was in high school over forty years ago so that's not a problem. Although the late Metropolitan Nicholas was able to converse freely with his colleagues in Slovakia and Ukraine on his many visits there over the years....
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on June 06, 2012, 03:48:08 AM
Does Fr. Gregorios speak any Ukr... I mean Carpatho-Ruthenian?

Probably not, but not many of us speak anything other than English.

So what is the point of maintaining ACROD as a separate jurisdiction? I thought it originally was founded in order to maintain Carpatho-Rusyn culture.

If that culture has disappeared, why not merge ACROD with GOARCH or the OCA?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 06, 2012, 09:01:26 AM
I didn't say that our culture disappeared - just the speaking of a language other than English among second, third and beyond generation Americans. Much of the OCA is of Carpatho-Rusyn background as well and the speaking of 'po-nashemu' (the Rusyn dialect) has disappeared there as well. Language does not equal culture or traditions.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 06, 2012, 09:16:20 AM
Does Fr. Gregorios speak any Ukr... I mean Carpatho-Ruthenian?

Probably not, but not many of us speak anything other than English.

So what is the point of maintaining ACROD as a separate jurisdiction? I thought it originally was founded in order to maintain Carpatho-Rusyn culture.

If that culture has disappeared, why not merge ACROD with GOARCH or the OCA?
I remember once, during a search for a new priest, someone asked if he spoke "the language."  Someone said "yes, he speaks English."

Even in the OCA, if everything is in English, you can tell the difference between a Carpatho-Russian parish and a "Great Russian" parish.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 06, 2012, 09:33:39 AM
Does Fr. Gregorios speak any Ukr... I mean Carpatho-Ruthenian?

Probably not, but not many of us speak anything other than English.

So what is the point of maintaining ACROD as a separate jurisdiction? I thought it originally was founded in order to maintain Carpatho-Rusyn culture.

If that culture has disappeared, why not merge ACROD with GOARCH or the OCA?
I remember once, during a search for a new priest, someone asked if he spoke "the language."  Someone said "yes, he speaks English."

Even in the OCA, if everything is in English, you can tell the difference between a Carpatho-Russian parish and a "Great Russian" parish.

That is quite true. It should be noted that second and third generation Slavic families were not as likely to pass along the language of the old world to their children in the period following the second world war. The US was frenzied with the 'Red Scare' and those of eastern European background were often singled out as potentially members of the pro-Soviet 'fifth column.' I think that is the main reason that many Slavic families lost the old language more quickly than did Greeks as a counterpoint.

The example Isa cites of being able to tell the difference between a CR parish and a 'Great Russian' parish in the OCA is on point and I think shows us what we can expect to find for the foreseeable future within a one-day unified administrative Orthodox structure in the USA.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: pious1 on June 06, 2012, 11:47:39 AM
What are the differences in the service of the OCA and ACROD? Is it the chant sung by the choir? Since both use primarily english and both embrace pan slavish and pro-american Orthodoxy, I am curious what differences one would see if they went to liturgies in both.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 06, 2012, 12:04:42 PM
What are the differences in the service of the OCA and ACROD? Is it the chant sung by the choir? Since both use primarily english and both embrace pan slavish and pro-american Orthodoxy, I am curious what differences one would see if they went to liturgies in both.


Very little, particularly across the Northeast, mid-Atlantic and Mid-west USA - with the exception of the OCA parishes which Isa referred to as 'Great Russian.' How much Russian practice was adopted at any particular parish depends on its particular history and likely, the inclinations of early pastors 'back in the day.'  The liturgies are substantially the same and choral singing is the norm most Sundays although you will hear more Rusyn chant in ACROD than in OCA parishes. In the ACROD the felon of the priest is likely to be in the 'Greek' style, while in the OCA you will see a mixture of Russian 'high back' styles with the Greek style. OCA is new calendar and ACROD is about 60/40 old calendar. English is the norm in both.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 06, 2012, 12:09:00 PM
What are the differences in the service of the OCA and ACROD? Is it the chant sung by the choir? Since both use primarily english and both embrace pan slavish and pro-american Orthodoxy, I am curious what differences one would see if they went to liturgies in both.

The difference I was talking about was the "Great Russian" end of the OCA versus ACROD, which has no "Great Russian" influence that I know of.  A lot of the OCA falls between the two.

For lack of a better term, the ACROD/"Nash" OCA tend to the "folksy": not only the choir singing, less opera, less of a lay audience for a clerical show with a full cast/caste, more popular pieties (embroidered cloths, usually of a local design, hanging, well, on practically anything you can hang them on), more eclectic iconography, etc...
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 06, 2012, 12:23:20 PM
What are the differences in the service of the OCA and ACROD? Is it the chant sung by the choir? Since both use primarily english and both embrace pan slavish and pro-american Orthodoxy, I am curious what differences one would see if they went to liturgies in both.

The difference I was talking about was the "Great Russian" end of the OCA versus ACROD, which has no "Great Russian" influence that I know of.  A lot of the OCA falls between the two.

For lack of a better term, the ACROD/"Nash" OCA tend to the "folksy": not only the choir singing, less opera, less of a lay audience for a clerical show with a full cast/caste, more popular pieties (embroidered cloths, usually of a local design, hanging, well, on practically anything you can hang them on), more eclectic iconography, etc...

Many of those distinctions depend on the particular region of the parish founders and may be seen in various Ukrainian parishes - both UGCC and UOC - as well as ACROD and OCA. I would agree that they are more prevalent in ACROD than in OCA, but it varies as we both said.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Fr. George on June 06, 2012, 12:40:39 PM
The Consistory of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of the U.S.A., with the permission of Archbishop Demetrios of America, Diocesan Locum Tenens and  Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, is recommending Fr. Gregorios Tatsis, Presiding Priest of the oldest Orthodox parish community in the United States, Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Cathedral in New Orleans, Louisiana, as the successor of the beloved Metropolitan Nicholas of Amissos, of blessed memory.  Fr. Gregorios's name will be presented to a Special Assembly which will be convened in July at the Christ the Savior Cathedral in Johnstown, Pennsylvania; other eligible names, after vetting, may be presented to the Assembly also.  The American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese will be celebrating the 75th Anniversary of the founding of the diocese under the omophorion of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.
How long has Fr. Gregorios been at Holy Trinity Cathedral?

He started at the Cathedral in October.  Prior to that he was the Ierokyrix of the Metropolis of Atlanta, and the Spiritual Advisor for the Youth Programs.  He was the interim pastor for 3 months in Raleigh, NC while the parish was waiting for their new priest (their previous pastor became the Dean of the Matropolis Cathedral in Atlanta).  He's traveled extensively throughout the Metropolis of Atlanta since his ordination in the winter of 2007, preaching and hearing confessions, attending every week of Summer Camp, and being a terrific spiritual presence in the Metropolis. 

Before that, he was in medical research for over 20 years, and has been the parish council president of two different parishes as well (both in the Charlotte area).
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on June 06, 2012, 06:54:49 PM
Seriously please, are the differences between regular OCA and ACROD parishes still big enough to justify separate jurisdictions? And let us not forget that the OCA has 2 Carpatho-Rusyn bishops with a background in ACROD, whereas ACROD will probably have a Greek bishop soon...

This really reminds me of my native city, Stuttgart, Germany, where we now have 3 parishes in Russian tradition, all in different jurisdictions... (ROCOR, MP and Rue Daru/EP)... I wish we could return to one city - one bishop.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on June 06, 2012, 07:05:58 PM
This really reminds me of my native city, Stuttgart, Germany, where we now have 3 parishes in Russian tradition, all in different jurisdictions... (ROCOR, MP and Rue Daru/EP)... I wish we could return to one city - one bishop.

Do they co-work together?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on June 06, 2012, 07:16:06 PM
Do they co-work together?

Rue Daru and MP do. In general, there is hope to bring all Orthodox parishes in the city together more closely...

Actually, what is funny is that neither of the 3 jurisdictions has a Russian bishop: the MP has an Ukrainian, ROCOR a German and Rue Daru a Belgian.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 06, 2012, 07:32:38 PM
Seriously please, are the differences between regular OCA and ACROD parishes still big enough to justify separate jurisdictions? And let us not forget that the OCA has 2 Carpatho-Rusyn bishops with a background in ACROD, whereas ACROD will probably have a Greek bishop soon...

This really reminds me of my native city, Stuttgart, Germany, where we now have 3 parishes in Russian tradition, all in different jurisdictions... (ROCOR, MP and Rue Daru/EP)... I wish we could return to one city - one bishop.
The bigger difference now is that the OCA is autocephalous and ACROD is not.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on June 06, 2012, 07:54:30 PM
The bigger difference now is that the OCA is autocephalous and ACROD is not.

The OCA calls itself autocephalous. But Goarch is about 5 or 10 times as large...
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 06, 2012, 08:03:22 PM
The bigger difference now is that the OCA is autocephalous and ACROD is not.

The OCA calls itself autocephalous. But Goarch is about 5 or 10 times as large...
No, the OCA's mother Church calls her autocephalous, and she is 10-20 times as large as the Phanar, GOARCH's master, so what's your point?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on June 06, 2012, 08:41:19 PM
ialmisry,

I thoght my point was clear, but just for you: An autocephalous church ideally should have jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. If this is not the case, at least it should be approximated for the autocephaly to have credibility. For the OCA, this simply isn't the case. And I do wish the US to have its own autocephalous church, uniting all Orthodox there. (Also, there is no reason why Canada should be under the US, but that would be another topic.)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Father H on June 06, 2012, 11:06:21 PM
ialmisry,

I thoght my point was clear, but just for you: An autocephalous church ideally should have jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. If this is not the case, at least it should be approximated for the autocephaly to have credibility. For the OCA, this simply isn't the case. And I do wish the US to have its own autocephalous church, uniting all Orthodox there. (Also, there is no reason why Canada should be under the US, but that would be another topic.)

You were clear.  However, although Isa is a great asset to OCnet, and even though orthodoxhistory website has successfully demonstrated that although the Russian Metropolia did have legitimate jurisdiction over Alaska while it was part of Russia, that this jurisdiction did not give it jurisdiction over Canada and the US, that the RM was not the first nor "sole" jurisdiction in the US and Canada, that the Greeks being one of the two of the first far outnumber the rest, that to be autocephalous you have to have complete jurisdiction over all Orthodox Christians in said canonical territory... Still, he will not admit that what you said is right, sadly.   
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 06, 2012, 11:39:20 PM
ialmisry,

I thoght my point was clear, but just for you: An autocephalous church ideally should have jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. If this is not the case, at least it should be approximated for the autocephaly to have credibility. For the OCA, this simply isn't the case. And I do wish the US to have its own autocephalous church, uniting all Orthodox there. (Also, there is no reason why Canada should be under the US, but that would be another topic.)
Somewhere here I've posted the Canadian incorporation (1903?, thereabouts) recognizing the jurisdiction of the Russian Archbishop of North America (i.e., Met. Jonah predecessor) and his successors.  But that's another issue.

Few "Mother Churches," NOT including either the Phanar nor Moscow, has jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. Estonia, case in point. That's, unfortunately, nothing new.

The Phanar thought it would rid itself of the OCA problem with the Episcopal Assembly scheme.  Abp. Demetrios, God grant him many years!, ignored the memo, and now the Phanar is stuck with an autocephalous OCA it is in communion with.  If the ethnarch wants to see himself as the Sultan's Patriarch of the Rum, he's welcome to do so.  Just don't expect us to play along.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 06, 2012, 11:43:12 PM
ialmisry,

I thoght my point was clear, but just for you: An autocephalous church ideally should have jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. If this is not the case, at least it should be approximated for the autocephaly to have credibility. For the OCA, this simply isn't the case. And I do wish the US to have its own autocephalous church, uniting all Orthodox there. (Also, there is no reason why Canada should be under the US, but that would be another topic.)

You were clear.  However, although Isa is a great asset to OCnet, and even though orthodoxhistory website has successfully demonstrated that although the Russian Metropolia did have legitimate jurisdiction over Alaska while it was part of Russia, that this jurisdiction did not give it jurisdiction over Canada and the US, that the RM was not the first nor "sole" jurisdiction in the US and Canada, that the Greeks being one of the two of the first far outnumber the rest, that to be autocephalous you have to have complete jurisdiction over all Orthodox Christians in said canonical territory... Still, he will not admit that what you said is right, sadly.  
Father, OH has denied, but not disproven, Russia jurisdiction over North America.  No sustained idea of jurisdiction has been presented.  Nor has it even touched the autocephaly debate that I have seen.

thanks for the compliment, btw, Father.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Father H on June 06, 2012, 11:53:38 PM
ialmisry,

I thoght my point was clear, but just for you: An autocephalous church ideally should have jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. If this is not the case, at least it should be approximated for the autocephaly to have credibility. For the OCA, this simply isn't the case. And I do wish the US to have its own autocephalous church, uniting all Orthodox there. (Also, there is no reason why Canada should be under the US, but that would be another topic.)
Somewhere here I've posted the Canadian incorporation (1903?, thereabouts) recognizing the jurisdiction of the Russian Archbishop of North America (i.e., Met. Jonah predecessor) and his successors.  But that's another issue.

Few "Mother Churches," NOT including either the Phanar nor Moscow, has jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. Estonia, case in point. That's, unfortunately, nothing new.

The Phanar thought it would rid itself of the OCA problem with the Episcopal Assembly scheme.  Abp. Demetrios, God grant him many years!, ignored the memo, and now the Phanar is stuck with an autocephalous OCA it is in communion with.  If the ethnarch wants to see himself as the Sultan's Patriarch of the Rum, he's welcome to do so.  Just don't expect us to play along.

Not true.  History is filled with a non-recognition of autocephaly while at the same time recognizing canonicity.  That is precisely what Constantinople and HE Demetrios (and yes, truly may God grant him many years) did.  If there was such a memo from the Patriarch and +D ignored it then +D would not still be here, but he is.   HAH Bartholomew made it clear to then Met. Herman on his visit that OCA is recognized fully as canonical, just not as de jure autocephalous (even though operationally autocephalous).   
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Father H on June 06, 2012, 11:54:39 PM
ialmisry,

I thoght my point was clear, but just for you: An autocephalous church ideally should have jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. If this is not the case, at least it should be approximated for the autocephaly to have credibility. For the OCA, this simply isn't the case. And I do wish the US to have its own autocephalous church, uniting all Orthodox there. (Also, there is no reason why Canada should be under the US, but that would be another topic.)

You were clear.  However, although Isa is a great asset to OCnet, and even though orthodoxhistory website has successfully demonstrated that although the Russian Metropolia did have legitimate jurisdiction over Alaska while it was part of Russia, that this jurisdiction did not give it jurisdiction over Canada and the US, that the RM was not the first nor "sole" jurisdiction in the US and Canada, that the Greeks being one of the two of the first far outnumber the rest, that to be autocephalous you have to have complete jurisdiction over all Orthodox Christians in said canonical territory... Still, he will not admit that what you said is right, sadly.  
Father, OH has denied, but not disproven, Russia jurisdiction over North America.  No sustained idea of jurisdiction has been presented.  Nor has it even touched the autocephaly debate that I have seen.

thanks for the compliment, btw, Father.

It was not just a compliment, it was the truth. 
btw you are wrong about the other stuff   ;) 
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 07, 2012, 12:16:53 AM
ialmisry,

I thoght my point was clear, but just for you: An autocephalous church ideally should have jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. If this is not the case, at least it should be approximated for the autocephaly to have credibility. For the OCA, this simply isn't the case. And I do wish the US to have its own autocephalous church, uniting all Orthodox there. (Also, there is no reason why Canada should be under the US, but that would be another topic.)
Somewhere here I've posted the Canadian incorporation (1903?, thereabouts) recognizing the jurisdiction of the Russian Archbishop of North America (i.e., Met. Jonah predecessor) and his successors.  But that's another issue.

Few "Mother Churches," NOT including either the Phanar nor Moscow, has jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. Estonia, case in point. That's, unfortunately, nothing new.

The Phanar thought it would rid itself of the OCA problem with the Episcopal Assembly scheme.  Abp. Demetrios, God grant him many years!, ignored the memo, and now the Phanar is stuck with an autocephalous OCA it is in communion with.  If the ethnarch wants to see himself as the Sultan's Patriarch of the Rum, he's welcome to do so.  Just don't expect us to play along.

Not true.  History is filled with a non-recognition of autocephaly while at the same time recognizing canonicity.
Other than the case of Kiev/Moscow (and that's iffy it fits that description), when was that, Father?

That is precisely what Constantinople and HE Demetrios (and yes, truly may God grant him many years) did.  If there was such a memo from the Patriarch and +D ignored it then +D would not still be here, but he is.
Oh, the Phanar has learned from the Abp. Iakovos/Abp. Spyridon debacle, it is not that simple.  The Phanar owes Abp. Demetrios.

HAH Bartholomew made it clear to then Met. Herman on his visit that OCA is recognized fully as canonical, just not as de jure autocephalous (even though operationally autocephalous).   
HAH can make anything clear he wants, just like his mouthpiece, for instance, made it clear that the Phanar gave Alexandria jurisdiction over all of Africa in 2003.  Since Alexandria has has had jurisdiction over all of Africa for seventy years before that at least, we just say "that's nice."

The Phanar signed onto the Chambesy accords with ALL the autocephalous Churches, as its spokesman never tires of saying (except, of course, the OCA).  The accords make it clear that all canonical Orthodox must be included.   The implementation has made it clear that the OCA is not under any other Church.  One can be a little pregnant only for so long.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on June 07, 2012, 01:41:24 AM
It seems Archbishop Demetrios picks his fights with The Phanar; standing up to His All Holiness, an action uncommon among hierarchs of the Ecumenical Throne during this Patriarchy,  over the issue of seating the OCA at the Episcopal Assembly, maintained unity and fellowship among the Orthodox jurisdictions in North America and will probably be one the most significant accomplishments of his tenure on the Archdiocesan Throne.  I'm not really seeking a response, but can you imagine an attempt to establish the Episcopal Assembly in North America without the Orthodox Church in America, the second largest church, with its holy and venerable history?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on June 07, 2012, 02:16:50 AM
IT seemed to me that the OCA actually was the third largest church, after GOARCH and AOCA...
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on June 07, 2012, 02:33:11 AM
Also, ialmisry, do you realize that historical arguments are not enough, and you also need to consider reality?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on June 07, 2012, 05:03:54 AM
IT seemed to me that the OCA actually was the third largest church, after GOARCH and AOCA...

Aren't the OCA still a bit larger than the AOCA?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 07, 2012, 06:34:02 AM
Also, ialmisry, do you realize that historical arguments are not enough, and you also need to consider reality?
Yes.

And the reality is that the OCA is autocephalous (Met. Jonah just consecrated its chrism), and in communion with all the rest of the Orthodox in the diptychs.
 
The Phanar is having to adjust itself to that reality.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 07, 2012, 06:40:24 AM
It seems Archbishop Demetrios picks his fights with The Phanar; standing up to His All Holiness, an action uncommon among hierarchs of the Ecumenical Throne during this Patriarchy,  over the issue of seating the OCA at the Episcopal Assembly, maintained unity and fellowship among the Orthodox jurisdictions in North America and will probably be one the most significant accomplishments of his tenure on the Archdiocesan Throne.  I'm not really seeking a response, but can you imagine an attempt to establish the Episcopal Assembly in North America without the Orthodox Church in America, the second largest church, with its holy and venerable history?
Against the other extreme "America(n) Only", Abp. Demetrios demonstrates that one doesn't have to be born a native local to know what is best for the local Church and to engage with the locality.  His predecessor Abp. Iakovos of blessed memory knew that as well.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_qpE5hNwi618/TTS3Ow8-gtI/AAAAAAAANFE/P8K6mjZq3-Q/s1600/iakovos_mlk_jr.jpg)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 07, 2012, 10:25:03 AM
ialmisry,

I thoght my point was clear, but just for you: An autocephalous church ideally should have jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. If this is not the case, at least it should be approximated for the autocephaly to have credibility. For the OCA, this simply isn't the case. And I do wish the US to have its own autocephalous church, uniting all Orthodox there. (Also, there is no reason why Canada should be under the US, but that would be another topic.)
Somewhere here I've posted the Canadian incorporation (1903?, thereabouts) recognizing the jurisdiction of the Russian Archbishop of North America (i.e., Met. Jonah predecessor) and his successors.  But that's another issue.

AS to Gorazd's point, the issues are complex and will not be resolved until some form of administrative unity is created in North America or at least the USA. I suspect the Canadians would react as well to being placed with us as say the Belgians would be if placed with France or Germany.


Few "Mother Churches," NOT including either the Phanar nor Moscow, has jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. Estonia, case in point. That's, unfortunately, nothing new.

The Phanar thought it would rid itself of the OCA problem with the Episcopal Assembly scheme.  Abp. Demetrios, God grant him many years!, ignored the memo, and now the Phanar is stuck with an autocephalous OCA it is in communion with.  If the ethnarch wants to see himself as the Sultan's Patriarch of the Rum, he's welcome to do so.  Just don't expect us to play along.

It's funny how we 'abhor' the Romans, yet we mimic them whenever it suits us. Over on byzcath there was a discussion about how the Eastern Catholics in what we call the 'diaspora' lacked the ability to select their own bishops in accordance with the treaties of Union from Brest and Uzghorod outside of their ancestral lands in that North America had been discovered on behalf of kingdoms (i.e. Spain, Portugal and France) loyal to the Pope of Rome thereby giving the Pope jurisdiction over those lands. Isn't that analogous to the OCA's argument about Alaska?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on June 07, 2012, 12:02:19 PM
And the reality is that the OCA is autocephalous (Met. Jonah just consecrated its chrism), and in communion with all the rest of the Orthodox in the diptychs.
 
The Phanar is having to adjust itself to that reality.

Just because the MP lets the OCA consecrate its own chrism, doesnt mean the EP needs to give all of its parishes to the OCA. In fact, if Moscow ever drops support for the OCA, the OCA would be quite lost...
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 07, 2012, 12:22:36 PM
And the reality is that the OCA is autocephalous (Met. Jonah just consecrated its chrism), and in communion with all the rest of the Orthodox in the diptychs.
 
The Phanar is having to adjust itself to that reality.

Just because the MP lets the OCA consecrate its own chrism, doesnt mean the EP needs to give all of its parishes to the OCA. In fact, if Moscow ever drops support for the OCA, the OCA would be quite lost...

What I find odd about this whole thing, is that online there are posters who blithely go on as if the rest of the American Orthodox in the other jurisdictions will someday simply 'see the light' and 'come' over the OCA. Yet the hierarchy of the OCA, including Metropolitan Jonah recognize that the problem is more complex than that and a different path will have to evolve. In terms of disparate nationalities co-existing within the boundaries of one nation, i.e. the  USA, the closest analogy to the Patristic Era is the western Roman Empire and that model didn't work out too well for the unity of the Faith.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 07, 2012, 01:05:53 PM
ialmisry,

I thoght my point was clear, but just for you: An autocephalous church ideally should have jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. If this is not the case, at least it should be approximated for the autocephaly to have credibility. For the OCA, this simply isn't the case. And I do wish the US to have its own autocephalous church, uniting all Orthodox there. (Also, there is no reason why Canada should be under the US, but that would be another topic.)
Somewhere here I've posted the Canadian incorporation (1903?, thereabouts) recognizing the jurisdiction of the Russian Archbishop of North America (i.e., Met. Jonah predecessor) and his successors.  But that's another issue.

AS to Gorazd's point, the issues are complex and will not be resolved until some form of administrative unity is created in North America or at least the USA. I suspect the Canadians would react as well to being placed with us as say the Belgians would be if placed with France or Germany.


Few "Mother Churches," NOT including either the Phanar nor Moscow, has jurisdiction over all canonical Orthodox people in its area. Estonia, case in point. That's, unfortunately, nothing new.

The Phanar thought it would rid itself of the OCA problem with the Episcopal Assembly scheme.  Abp. Demetrios, God grant him many years!, ignored the memo, and now the Phanar is stuck with an autocephalous OCA it is in communion with.  If the ethnarch wants to see himself as the Sultan's Patriarch of the Rum, he's welcome to do so.  Just don't expect us to play along.

It's funny how we 'abhor' the Romans, yet we mimic them whenever it suits us. Over on byzcath there was a discussion about how the Eastern Catholics in what we call the 'diaspora' lacked the ability to select their own bishops in accordance with the treaties of Union from Brest and Uzghorod outside of their ancestral lands in that North America had been discovered on behalf of kingdoms (i.e. Spain, Portugal and France) loyal to the Pope of Rome thereby giving the Pope jurisdiction over those lands. Isn't that analogous to the OCA's argument about Alaska?
No.

The OCA, through its predecessors, has exercised jurisdiction from Alaska down to California continuously since the time Spain still ruled New Spain.  In fact, in the 1850's, when the Episcopalians reached CA and were forming a diocese, they considered getting their orders from the Orthodox bishop in Sitka.  The next decade said bishop, a member of the Russian Holy Synod and with suffragans in the same Church, moved his see to SF, and it has remained in the Continental US ever since.  By the time a bishop of any other Church arrived in the US (and that was a Greek Metropolitan visiting the World's Fair of 1892), Met. Jonah's predecessors were performing their visitations from coast to coast.  By the time the Phanar decided, without basis, to claim North America-the first to dispute Russia's claim-North America was already a diocese, established with jurisdiction by the Czar, British Crown and American Congress over the US and Canada, with three bishops, having already consecrated its own bishop.  The present state of the OCA, minus autocephaly, was already in place, more or less, a decade before the first foreign bishop-Met. Meletios of Greece-set foot in North America and set up a diocese.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on June 07, 2012, 01:10:57 PM
And the reality is that the OCA is autocephalous (Met. Jonah just consecrated its chrism), and in communion with all the rest of the Orthodox in the diptychs.
 
The Phanar is having to adjust itself to that reality.

Just because the MP lets the OCA consecrate its own chrism, doesnt mean the EP needs to give all of its parishes to the OCA. In fact, if Moscow ever drops support for the OCA, the OCA would be quite lost...
and if Greece drops the Phanar, where is it going to be?

The Phanar won't give his parishes in Estonia to Moscow.  Does that void Moscow's autocephaly?

The MP doesn't let the OCA do anything.  The OCA is fully empowered to "be independent and self-governing with the right of electing her own Primate and all her bishops, without confirmation or the right of veto over such elections on the part of any other church organization or representative of the Eastern Orthodox or any other confession; irmly and inalterably preserve the divine dogmas, being guided in her life by the sacred Canons of the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church of Christ and governed in accordance with her own Statute as accepted, augmented or amended from time to time by her own highest legislative and executive organ;maintain direct relations with all other Churches and confessions, Orthodox and non-Orthodox alike; enjoy all the authority, privileges and rights usually inherent in the term “autocephaly” in the canonical tradition of the Eastern Orthodox Church, including the right of preparing and consecrating Holy Chrism."  The hew and cry that the Phanar raised when Romania first consecrated its chrism indicates it thinks it important.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on June 07, 2012, 01:44:28 PM
And the reality is that the OCA is autocephalous (Met. Jonah just consecrated its chrism), and in communion with all the rest of the Orthodox in the diptychs.
 
The Phanar is having to adjust itself to that reality.

Just because the MP lets the OCA consecrate its own chrism, doesnt mean the EP needs to give all of its parishes to the OCA. In fact, if Moscow ever drops support for the OCA, the OCA would be quite lost...
and if Greece drops the Phanar, where is it going to be?

The Phanar won't give his parishes in Estonia to Moscow.  Does that void Moscow's autocephaly?

The MP doesn't let the OCA do anything.  The OCA is fully empowered to "be independent and self-governing with the right of electing her own Primate and all her bishops, without confirmation or the right of veto over such elections on the part of any other church organization or representative of the Eastern Orthodox or any other confession; irmly and inalterably preserve the divine dogmas, being guided in her life by the sacred Canons of the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church of Christ and governed in accordance with her own Statute as accepted, augmented or amended from time to time by her own highest legislative and executive organ;maintain direct relations with all other Churches and confessions, Orthodox and non-Orthodox alike; enjoy all the authority, privileges and rights usually inherent in the term “autocephaly” in the canonical tradition of the Eastern Orthodox Church, including the right of preparing and consecrating Holy Chrism."  The hew and cry that the Phanar raised when Romania first consecrated its chrism indicates it thinks it important.

I am well aware of the legal arguments raised by the OCA and the counterarguments more 'silently' advanced by others. The reality remains that the overall canonical situation in the Americas will not be solved absent some sort of consensus and as with most things in Church history, those with power will prevail - in some cases through numbers, in others through money and temporal power and in others, through the power of church history and canonical interpretation, It will only happen when there is a convergence and true meeting of the minds. Elements within both the Phanar or the OCA who believe that it shall come to be as they deign it to be and solely upon the terms they dictate will both be disappointed.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on July 16, 2012, 06:25:53 AM
Quote from: http://www.acrod.org/news/releases/nomination-announcement
JOHNSTOWN, PA [Christ The Saviour Cathedral] -- Meeting in Special Assembly today which was presided over by His Eminence, Archbishop Demetrios of America, Diocesan Locum Tenens, the priests of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of the USA nominated the Very Rev. Archimandrite Grigorios (Tatsis)  as successor to His Eminence, Metropolitan Nicholas of Amissos...
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on July 16, 2012, 07:32:58 PM
"Axios."  (Thanks for the post.)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Asteriktos on July 17, 2012, 04:13:26 PM
Axios!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Benjamin the Red on July 17, 2012, 04:18:09 PM
I heard about this and read a longer bio of Arch. Grigorios. I'm very excited for ACROD!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: katherineofdixie on July 17, 2012, 04:33:10 PM
Ok, I know Fr. Grigorios so I am possibly just an eensy-weensy bit prejudiced - however
AXIOS! AXIOS! AXIOS!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Fr. George on August 30, 2012, 11:51:13 AM
It's official: This afternoon at 2:00pm, the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate (presided over by His Eminence, Metropolitan SAVAS of Pittsburgh, and honor granted to him by the Ecumenical Patriarch for the purpose of the election) elected the V. Rev. Archimandrite Gregorios Tatsis to be His Grace, Bishop GREGORIOS of Nyssa.  Many years to him, to the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese, and to the parish of Holy Trinity in New Orleans, LA (which His Grace is now serving).  AXIOS!  AXIOS!  AXIOS!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: GreekChef on August 30, 2012, 11:59:26 AM
It's official: This afternoon at 2:00pm, the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate (presided over by His Eminence, Metropolitan SAVAS of Pittsburgh, and honor granted to him by the Ecumenical Patriarch for the purpose of the election) elected the V. Rev. Archimandrite Gregorios Tatsis to be His Grace, Bishop GREGORIOS of Nyssa.  Many years to him, to the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese, and to the parish of Holy Trinity in New Orleans, LA (which His Grace is now serving).  AXIOS!  AXIOS!  AXIOS!

AXIOS! AXIOS! AXIOS!  CAN'T SAY THAT ENOUGH TIMES!!!!!!!!! YAY!!!!!!
See you at the ordination/enthronement, Fr. George!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: katherineofdixie on August 30, 2012, 12:17:57 PM
AXIOS! AXIOS! AXIOS!


from another member of the Bishop Gregorios Fan Club and Marching Society.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on August 30, 2012, 12:20:09 PM
ΑΞΙΟΣ! ΑΞΙΟΣ! ΑΞΙΟΣ!

Finally...and not a day too soon.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on August 30, 2012, 12:34:40 PM
Nothing against Bishop Gregorios personally, but the man is a Greek American, who was serving in the Greek tradition until very recently, and he does not speak a word of the language of Carpatho-Ruthenia. In other words, this is the end of the Carpatho-Ruthenian character of ACROD. Probably, after him, the parishes will just be put directly under the local Greek bishop.

In that sense, let us sing for ACROD: Vechnaya pamyat! Memory eternal!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on August 30, 2012, 12:36:17 PM
"Axios, Axios, Axios!"



And congratulations to Metropolitan Savas for the privilege His All Holiness extended to him, to preside over the Holy and Sacred of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: jah777 on August 30, 2012, 12:44:53 PM
of Nyssa   ???
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on August 30, 2012, 01:07:47 PM
Nothing against Bishop Gregorios personally, but the man is a Greek American, who was serving in the Greek tradition until very recently, and he does not speak a word of the language of Carpatho-Ruthenia. In other words, this is the end of the Carpatho-Ruthenian character of ACROD. Probably, after him, the parishes will just be put directly under the local Greek bishop.

In that sense, let us sing for ACROD: Vechnaya pamyat! Memory eternal!

Don't be so sure of that.  The GOAA has always respected and supported the integrity of ACROD and its founding principals, including honoring their cultural practices, and now, even giving one of its sons to serve ACROD's hierarchical needs, at their time of need.  His Grace has an excellent reputation and will be supported by the ACROD Consistory, clergy and faithful.  From what I have heard about His Grace, he will learn the pertinent Carpatho-Rusyn practices, and honor them and the legacy of his venerable episcopal predecessors, of Blessed Memory.  Patriarch Bartholomew noted the importance the Ecumenical Patriarchate ascribes to the venerable Carpatho-Rusin traditions upon a visit to ACROD headquarters and Christ The Saviour Cathedral.  His All Holiness was a friend of Metropolitan Nicholas,' who had attended the Halki Theological School.  Recall also, that Metropolitan Orestes reported that he and his fellow founding clergy of ACROD, chose to seek canonical protection under the Ecumenical Patriarchate because their predecessors, who were associated with St. Alexis of Wilkes Barre, had been victimized by the Russification imposed on their parishes by the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Metropolia, the OCA's predecessor.

Don't forget that the priests of ACROD met with Bishop-elect Gregorios upon the recommendation of the Consistory, and voted to recommend his election to the ACROD Throne.

It is unworthy of this forum to invoke our memorial prayers in response to the election of a diocesan hierarch.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on August 30, 2012, 01:27:53 PM
It is unworthy of the Ecumenical (universal) character of the Patriarchate of Constantinople to place a Greek bishop in ACROD. When the EP placed Greek bishops in Bulgaria, and refused to acknowledge the Bulgarian dissatisfaction with that, a schism was the consequence. Luckily, that is history now. But it is a shame that they have not learnt from history.

And I say that as a person whose main parish is under the EP, and I would always defend the EP against the MP, his All-Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew gainst accusations of ecumenism, etc. But this time, they have made a mistake. Would it have been so hard to get someone from ACROD itself to become bishop, or someone from the Czechoslovak church?

It really seems like ACROD escaped to Constantinople to avoid being russified, only to become hellenised 3 generations later.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: katherineofdixie on August 30, 2012, 01:57:41 PM
Would it have been so hard to get someone from ACROD itself to become bishop, or someone from the Czechoslovak church?


Apparently it was.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on August 30, 2012, 02:06:11 PM
Would it have been so hard to get someone from ACROD itself to become bishop, or someone from the Czechoslovak church?


Apparently it was.
AFAIK, they did not make an official request to Met. Christopher to suggest someone. They just asked their own priests if someone knew someone in the Old Country, and no one made a suggestion, so they turned to the Greeks, instead of seriously pursuing the issue.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: katherineofdixie on August 30, 2012, 02:10:01 PM
Would it have been so hard to get someone from ACROD itself to become bishop, or someone from the Czechoslovak church?


Apparently it was.
AFAIK, they did not make an official request to Met. Christopher to suggest someone. They just asked their own priests if someone knew someone in the Old Country, and no one made a suggestion, so they turned to the Greeks, instead of seriously pursuing the issue.


And so, when asked by ACROD, the "Greeks" suggested an intelligent, capable American born priest of Greek heritage.

What could they have been thinking???!!!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on August 30, 2012, 02:12:57 PM
Re. Reply No. 254, above.

Ha, good post "katherineofdixie!"
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on August 30, 2012, 02:13:25 PM
What could they have been thinking???!!!
Do you think I can look into other people's brains?

I cannot. But I have seen a poll before, where about half of the polled GOARCH members said, the church should make Greek Culture an equal priority as Orthodox Christianity.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Schultz on August 30, 2012, 02:13:40 PM
It is unworthy of the Ecumenical (universal) character of the Patriarchate of Constantinople to place a Greek bishop in ACROD. When the EP placed Greek bishops in Bulgaria, and refused to acknowledge the Bulgarian dissatisfaction with that, a schism was the consequence. Luckily, that is history now. But it is a shame that they have not learnt from history.

Can you show any ACROD dissatisfaction?  I've seen nothing but elation over the election.  Oh, and I actually talk to ACROD people.

Quote

It really seems like ACROD escaped to Constantinople to avoid being russified, only to become hellenised 3 generations later.

Care to substantiate that, too?  I don't know any ACROD parishes that do anything but ACROD customs.  
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Schultz on August 30, 2012, 02:14:33 PM
What could they have been thinking???!!!
Do you think I can look into other people's brains?

I cannot. But I have seen a poll before, where about half of the polled GOARCH members said, the church should make Greek Culture an equal priority as Orthodox Christianity.

And if you polled ACROD parishes, they would say the same thing about Carpatho-Rusyn customs.

You'll have to pry Rusyn customs from their cold, dead hands.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: katherineofdixie on August 30, 2012, 02:15:33 PM
Ha, good post "katherineofdixie!"


Well, I have to admit, I am prejudiced in favor of Bishop Gregorios, so mine is not at all an unbiased opinion!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Orest on August 30, 2012, 02:17:49 PM
It is unworthy of the Ecumenical (universal) character of the Patriarchate of Constantinople to place a Greek bishop in ACROD. When the EP placed Greek bishops in Bulgaria, and refused to acknowledge the Bulgarian dissatisfaction with that, a schism was the consequence. Luckily, that is history now. But it is a shame that they have not learnt from history.

And I say that as a person whose main parish is under the EP, and I would always defend the EP against the MP, his All-Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew gainst accusations of ecumenism, etc. But this time, they have made a mistake. Would it have been so hard to get someone from ACROD itself to become bishop, or someone from the Czechoslovak church?

It really seems like ACROD escaped to Constantinople to avoid being russified, only to become hellenised 3 generations later.
Gorazd, you make a lot of sense.  Especially about "hellenizing the Carpatho-Russians" in ACROD.  The EP did the same thing in Romania but to a lesser extent than what happened in Bulgaria during the days of the Ottoman Empire. Is the EP trying to build another empire?  I don't know but their actions are NOT right.  The search in the
"old Country" was not taken seriously: surely at least one or two monks could have emigrated to the USA and lived here a few years to see if they or one of them fitted in and was suitaable bishop material.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on August 30, 2012, 02:18:10 PM
What could they have been thinking???!!!
Do you think I can look into other people's brains?

I cannot. But I have seen a poll before, where about half of the polled GOARCH members said, the church should make Greek Culture an equal priority as Orthodox Christianity.

Was that the Gallop Poll from 1980?   Things have changed, big time.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on August 30, 2012, 02:20:31 PM
Can you show any ACROD dissatisfaction?  I've seen nothing but elation over the election.  Oh, and I actually talk to ACROD people.
I am stating my personal opinion. I did not make any claims of being representative of current emotions in ACROD. Btw, last time we saw "nothing but elation" in American Orthodoxy, was on the election of Met. Jonah. And we all know how that ended. So I am sceptical about this wave of euphoria.


Care to substantiate that, too?  I don't know any ACROD parishes that do anything but ACROD customs.  
I can only tell you that there still are a lot of Greek customs in Bulgaria today, from EP jurisdiction times. In the last few years, Hellenophiles, who have often been monks on Athos, are making a comeback. In the dioceses of Sofia and Plovdiv, they are even imposing Byzantine chant, making flee many people who love the beauty of the Kyiv choral.

As for ACROD, we will see in 10 or 20 years, how they will celebrate.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: katherineofdixie on August 30, 2012, 02:22:09 PM
What could they have been thinking???!!!
Do you think I can look into other people's brains?

I cannot. But I have seen a poll before, where about half of the polled GOARCH members said, the church should make Greek Culture an equal priority as Orthodox Christianity.


For the life of me, I cannot understand this kneejerk reaction - well, it looks a lot like prejudice to me, actually - against the "Greeks." First of all, they are not monolithic. If you have three Greeks, you have five opinions. There is no sinister Greek conspiracy to take over ACROD and make them eat kalamari instead of pierogies, or whatever it is that they eat.
Trust me, I know the "Greeks" well - I love them and they exasperate me in about equal proportions!
ACROD is lucky to get a Hierarch like Bishop Gregorios.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on August 30, 2012, 02:26:30 PM
Nothing against Bishop Gregorios personally, but the man is a Greek American, who was serving in the Greek tradition until very recently, and he does not speak a word of the language of Carpatho-Ruthenia. In other words, this is the end of the Carpatho-Ruthenian character of ACROD. Probably, after him, the parishes will just be put directly under the local Greek bishop.

In that sense, let us sing for ACROD: Vechnaya pamyat! Memory eternal!

I am one of those who does not really care about ethnicity, except when it overshadows worship and then I oppose it. Therefore, I'm hopeful that the election of a Greek-American to head ACROD will result in less "Greekness" and less "Carpatho-Ruthenianness" in ACROD, with the result that the exemplary spirituality of ACROd will deepen further and be a model for the other jurisdictions. (By "exemplary spirituality," I have in mind the regular church attendance of 47%). I pray that Bishop Gregorios and his flock will be patient with each other so that this experiment in American Orthodoxy will be successful.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on August 30, 2012, 02:32:52 PM
It is unworthy of the Ecumenical (universal) character of the Patriarchate of Constantinople to place a Greek bishop in ACROD. When the EP placed Greek bishops in Bulgaria, and refused to acknowledge the Bulgarian dissatisfaction with that, a schism was the consequence. Luckily, that is history now. But it is a shame that they have not learnt from history.

And I say that as a person whose main parish is under the EP, and I would always defend the EP against the MP, his All-Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew gainst accusations of ecumenism, etc. But this time, they have made a mistake. Would it have been so hard to get someone from ACROD itself to become bishop, or someone from the Czechoslovak church?

It really seems like ACROD escaped to Constantinople to avoid being russified, only to become hellenised 3 generations later.
Gorazd, you make a lot of sense.  Especially about "hellenizing the Carpatho-Russians" in ACROD.  The EP did the same thing in Romania but to a lesser extent than what happened in Bulgaria during the days of the Ottoman Empire. Is the EP trying to build another empire?  I don't know but their actions are NOT right.  The search in the
"old Country" was not taken seriously: surely at least one or two monks could have emigrated to the USA and lived here a few years to see if they or one of them fitted in and was suitaable bishop material.

Wrong!  There's been no "hellenizing the Carpatho-Rusyns in ACROD; NONE.

You're confusing what the Metropolia did to the Carpatho-Russians who converted to Eastern Orthodox Christianity via the Metropolia.  The Metropolia totally Russified the Carpatho-Rusyn parishes and their faithful who converted to Orthodox Christianity, a fact acknowledged by Metropolitan Orestes, of Blessed Memory, and his fellow Carpatho-Rusyn founders of ACROD.

The Metropolia/OCA have always been jealous of the loving association between ACROD, and the GOAA/EP, since ACROD's founding in 1937.  Some things don't change.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: arimethea on August 30, 2012, 02:41:29 PM
Care to substantiate that, too?  I don't know any ACROD parishes that do anything but ACROD customs.  
I can only tell you that there still are a lot of Greek customs in Bulgaria today, from EP jurisdiction times. In the last few years, Hellenophiles, who have often been monks on Athos, are making a comeback. In the dioceses of Sofia and Plovdiv, they are even imposing Byzantine chant, making flee many people who love the beauty of the Kyiv choral.

As for ACROD, we will see in 10 or 20 years, how they will celebrate.

There are a lot of Greek customs in Bulgaria because they were "Greeks" for almost a 1000 years. The idiots who make the claims you are have no sense of history, and forget that "Bulgarian" practice is an invented thing by the Russians of the 1800's when their influence grew over Bulgaria. Some of the most ancient Byzantine Notation music compositions are in Slavonic and come from Bulgaria.

Here is another fact about the Carpathian practice, it is more similar to the current Greek practices then the Russians. Many of the Carpathian Rus in the Ukraine became Roman Catholic when faced with Russification by the Russian Orthodox Church after WWII.

Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Νεκτάριος on August 30, 2012, 02:49:58 PM
As for the claim that the new hierarch doesn't speak the language of the Ruthenian people, does this mean that he doesn't speak English?  I'm willing to bet that hardly anyone among the flock has any true fluency in Church Slavonic and it is doubtful that many under 35 have anything but a scant and passive understanding of Ruthenian, Slovak, Ukrainian, or whatever modern Slavic language they consider to be their ancestral tongue.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on August 30, 2012, 02:50:47 PM
Is the EP trying to build another empire?

ACROD an empire? 10k faithful here and there? They would fit in 2-3 Białystok parishes.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on August 30, 2012, 04:19:13 PM
Would it have been so hard to get someone from ACROD itself to become bishop, or someone from the Czechoslovak church?


Apparently it was.
AFAIK, they did not make an official request to Met. Christopher to suggest someone. They just asked their own priests if someone knew someone in the Old Country, and no one made a suggestion, so they turned to the Greeks, instead of seriously pursuing the issue.

"As far as you know"? Well, what DO you know of our two year search? You are aware that we are an English-speaking diocese and you easy solution was not so easy, I'm sure. So again, what DO you know?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: arimethea on August 30, 2012, 04:33:15 PM
Would it have been so hard to get someone from ACROD itself to become bishop, or someone from the Czechoslovak church?


Apparently it was.
AFAIK, they did not make an official request to Met. Christopher to suggest someone. They just asked their own priests if someone knew someone in the Old Country, and no one made a suggestion, so they turned to the Greeks, instead of seriously pursuing the issue.

This shows a complete lack of understanding where most of these people come from... The founders of ACROD come from an area that is now part of Western Ukraine. It is not under Metropolitan Christopher. The sad fact is the people who did not emigrate to the US are now mainly Byzantine Catholics. There is no longer a mother church for the people of ACROD.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on August 30, 2012, 04:37:26 PM
ACROD people are both from today's Slovakia and Ukraine. In Ukrainian Zakarpattia Oblast, the UOC-MP and the Greek Catholics have about an equal share of adherents. I suggest someone from Slovakia, rather than Ukraine, because it would be highly problematic taking someone from the MP as an EP bishop.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on August 30, 2012, 04:47:12 PM
Because it would be highly problematic taking someone from the MP as an EP bishop.

AFAIR Basil Osborne gave up bishopping ;)

On the other hand it works for contrarywise examples (the current Bishop of Korsun being a former Rue Daru Priest and St. Sergius graduate).
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on August 30, 2012, 04:56:50 PM
Bishop Nestor of Korsun was sent by the MP to study in France, and for a certain time, had permission to serve in the Rue Daru jurisdiction. He was never incardinated there, but lend from the MP.

Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on August 30, 2012, 05:05:39 PM
Bishop Nestor of Korsun was sent by the MP to study in France, and for a certain time, had permission to serve in the Rue Daru jurisdiction. He was never incardinated there, but lend from the MP.



I doubt this priest lending happens outside the USA. For sure Fr. Nestor was appointed by Abp Sergius as a pastor of an Exarchate's parish. That means he was considered to be an Exarchate's member, doesn't it?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on August 30, 2012, 06:20:18 PM
I doubt this priest lending happens outside the USA. For sure Fr. Nestor was appointed by Abp Sergius as a pastor of an Exarchate's parish. That means he was considered to be an Exarchate's member, doesn't it?

We have priest lending in Germany. For example, the Church of Greece is lending some priests to the EP's German Metropolia, and they are being appointed as pastors of parishes, sometimes for years.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on August 30, 2012, 06:36:16 PM
ACROD people are both from today's Slovakia and Ukraine. In Ukrainian Zakarpattia Oblast, the UOC-MP and the Greek Catholics have about an equal share of adherents. I suggest someone from Slovakia, rather than Ukraine, because it would be highly problematic taking someone from the MP as an EP bishop.

And from Poland, Romania, Hungary...how do you know an old world candidate was not considered as a possibility?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Schultz on August 30, 2012, 09:16:29 PM
ACROD people are both from today's Slovakia and Ukraine. In Ukrainian Zakarpattia Oblast, the UOC-MP and the Greek Catholics have about an equal share of adherents. I suggest someone from Slovakia, rather than Ukraine, because it would be highly problematic taking someone from the MP as an EP bishop.

No, ACROD people are from Pennsylvania, New York, Michigan, and New Jersey, mostly.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Father H on August 30, 2012, 09:34:20 PM
It is unworthy of the Ecumenical (universal) character of the Patriarchate of Constantinople to place a Greek bishop in ACROD. When the EP placed Greek bishops in Bulgaria, and refused to acknowledge the Bulgarian dissatisfaction with that, a schism was the consequence. Luckily, that is history now. But it is a shame that they have not learnt from history.

And I say that as a person whose main parish is under the EP, and I would always defend the EP against the MP, his All-Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew gainst accusations of ecumenism, etc. But this time, they have made a mistake. Would it have been so hard to get someone from ACROD itself to become bishop, or someone from the Czechoslovak church?

It really seems like ACROD escaped to Constantinople to avoid being russified, only to become hellenised 3 generations later.

This was NOT the Patriarch's first choice as to what happened in ACROD.  This was strictly ACROD chancery's suggestion, and they chose Bishop Gregorios over other "Slavic options."  The Patriarch was hesitant about the suggestion when first given.  I cannot say anything else about it on the internet.  ACROD has been under Constantinople for generations without any Hellenization, so your claims and speculations are unfounded. 
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Father H on August 30, 2012, 09:37:52 PM
ACROD people are both from today's Slovakia and Ukraine. In Ukrainian Zakarpattia Oblast, the UOC-MP and the Greek Catholics have about an equal share of adherents. I suggest someone from Slovakia, rather than Ukraine, because it would be highly problematic taking someone from the MP as an EP bishop.

No, ACROD people are from Pennsylvania, New York, Michigan, and New Jersey, mostly.

lol.  Yes, Schultz, but these are facts (to which I would add "Florida"), frowned upon by those who fail to gain from them in their claims. 
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Father H on August 30, 2012, 09:45:20 PM
Is the EP trying to build another empire?

ACROD an empire? 10k faithful here and there? They would fit in 2-3 Białystok parishes.

You are correct Michal.  Thank you for the "reality check."  This "anti-Byzantine intrigue" needs kept in balance. 
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on August 31, 2012, 07:08:13 AM
I am glad to read that it is not the Patriarch's personal fault.

Still, it is strange that ACROD gets a Greek bishop, and a Slav gets sent to be bishop in a Greek diocese in Mexico.

And I do remain sceptical about the "messiah from outside". As I mentioned, that did fail in the case of Metropolitan (or what is the correct title now? Retired Metropolitan?) Jonah.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on August 31, 2012, 07:14:20 AM
Still, it is strange that ACROD gets a Greek bishop, and a Slav gets sent to be bishop in a Greek diocese in Mexico.

Maybe a Greek would be a better primate than an Ukrainian for the Rusyns? AFAIK Rusyns do not like Ukrainians much (and vice-versa). There is no danger that Bishop Gregory would try to ukrainize them as the "bigger brother".

Who would the UOC-USA prefer? A Greek or a Russian?  :police:
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on August 31, 2012, 07:49:59 AM
"Ukrainize" them? When the UOC-MP is looking to Zakarpattia Oblast for authentic tradition? I don't think so.

Anyway, if several candidates were considered, as some posters mentioned in this thread, why wasn't there a vote between several candidates?

As it happened, it reminded me a bit of elections in the USSR: one candidate, all vote for him, everyone applauds. (And the Greek Metropolitan presided the whole thing as locum tenens).
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on August 31, 2012, 07:54:59 AM
"Ukrainize" them? When the UOC-MP is looking to Zakarpattia Oblast for authentic tradition? I don't think so.

You forgot Ukrainian authorities put one Rusyn priest into jail.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on August 31, 2012, 08:09:23 AM
You forgot Ukrainian authorities put one Rusyn priest into jail.
Let's discuss that in the Politics section, please. Anyway, it was not the Church who jailed him, only Politics.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Νεκτάριος on August 31, 2012, 08:10:29 AM
"Ukrainize" them? When the UOC-MP is looking to Zakarpattia Oblast for authentic tradition? I don't think so.

You forgot Ukrainian authorities put one Rusyn priest into jail.

This would be the one, Fr. Dmitri Sidor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimitry_Sydor). 
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on August 31, 2012, 08:21:09 AM
Anyway, it was not the Church who jailed him, only Politics.

Why are not talking "Churches" here but about nations.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on August 31, 2012, 05:40:57 PM
"Ukrainize" them? When the UOC-MP is looking to Zakarpattia Oblast for authentic tradition? I don't think so.

Anyway, if several candidates were considered, as some posters mentioned in this thread, why wasn't there a vote between several candidates?

As it happened, it reminded me a bit of elections in the USSR: one candidate, all vote for him, everyone applauds. (And the Greek Metropolitan presided the whole thing as locum tenens).

Obviously, the Consistory, composed of church leadership appointed by Metropolitan Nicholas of Blessed Memory, must not have felt any other candidates would be the best fit for the diocese.  The priests could have nominated another candidate if they felt there was someone who would better serve them, but obviously, having met Bishop-elect Gregorios, when he was an archimandrite, they agreed with the Consistory.

There was one priest eligible within the diocese, I don't know if he is the priest mentioned in Reply No. 286, but I do know that the one eligible priest refused consideration.  There may have been a health issue, is my recollection, but I could be wrong.

The Locum Tenens is Archbishop Demerios of America, primate of the GOAA and Chairman of ACOB.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on August 31, 2012, 08:06:11 PM
Fr. Dmitry Sidor is not in ACROD, but in the UOC-MP.

Anyway, a part of my family being refugees from communism, and one relative having been murdered by Communists, I cannot exactly feel comfortable about elections with just one candidate.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on August 31, 2012, 08:46:11 PM
Still, it is strange that ACROD gets a Greek bishop,

What is strange about an Orthodox diocese of Americans of Carpatho-Russian descent getting an American of Greek descent for bishop?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Father H on August 31, 2012, 11:31:43 PM
Still, it is strange that ACROD gets a Greek bishop, and a Slav gets sent to be bishop in a Greek diocese in Mexico.

Maybe a Greek would be a better primate than an Ukrainian for the Rusyns? AFAIK Rusyns do not like Ukrainians much (and vice-versa). There is no danger that Bishop Gregory would try to ukrainize them as the "bigger brother".

Who would the UOC-USA prefer? A Greek or a Russian?  :police:

Right.  You are correct, this was one of the fears.  The rationale was that the Greeks have never tried to Hellenize ACROD, but there was a fear that Ukrainians would try to "Ukrainize" ACROD.  With a Greek Bishop, there was felt to be more of a surety to maintain prostopinje and Rusyn praxes, without pressure to "blend."   I also think that your comparison of Rusyn to Ukrainian and Ukrainian to Russian in terms of suspicion is correct.  It is there.  Several of my Ukrainians (speaking of parishioners directly from Ukraine) are as suspicious of the русинів.  This is not true of the Americans of Ukrainian descent.  We can argue whether is right or wrong, but is there.      
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on September 01, 2012, 08:35:08 AM
An interesting aside to this is the conversation I had a few months ago with my priest when I brought up the possibility of a Ukrainian bishop for us. His response was 'classic':
(paraphrasing)
"Even the Catholics knew the relations between the Rusyns and the Ukrainians and created the Byzantine Catholic and Ukrainian Catholic churches here to keep them separate".
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 01, 2012, 08:42:15 AM
"Even the Catholics knew the relations between the Rusyns and the Ukrainians and created the Byzantine Catholic and Ukrainian Catholic churches here to keep them separate".

And still Ukrainians talk about the benefits of potential merging Ukrainian Catholic Church with the Archdiocese of Mukachevo.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on September 01, 2012, 08:45:34 AM
"Even the Catholics knew the relations between the Rusyns and the Ukrainians and created the Byzantine Catholic and Ukrainian Catholic churches here to keep them separate".

And still Ukrainians talk about the benefits of potential merging Ukrainian Catholic Church with the Archdiocese of Mukachevo.
 Where is the Archdiocese of Mukachevo?

(I'll probably regret trying to fathom Ukrainian issues.)  :)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 01, 2012, 08:48:39 AM
OK, not "Archdiocese" but "Diocese".

Marked with grey:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/Ukraine_eparchies.png)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on September 01, 2012, 12:03:32 PM
Interesting that the grey area is included in that western portion of Ukraine which the Rusyns admit to having some of their people (I think). Again, I'm just curious with no ax to grind here
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 01, 2012, 12:14:51 PM
Not sure whether you are serious or making a fool out of me...

The map shows Eastern Rite Catholic Dioceses in Ukraine (but the Armenian one). All but one dioceses marked belong to the Ukrainian Rite but the grey one is independent and responds directly to the Vatican (not to Kyiv). It's because that area is populated by Rusyns who do not share culture, language, tradition and history with most of the Ukrainians and therefore are given by Vatican ecclesiastical independence from Ukraine.

On the other hand Ukrainians dream of taking over the Diocese and merging them into the UGCC.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on September 01, 2012, 12:32:27 PM
No, my friend, I am not trying to make you appear foolish. Things Ukrainian can be really confusing on this side of the pond. Thanks for the input.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on September 01, 2012, 12:48:12 PM
It's because that area is populated by Rusyns who do not share culture, language, tradition and history with most of the Ukrainians and therefore are given by Vatican ecclesiastical independence from Ukraine.

Dream on.

There are merely historical reasons. That one was in Hungary, and later Czechoslovakia, whereas the UGCC was the Greek Catholic hierarchy of Austria, and later Poland.

Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 01, 2012, 01:00:30 PM
There are merely historical reasons. That one was in Hungary, and later Czechoslovakia, whereas the UGCC was the Greek Catholic hierarchy of Austria, and later Poland.

^ An example of typical Ukrainian opinion about the Rusyns. Does anyone notice that it's parallel to the Russian's opinion about Ukrainians?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Νεκτάριος on September 01, 2012, 01:06:45 PM
Fr. Dmitry Sidor is not in ACROD, but in the UOC-MP.

Anyway, a part of my family being refugees from communism, and one relative having been murdered by Communists, I cannot exactly feel comfortable about elections with just one candidate.


The Fr. Sidor saga shows precisely the problem, Slavs really don't make good neighbors with each other.  In most cases it seems like the group in power tries to assimilate the weaker neighbor  (For what its worth even the Magic Kingdom has the same problem (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-527862/Ikeas-Danish-doormats--stop-naming-rubbish-products-Danes-tell-Swedish-retailer.html)).  So if the people in ACROD are happy with the decision what right do you have to upset?  

I'm not sure what your little diatribe about communism has to do with this thread.  The communists along with your ancestors and countrymen killed plenty of my relatives.  Not sure how that makes one more or less able to talk about the current situation in ACROD.    
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Νεκτάριος on September 01, 2012, 01:09:59 PM
There are merely historical reasons. That one was in Hungary, and later Czechoslovakia, whereas the UGCC was the Greek Catholic hierarchy of Austria, and later Poland.

^ An example of typical Ukrainian opinion about the Rusyns. Does anyone notice that it's parallel to the Russian's opinion about Ukrainians?

The Little Ukrainians are just Ukrainians who have been been under the influence of Hungarian and Slovakian fascists.  There is no Little Ukrainian Dialect, nonetheless it should be forbidden to use it.   I've never heard this logic before, have you.

Completely unrelated but I'm planning a trip to Zakarpats'ka in a few weeks. 
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 01, 2012, 01:15:35 PM
Completely unrelated but I'm planning a trip to Zakarpats'ka in a few weeks. 

Enjoy your ether.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ICXCNIKA on September 01, 2012, 02:52:53 PM
Michail, you make an excellent point. The relationships between Russians, Ukrainians, and Rusyns is a strange one or at least difficult to understand. To date I have heard Russians deny the existence of Ukrainians and Ukrainians deny the existence of Rusyns and Rusyns deny the existence of Ukrainians.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Schultz on September 01, 2012, 03:06:16 PM
Michail, you make an excellent point. The relationships between Russians, Ukrainians, and Rusyns is a strange one or at least difficult to understand. To date I have heard Russians deny the existence of Ukrainians and Ukrainians deny the existence of Rusyns and Rusyns deny the existence of Ukrainians.

I've never heard a Rusyn deny the existence of Ukrainian identity so long as it's applied to Ukrainians and not Rusyns.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on September 01, 2012, 04:31:51 PM
There are merely historical reasons. That one was in Hungary, and later Czechoslovakia, whereas the UGCC was the Greek Catholic hierarchy of Austria, and later Poland.

^ An example of typical Ukrainian opinion about the Rusyns. Does anyone notice that it's parallel to the Russian's opinion about Ukrainians?

Why do I have the impression that you have not read my post exactly?

I am only stating the reason for the existence of two separate jurisdictions in communion with Rome. And that reason is not culture or identity.

The question of Rusyn identity is a more complex one, which I did not address in this post.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 01, 2012, 04:47:20 PM
I am only stating the reason for the existence of two separate jurisdictions in communion with Rome. And that reason is not culture or identity.

DIocese of Mukachevo was restored in 1989. Why wasn't it merged with the UGCC?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on September 01, 2012, 04:55:08 PM
DIocese of Mukachevo was restored in 1989. Why wasn't it merged with the UGCC?
Why should it have been? The status quo ante was restored.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 01, 2012, 05:10:23 PM
Status quo wasn't restored because there were no boarders between that part of Zakarpathia and Ukraine.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on September 01, 2012, 05:42:29 PM
Status quo wasn't restored because there were no boarders between that part of Zakarpathia and Ukraine.

The Greek Catholic hierarchy was restored, as it was before Stalin suppressed it. That's all.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Irish Melkite on September 02, 2012, 03:44:35 AM
Status quo wasn't restored because there were no boarders between that part of Zakarpathia and Ukraine.

The Greek Catholic hierarchy was restored, as it was before Stalin suppressed it. That's all.

Gorazd is correct.

Many years,

Neil
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 02, 2012, 08:05:38 PM
This shows a complete lack of understanding where most of these people come from... The founders of ACROD come from an area that is now part of Western Ukraine. It is not under Metropolitan Christopher. The sad fact is the people who did not emigrate to the US are now mainly Byzantine Catholics. There is no longer a mother church for the people of ACROD.

ACROD founders came from both the Mukachevo and Presov Eparchies.  Metropolitan Orestes was from Presov
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 02, 2012, 08:11:27 PM
I am only stating the reason for the existence of two separate jurisdictions in communion with Rome. And that reason is not culture or identity.

DIocese of Mukachevo was restored in 1989. Why wasn't it merged with the UGCC?

The Eparchy of Mukachevo has never been a part of the UGCC or the Kyiv Metropolitanate.  Before the union of Uzhorord, Mukachevo answered to Constantinople via Transylvania whose metropolitans ordained the bishops for Mukachevo.  It was never under Kyiv or Lviv.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 03, 2012, 03:14:16 AM
The Eparchy of Mukachevo has never been a part of the UGCC or the Kyiv Metropolitanate.  Before the union of Uzhorord, Mukachevo answered to Constantinople via Transylvania whose metropolitans ordained the bishops for Mukachevo.  It was never under Kyiv or Lviv.

Many of the Ukrainian priests say it's a matter of time.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on September 03, 2012, 03:28:08 PM
The Eparchy of Mukachevo has never been a part of the UGCC or the Kyiv Metropolitanate.  Before the union of Uzhorord, Mukachevo answered to Constantinople via Transylvania whose metropolitans ordained the bishops for Mukachevo.  It was never under Kyiv or Lviv.

Many of the Ukrainian priests say it's a matter of time.

Would Rome force Mukachevo to go under Lviv against its will? I don't see why they should do that. And as a consolidation of Catholic forces in Ukraine, such a move could also be considered hostile by the MP.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Gorazd on September 03, 2012, 03:39:45 PM
 The communists along with your ancestors and countrymen killed plenty of my relatives.
Considering the antifascist history of my family, I will consider your statement ignorance, rather than an insult.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 03, 2012, 04:53:01 PM
Would Rome force Mukachevo to go under Lviv against its will?

No.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 03, 2012, 07:02:02 PM
Would Rome force Mukachevo to go under Lviv against its will?

No.
Oh?

You might want to review the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican before answering.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on September 03, 2012, 07:05:08 PM
Still, it is strange that ACROD gets a Greek bishop,

What is strange about an Orthodox diocese of Americans of Carpatho-Russian descent getting an American of Greek descent for bishop?

We've been away for the past ten days, including a stop at our annual diocesan fraternal organization's convention in Johnstown, PA. If there is any dissension, it must have been laying low as most are eager to have a bishop back at the cathedral!

Deacon Lance is correct. Nothing is strange as we are in America. I am nearly 60 years old and I can neither speak, nor read the Rusyn language. Only a few committed members of the Carpatho-Rusyn Society have that ability - at least those under say eighty five years of age or so....and most of them would agree that there is simply no need for that knowledge within the structure of the American Church. Frankly the number of folks here in America who have any degree of fluency in the language who are either part of ACROD or the OCA or Byzantine Catholic are few and far between. There has been little if any immigration over the past thirty years and there really is no need for a priest or bishop to be able to speak 'po-nasemu' either for purposes of confessions or sermons. I haven't heard a Rusyn sermon in our diocese since I was a child in the late 1960's. We rarely have any Slavonic in our services.

While in the old days there may have been animosity between Ukrainians and Rusyns in America (certainly the history of the Greek Catholic Church and the failed mission of Bishop Ortynsky bears that out) it is rather absurd to say there is any real, lingering dislike or animosity these days among us. For the past three years or so, Archbishop Antony of the UOC-USA has been ministering our spiritual needs even though Archbishop Dimitrios was the Locum Tenens as +Dimitrios is a wise man and recognized the need for a bishop to have knowledge of the practice of the Rusyns and Ukrainians as laid out by St. Peter Mohyla. I can assure you that Father Grigorios has not been twiddling his thumbs boiling red Paschal eggs to replace pysanky and cases of ouzo in place of Becherova, but rather has been studying the Slavic praxis and learning the Rusyn chants and Church Slavonic so that he can be prepared for this new phase of his priestly life.

He stated clearly during his 'interview process' that a Bishop who would change the ways of 10,000 faithful in favor of his particular ways (that is by replacing Rusyn or Slavic traditions in favor of Hellenistic ones) would be an arrogant fool. From the testimony of those here who know him well over the years, it is clear that he is neither arrogant nor a fool.

As to issues regarding Presov and Uzghorod and why Muchachevo retains her status and is not part of the UGCC - they are not really germane here in America. But I do suspect that Rome knows full well why Mucachevo's independent status had to be retained.

And yes, Metropolitan Orestes did come from Presov, was pastor in,I believe, Osturna, Slovakia and probably half of the founders of the ACROD (including my grandparents as well as my wife's maternal side) came from what is now Slovakia and half came from Transcarpathia.

And back in the 1960's we did obtain a Bishop from the 'old sod', i.e. an Orthodox auxialiary from Kosicse, Slovakia - the late Bishop Methodius (Kanchuka). His short tenure of less than one year, before we 'asked' that he be returned to the Czechoslovak church, was - to be blunt - a disaster and is mostly forgotten by those in the ACROD today.

In a 'perfect' world I suppose I would have preferred a son of one of our parishes who possessed a full knowledge of our history, our struggles and our successes but this world is not a perfect one. I wish the Bishop-elect well and am more that willing to proclaim "Axios."

And if anyone thinks that we have signed our 'death warrant' or sipped on some poison which will wipe us out - well, they don't really know Rusyn culture and the sons and daughters of Duchnovyc.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 03, 2012, 07:05:54 PM
Would Rome force Mukachevo to go under Lviv against its will?

No.
Oh?

You might want to review the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican before answering.

I know it and my answer remains.  
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on September 03, 2012, 07:44:36 PM
Still, it is strange that ACROD gets a Greek bishop,

What is strange about an Orthodox diocese of Americans of Carpatho-Russian descent getting an American of Greek descent for bishop?

We've been away for the past ten days, including a stop at our annual diocesan fraternal organization's convention in Johnstown, PA. If there is any dissension, it must have been laying low as most are eager to have a bishop back at the cathedral!

Deacon Lance is correct. Nothing is strange as we are in America. I am nearly 60 years old and I can neither speak, nor read the Rusyn language. Only a few committed members of the Carpatho-Rusyn Society have that ability - at least those under say eighty five years of age or so....and most of them would agree that there is simply no need for that knowledge within the structure of the American Church. Frankly the number of folks here in America who have any degree of fluency in the language who are either part of ACROD or the OCA or Byzantine Catholic are few and far between. There has been little if any immigration over the past thirty years and there really is no need for a priest or bishop to be able to speak 'po-nasemu' either for purposes of confessions or sermons. I haven't heard a Rusyn sermon in our diocese since I was a child in the late 1960's. We rarely have any Slavonic in our services.

While in the old days there may have been animosity between Ukrainians and Rusyns in America (certainly the history of the Greek Catholic Church and the failed mission of Bishop Ortynsky bears that out) it is rather absurd to say there is any real, lingering dislike or animosity these days among us. For the past three years or so, Archbishop Antony of the UOC-USA has been ministering our spiritual needs even though Archbishop Dimitrios was the Locum Tenens as +Dimitrios is a wise man and recognized the need for a bishop to have knowledge of the practice of the Rusyns and Ukrainians as laid out by St. Peter Mohyla. I can assure you that Father Grigorios has not been twiddling his thumbs boiling red Paschal eggs to replace pysanky and cases of ouzo in place of Becherova, but rather has been studying the Slavic praxis and learning the Rusyn chants and Church Slavonic so that he can be prepared for this new phase of his priestly life.

He stated clearly during his 'interview process' that a Bishop who would change the ways of 10,000 faithful in favor of his particular ways (that is by replacing Rusyn or Slavic traditions in favor of Hellenistic ones) would be an arrogant fool. From the testimony of those here who know him well over the years, it is clear that he is neither arrogant nor a fool.

As to issues regarding Presov and Uzghorod and why Muchachevo retains her status and is not part of the UGCC - they are not really germane here in America. But I do suspect that Rome knows full well why Mucachevo's independent status had to be retained.

And yes, Metropolitan Orestes did come from Presov, was pastor in,I believe, Osturna, Slovakia and probably half of the founders of the ACROD (including my grandparents as well as my wife's maternal side) came from what is now Slovakia and half came from Transcarpathia.

And back in the 1960's we did obtain a Bishop from the 'old sod', i.e. an Orthodox auxialiary from Kosicse, Slovakia - the late Bishop Methodius (Kanchuka). His short tenure of less than one year, before we 'asked' that he be returned to the Czechoslovak church, was - to be blunt - a disaster and is mostly forgotten by those in the ACROD today.

In a 'perfect' world I suppose I would have preferred a son of one of our parishes who possessed a full knowledge of our history, our struggles and our successes but this world is not a perfect one. I wish the Bishop-elect well and am more that willing to proclaim "Axios."

And if anyone thinks that we have signed our 'death warrant' or sipped on some poison which will wipe us out - well, they don't really know Rusyn culture and the sons and daughters of Duchnovyc.

I knew you would give us the definitive commentary.

(I wondered where you were, but I thought you knew too much and were staying out of it.  Welcome back.)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 03, 2012, 08:12:04 PM
I am only stating the reason for the existence of two separate jurisdictions in communion with Rome. And that reason is not culture or identity.

DIocese of Mukachevo was restored in 1989. Why wasn't it merged with the UGCC?

The Eparchy of Mukachevo has never been a part of the UGCC or the Kyiv Metropolitanate.  Before the union of Uzhorord, Mukachevo answered to Constantinople via Transylvania whose metropolitans ordained the bishops for Mukachevo.  It was never under Kyiv or Lviv.
The Eparchy of Mukacheve had been at the birth of its episcopate in the Metropolitinate of Kiev, in the Metropolitinate of Galicia when that was seperate:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Kingdom_of_Galicia_Volhynia_Rus%27_Ukraine_1245_1349.jpg)
before the autocephaly of the Metropolitanate of Kiev and All Rus'.  Before that, Constantinople alternated jurisdiction between Galicia/Rus' and the Metropolitanate of Moldavia.  Before that, it would have fallen under the Metropolitanate of Tourkia, i.e. Hungary, as long as that lasted.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 03, 2012, 08:13:40 PM
Would Rome force Mukachevo to go under Lviv against its will?

No.
Oh?

You might want to review the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican before answering.

I know it and my answer remains.  
Then you don't know that history, or are in denial.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 03, 2012, 10:07:37 PM
I am only stating the reason for the existence of two separate jurisdictions in communion with Rome. And that reason is not culture or identity.

DIocese of Mukachevo was restored in 1989. Why wasn't it merged with the UGCC?

The Eparchy of Mukachevo has never been a part of the UGCC or the Kyiv Metropolitanate.  Before the union of Uzhorord, Mukachevo answered to Constantinople via Transylvania whose metropolitans ordained the bishops for Mukachevo.  It was never under Kyiv or Lviv.
The Eparchy of Mukacheve had been at the birth of its episcopate in the Metropolitinate of Kiev, in the Metropolitinate of Galicia when that was seperate:
before the autocephaly of the Metropolitanate of Kiev and All Rus'.  Before that, Constantinople alternated jurisdiction between Galicia/Rus' and the Metropolitanate of Moldavia.  Before that, it would have fallen under the Metropolitanate of Tourkia, i.e. Hungary, as long as that lasted.

The bishop of Mukachevo was also abbot of St Nicholas Monastery which was stauropegial under Constantinople regardless of which political power the Rusyns answered to.  Please get yourself a copy of The Union of Uzhorod   by  Michael Lacko.  For further proof, when the Union of Brest was enacted by the Metropolitan of Kyiv and his suffragans, Mukachevo was not among them.      
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 03, 2012, 10:14:01 PM
Would Rome force Mukachevo to go under Lviv against its will?

No.
Oh?

You might want to review the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican before answering.

I know it and my answer remains.  
Then you don't know that history, or are in denial.

If Rome wanted to force Mukachevo under Kyiv it could do so and had the perfect opportunity in the 90s when the auxillary of Mukachevo was pro-Ukrainian.  As it is, Mukachevo and the Rusyns unique status has been respected by both Rome and Lviv/Kyiv.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 03, 2012, 10:59:17 PM
I am only stating the reason for the existence of two separate jurisdictions in communion with Rome. And that reason is not culture or identity.

DIocese of Mukachevo was restored in 1989. Why wasn't it merged with the UGCC?

The Eparchy of Mukachevo has never been a part of the UGCC or the Kyiv Metropolitanate.  Before the union of Uzhorord, Mukachevo answered to Constantinople via Transylvania whose metropolitans ordained the bishops for Mukachevo.  It was never under Kyiv or Lviv.
The Eparchy of Mukacheve had been at the birth of its episcopate in the Metropolitinate of Kiev, in the Metropolitinate of Galicia when that was seperate:
before the autocephaly of the Metropolitanate of Kiev and All Rus'.  Before that, Constantinople alternated jurisdiction between Galicia/Rus' and the Metropolitanate of Moldavia.  Before that, it would have fallen under the Metropolitanate of Tourkia, i.e. Hungary, as long as that lasted.

The bishop of Mukachevo was also abbot of St Nicholas Monastery which was stauropegial under Constantinople regardless of which political power the Rusyns answered to.
That wan't until 1491, when the Metropolitanate of Kiev and All Rus' had been autocephalous of Constantinople for four decades.

Please get yourself a copy of The Union of Uzhorod   by  Michael Lacko.  For further proof, when the Union of Brest was enacted by the Metropolitan of Kyiv and his suffragans, Mukachevo was not among them.      
The "Union of Brest" wasn't enacted by the Metropolitan of Kiev and his suffragans: some of them acquiesced into it.  Others, like the Bishop of Lviv, didn't sign it either.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Orest on September 04, 2012, 09:01:55 AM
Would Rome force Mukachevo to go under Lviv against its will?
No.
Oh?
You might want to review the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican before answering.

Sorry, I don't know what you are referring to.  Please enlighten me.
about the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican as it pertains to this issue under discussion.  Thanks.

Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 04, 2012, 09:35:24 AM
Would Rome force Mukachevo to go under Lviv against its will?
No.
Oh?
You might want to review the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican before answering.

Sorry, I don't know what you are referring to.  Please enlighten me.
about the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican as it pertains to this issue under discussion.  Thanks.


The Concordant between the Vatican and Warsaw, to which the Metropolitan was not a party, put him on a very, very short leash, placed in the hands of the Latin hierarchy of Poland.  His jurisdiction was strictly confined to Galicia: when he attempted to reconstitute his diocese of Kholm, his hand was slapped so hard that it was broken off.  Only in the Soviet Union, i.e. where he had no hopes of exercising jurisdiction, did the Vatican give him a free hand-until it turned the USSR over to the "New Union" under a French IIRC cardinal whose name escapes me at the moment, to whom was also given the jurisdiction over the Metropolitan's flock in Eastern Poland, along with the Latin ordinary.  The jurisdiction of the Metropolitan's flock in Southern Poland was placed under the Vatican directly.

And, of course, he had no jurisdiction over the Latin Polish hierarchy in Galicia itself.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Schultz on September 04, 2012, 09:44:03 AM
Would Rome force Mukachevo to go under Lviv against its will?
No.
Oh?
You might want to review the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican before answering.

Sorry, I don't know what you are referring to.  Please enlighten me.
about the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican as it pertains to this issue under discussion.  Thanks.


The Concordant between the Vatican and Warsaw, to which the Metropolitan was not a party, put him on a very, very short leash, placed in the hands of the Latin hierarchy of Poland.  His jurisdiction was strictly confined to Galicia: when he attempted to reconstitute his diocese of Kholm, his hand was slapped so hard that it was broken off.  Only in the Soviet Union, i.e. where he had no hopes of exercising jurisdiction, did the Vatican give him a free hand-until it turned the USSR over to the "New Union" under a French IIRC cardinal whose name escapes me at the moment, to whom was also given the jurisdiction over the Metropolitan's flock in Eastern Poland, along with the Latin ordinary.  The jurisdiction of the Metropolitan's flock in Southern Poland was placed under the Vatican directly.

And, of course, he had no jurisdiction over the Latin Polish hierarchy in Galicia itself.

and what does this have to do with the possibility of Rome forcing Mukacevo under UGCC?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 04, 2012, 09:51:50 AM
Would Rome force Mukachevo to go under Lviv against its will?
No.
Oh?
You might want to review the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican before answering.

Sorry, I don't know what you are referring to.  Please enlighten me.
about the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican as it pertains to this issue under discussion.  Thanks.


The Concordant between the Vatican and Warsaw, to which the Metropolitan was not a party, put him on a very, very short leash, placed in the hands of the Latin hierarchy of Poland.  His jurisdiction was strictly confined to Galicia: when he attempted to reconstitute his diocese of Kholm, his hand was slapped so hard that it was broken off.  Only in the Soviet Union, i.e. where he had no hopes of exercising jurisdiction, did the Vatican give him a free hand-until it turned the USSR over to the "New Union" under a French IIRC cardinal whose name escapes me at the moment, to whom was also given the jurisdiction over the Metropolitan's flock in Eastern Poland, along with the Latin ordinary.  The jurisdiction of the Metropolitan's flock in Southern Poland was placed under the Vatican directly.

And, of course, he had no jurisdiction over the Latin Polish hierarchy in Galicia itself.

and what does this have to do with the possibility of Rome forcing Mukacevo under UGCC?
The Congregation in the Vatican need only decide it being in their interest, and it will happen that day.  Whatever Mukachevo or the UGCC think about that.  That is their track record.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on September 04, 2012, 10:05:17 AM
Would Rome force Mukachevo to go under Lviv against its will?
No.
Oh?
You might want to review the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican before answering.

Sorry, I don't know what you are referring to.  Please enlighten me.
about the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican as it pertains to this issue under discussion.  Thanks.


The Concordant between the Vatican and Warsaw, to which the Metropolitan was not a party, put him on a very, very short leash, placed in the hands of the Latin hierarchy of Poland.  His jurisdiction was strictly confined to Galicia: when he attempted to reconstitute his diocese of Kholm, his hand was slapped so hard that it was broken off.  Only in the Soviet Union, i.e. where he had no hopes of exercising jurisdiction, did the Vatican give him a free hand-until it turned the USSR over to the "New Union" under a French IIRC cardinal whose name escapes me at the moment, to whom was also given the jurisdiction over the Metropolitan's flock in Eastern Poland, along with the Latin ordinary.  The jurisdiction of the Metropolitan's flock in Southern Poland was placed under the Vatican directly.

And, of course, he had no jurisdiction over the Latin Polish hierarchy in Galicia itself.

and what does this have to do with the possibility of Rome forcing Mukacevo under UGCC?
The Congregation in the Vatican need only decide it being in their interest, and it will happen that day.  Whatever Mukachevo or the UGCC think about that.  That is their track record.

I don't doubt that many of the bureaucrat's at the Congregation still toast to the good old days before the internet, Facebook, Twitter etc.... when they could get away with things that they can't quite pull off today in cahoots with state power. While such sentiments and efforts to effectuate them still exist as Isa alludes to, such actions are much harder to pull off today. An autocratic state may crack down with the power of the state to shut off dissent but at great risk and cost. The Church no longer has access to such temporal forces to gain its advantage. I suspect the faithful of Muchachevo would take their fate into their own hands were Rome to force something upon them which was politically and culturally unsustainable.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 04, 2012, 10:07:56 AM
Would Rome force Mukachevo to go under Lviv against its will?
No.
Oh?
You might want to review the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican before answering.

Sorry, I don't know what you are referring to.  Please enlighten me.
about the history of Met. Sheptytsky and the Vatican as it pertains to this issue under discussion.  Thanks.


The Concordant between the Vatican and Warsaw, to which the Metropolitan was not a party, put him on a very, very short leash, placed in the hands of the Latin hierarchy of Poland.  His jurisdiction was strictly confined to Galicia: when he attempted to reconstitute his diocese of Kholm, his hand was slapped so hard that it was broken off.  Only in the Soviet Union, i.e. where he had no hopes of exercising jurisdiction, did the Vatican give him a free hand-until it turned the USSR over to the "New Union" under a French IIRC cardinal whose name escapes me at the moment, to whom was also given the jurisdiction over the Metropolitan's flock in Eastern Poland, along with the Latin ordinary.  The jurisdiction of the Metropolitan's flock in Southern Poland was placed under the Vatican directly.

And, of course, he had no jurisdiction over the Latin Polish hierarchy in Galicia itself.

and what does this have to do with the possibility of Rome forcing Mukacevo under UGCC?
The Congregation in the Vatican need only decide it being in their interest, and it will happen that day.  Whatever Mukachevo or the UGCC think about that.  That is their track record.

I don't doubt that many of the bureaucrat's at the Congregation still toast to the good old days before the internet, Facebook, Twitter etc.... when they could get away with things that they can't quite pull off today in cahoots with state power. While such sentiments and efforts to effectuate them still exist as Isa alludes to, such actions are much harder to pull off today. An autocratic state may crack down with the power of the state to shut off dissent but at great risk and cost. The Church no longer has access to such temporal forces to gain its advantage. I suspect the faithful of Muchachevo would take their fate into their own hands were Rome to force something upon them which was politically and culturally unsustainable.
I would hope so, as their Orthodox brethren are in the present day.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on September 04, 2012, 10:08:31 AM
Still, it is strange that ACROD gets a Greek bishop,

What is strange about an Orthodox diocese of Americans of Carpatho-Russian descent getting an American of Greek descent for bishop?

We've been away for the past ten days, including a stop at our annual diocesan fraternal organization's convention in Johnstown, PA. If there is any dissension, it must have been laying low as most are eager to have a bishop back at the cathedral!

Deacon Lance is correct. Nothing is strange as we are in America. I am nearly 60 years old and I can neither speak, nor read the Rusyn language. Only a few committed members of the Carpatho-Rusyn Society have that ability - at least those under say eighty five years of age or so....and most of them would agree that there is simply no need for that knowledge within the structure of the American Church. Frankly the number of folks here in America who have any degree of fluency in the language who are either part of ACROD or the OCA or Byzantine Catholic are few and far between. There has been little if any immigration over the past thirty years and there really is no need for a priest or bishop to be able to speak 'po-nasemu' either for purposes of confessions or sermons. I haven't heard a Rusyn sermon in our diocese since I was a child in the late 1960's. We rarely have any Slavonic in our services.

While in the old days there may have been animosity between Ukrainians and Rusyns in America (certainly the history of the Greek Catholic Church and the failed mission of Bishop Ortynsky bears that out) it is rather absurd to say there is any real, lingering dislike or animosity these days among us. For the past three years or so, Archbishop Antony of the UOC-USA has been ministering our spiritual needs even though Archbishop Dimitrios was the Locum Tenens as +Dimitrios is a wise man and recognized the need for a bishop to have knowledge of the practice of the Rusyns and Ukrainians as laid out by St. Peter Mohyla. I can assure you that Father Grigorios has not been twiddling his thumbs boiling red Paschal eggs to replace pysanky and cases of ouzo in place of Becherova, but rather has been studying the Slavic praxis and learning the Rusyn chants and Church Slavonic so that he can be prepared for this new phase of his priestly life.

He stated clearly during his 'interview process' that a Bishop who would change the ways of 10,000 faithful in favor of his particular ways (that is by replacing Rusyn or Slavic traditions in favor of Hellenistic ones) would be an arrogant fool. From the testimony of those here who know him well over the years, it is clear that he is neither arrogant nor a fool.

As to issues regarding Presov and Uzghorod and why Muchachevo retains her status and is not part of the UGCC - they are not really germane here in America. But I do suspect that Rome knows full well why Mucachevo's independent status had to be retained.

And yes, Metropolitan Orestes did come from Presov, was pastor in,I believe, Osturna, Slovakia and probably half of the founders of the ACROD (including my grandparents as well as my wife's maternal side) came from what is now Slovakia and half came from Transcarpathia.

And back in the 1960's we did obtain a Bishop from the 'old sod', i.e. an Orthodox auxialiary from Kosicse, Slovakia - the late Bishop Methodius (Kanchuka). His short tenure of less than one year, before we 'asked' that he be returned to the Czechoslovak church, was - to be blunt - a disaster and is mostly forgotten by those in the ACROD today.

In a 'perfect' world I suppose I would have preferred a son of one of our parishes who possessed a full knowledge of our history, our struggles and our successes but this world is not a perfect one. I wish the Bishop-elect well and am more that willing to proclaim "Axios."

And if anyone thinks that we have signed our 'death warrant' or sipped on some poison which will wipe us out - well, they don't really know Rusyn culture and the sons and daughters of Duchnovyc.

I knew you would give us the definitive commentary.

(I wondered where you were, but I thought you knew too much and were staying out of it.  Welcome back.)

I was also thinking this morning that God does indeed work His ways in ways which we may not understand. Perhaps, just perhaps, a wise Bishop tending to a flock not of his own ancestral heritage can show Americans a path to Orthodox solidarity and growth beyond the ethnic umbrellas which both shield us and limit us today? I think that the Bishop-elect needs our prayers that he act wisely, in a just manner and in a way which protects small 't' traditions which are not at variance with the Tradition of the entire Church.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 04, 2012, 12:47:37 PM
That wan't until 1491, when the Metropolitanate of Kiev and All Rus' had been autocephalous of Constantinople for four decades.

Actually the stauropegial status was granted in 1391.  Before that it was conbtrolled by the Valachians/Romanians.  1491 is the first historical record of a bishop in Mukachevo.  The Rusyns trace their evangelizatiuon to Ss Cyril and Methodius not St Vladimir. 

The "Union of Brest" wasn't enacted by the Metropolitan of Kiev and his suffragans: some of them acquiesced into it.  Others, like the Bishop of Lviv, didn't sign it either.

The bishops of Kyiv, Vladimir, Lutsk, Pinsk, Kholm, Polotsk, Peremyshl, and Lviv all signed.  The bishops of Peremyshl and Lviv  recanted and the union did not occur until 1693 and 1700 in those eparchies.  Again the bishop of Mukachevo had no involvement.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 04, 2012, 01:29:10 PM
The bishops of Kyiv, Vladimir, Lutsk, Pinsk, Kholm, Polotsk, Peremyshl, and Lviv all signed.  The bishops of Peremyshl and Lviv  recanted and the union did not occur until 1693 and 1700 in those eparchies.

No, they didn't. Bishops Michael and Gedeon didn't take part in that Robber Council.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 04, 2012, 02:29:03 PM
The bishops of Kyiv, Vladimir, Lutsk, Pinsk, Kholm, Polotsk, Peremyshl, and Lviv all signed.  The bishops of Peremyshl and Lviv  recanted and the union did not occur until 1693 and 1700 in those eparchies.

No, they didn't. Bishops Michael and Gedeon didn't take part in that Robber Council.
In fact, they took part in the legitimate council deposing and anathematizing those who signed.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 04, 2012, 02:45:09 PM
That wan't until 1491, when the Metropolitanate of Kiev and All Rus' had been autocephalous of Constantinople for four decades.

Actually the stauropegial status was granted in 1391.
You have any documentation on that, Deacon?  I'd like to know the specifics.

Before that it was conbtrolled by the Valachians/Romanians.
 
Moldovans, to actually be specific. The jurisdiction alternated, per the decisions of their Patriarch in Constantinople, between them and Galicia.

1491 is the first historical record of a bishop in Mukachevo.  The Rusyns trace their evangelizatiuon to Ss Cyril and Methodius not St Vladimir. 
They are right.  Their successors, fleeing the suppression of Old Rome, fled to the safety of St. Vladimir and his successors.

The "Union of Brest" wasn't enacted by the Metropolitan of Kiev and his suffragans: some of them acquiesced into it.  Others, like the Bishop of Lviv, didn't sign it either.
The bishops of Kyiv, Vladimir, Lutsk, Pinsk, Kholm, Polotsk, Peremyshl, and Lviv all signed.  The bishops of Peremyshl and Lviv  recanted and the union did not occur until 1693 and 1700 in those eparchies.
Already answered.  The seals of Lviv and Peremyshl were forged.  And when the Austrian Emperor went to Lviv in towards the end of the 1700's, he was met by Orthodox requesting a charter for an Orthodox Church.

Again the bishop of Mukachevo had no involvement.
No good Orthodox Rus' bishop did.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 04, 2012, 03:59:46 PM
The bishops of Kyiv, Vladimir, Lutsk, Pinsk, Kholm, Polotsk, Peremyshl, and Lviv all signed.  The bishops of Peremyshl and Lviv  recanted and the union did not occur until 1693 and 1700 in those eparchies.

No, they didn't. Bishops Michael and Gedeon didn't take part in that Robber Council.
The Union of Brest wasn't done in a day.  The process started in 1590.  Bishop Gideon was an early supporter who later rejected the union.  Metropolitan Michael went from supporter to obfusticator back to supporter. 
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 04, 2012, 04:07:40 PM
The bishops of Kyiv, Vladimir, Lutsk, Pinsk, Kholm, Polotsk, Peremyshl, and Lviv all signed.  The bishops of Peremyshl and Lviv  recanted and the union did not occur until 1693 and 1700 in those eparchies.

No, they didn't. Bishops Michael and Gedeon didn't take part in that Robber Council.
The Union of Brest wasn't done in a day.  The process started in 1590.  Bishop Gideon was an early supporter who later rejected the union.  Metropolitan Michael went from supporter to obfusticator back to supporter. 

You did not write about "the process". You wrote, they had signed and that is not true. It's a fact they had been considering union but they repented before the union took place.

I've also have not heard that Bishop Michael approved the union later. Are you sure you don't confuse him with Archbishop Meletius?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 04, 2012, 04:25:10 PM
You have any documentation on that, Deacon?  I'd like to know the specifics.

I already told you one book to get, another is Byzantine Rite Rusins in Carpatho-Ruthenia and America by Walter Warzeski.  The specifics are there is never a single instance of the Metropolitans of Kyiv or Halych metioning a suffragan in  Mukachevo.  The foundation of the Eparchy of Mukachevo is lost to history but when it is finally mentioned as existing it is by Hungarians and Romanians.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 04, 2012, 04:29:53 PM
The bishops of Kyiv, Vladimir, Lutsk, Pinsk, Kholm, Polotsk, Peremyshl, and Lviv all signed.  The bishops of Peremyshl and Lviv  recanted and the union did not occur until 1693 and 1700 in those eparchies.

No, they didn't. Bishops Michael and Gedeon didn't take part in that Robber Council.
The Union of Brest wasn't done in a day.  The process started in 1590.  Bishop Gideon was an early supporter who later rejected the union.  Metropolitan Michael went from supporter to obfusticator back to supporter. 

You did not write about "the process". You wrote, they had signed and that is not true. It's a fact they had been considering union but they repented before the union took place.

I've also have not heard that Bishop Michael approved the union later. Are you sure you don't confuse him with Archbishop Meletius?

Their seals were affixed.  Some say fraudulently. 

I was speaking of Metropolitan Michael of Kyiv not Bishop Michael of Peremyshl.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 04, 2012, 04:41:15 PM
And I'm talking about Bishops Michael (Kopysteński) of Przemyśl and Gedeon (Bałaban) of Lviv who, in presence of the Orthodox clergy, monastics, faithful and representatives from abroad (including St. Cyrill Lukaris) deposed those, who signed the union act.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on September 04, 2012, 04:55:19 PM
Since the thread appears to be successfully derailed here, this discussion reminds me of a bar full of baseball fans arguing about whether Reggie Jackson should or should not be in the Hall of Fame given his career batting average and how come the Baseball Hall of Fame never has had a unanimous first year inductee, if Ripken was not, how can Jeter be and so on. I wonder if the Super Bowl line-ups will be debated endlessly in two or three hundred years...such discussions, whether in sports or religion are really not that important to the underlying issue and to the present day. At least that's the way I see it.... (sorry Michal and our non North American readers...I suppose there are similar arguments among World Cup fans...)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 04, 2012, 05:36:35 PM
I'm not interested in TV sport at all. No matter it's football or that American one where people carry a coconut under their armpit and slam others.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 04, 2012, 07:26:20 PM
You have any documentation on that, Deacon?  I'd like to know the specifics.

I already told you one book to get, another is Byzantine Rite Rusins in Carpatho-Ruthenia and America by Walter Warzeski.  The specifics are there is never a single instance of the Metropolitans of Kyiv or Halych metioning a suffragan in  Mukachevo.  The foundation of the Eparchy of Mukachevo is lost to history but when it is finally mentioned as existing it is by Hungarians and Romanians.
Quote
Munkács
Diocese in Hungary, of Greek Catholic Rite, suffragan of Gran. It dates from the fifteenth century. Until then the Greek Ruthenians who had emigrated to Hungary a generation before, 1254, were subject to the See of Przemysl. In 1458 the Diocese of Munkács is mentioned for the first time in a document of King Mathias as a parish with episcopal jurisdiction. It was probably established between 1439 and 1458, as the document mentions that Lucas, the occupant of the see, had already exercised the usual jurisdiction for a considerable period. Its history is connected with that of the Basilian monastery at Csernekhegy near Munkács, established supposedly in 1360 by Duke Theodore Koriatovics, but demonstrably as late as 1418. The history of the diocese falls naturally into three periods. Until 1641, when union with Rome took place, Munkács endeavoured to extend its episcopal jurisdiction over the thirteen districts (Komitate) of Hungary, later its territory.
Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10634a.htm
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 04, 2012, 07:30:24 PM

The bishops of Kyiv, Vladimir, Lutsk, Pinsk, Kholm, Polotsk, Peremyshl, and Lviv all signed.  The bishops of Peremyshl and Lviv  recanted and the union did not occur until 1693 and 1700 in those eparchies.

No, they didn't. Bishops Michael and Gedeon didn't take part in that Robber Council.
The Union of Brest wasn't done in a day.  The process started in 1590.  Bishop Gideon was an early supporter who later rejected the union.  Metropolitan Michael went from supporter to obfusticator back to supporter. 

You did not write about "the process". You wrote, they had signed and that is not true. It's a fact they had been considering union but they repented before the union took place.

I've also have not heard that Bishop Michael approved the union later. Are you sure you don't confuse him with Archbishop Meletius?

Their seals were affixed.  Some say fraudulently. 

I was speaking of Metropolitan Michael of Kyiv not Bishop Michael of Peremyshl.
Since the Metropolitanate of Kiev was not autocephalous, the whole thing was manifestly fraudulent, the reason why the Swedish King of Poland shut all the Churches of Brest, in the vain hope that the Orthodox of the Metropolitanate could not deal with the apostates.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 04, 2012, 07:36:19 PM
Quote
Munkács
Diocese in Hungary, of Greek Catholic Rite, suffragan of Gran. It dates from the fifteenth century. Until then the Greek Ruthenians who had emigrated to Hungary a generation before, 1254, were subject to the See of Przemysl. In 1458 the Diocese of Munkács is mentioned for the first time in a document of King Mathias as a parish with episcopal jurisdiction. It was probably established between 1439 and 1458, as the document mentions that Lucas, the occupant of the see, had already exercised the usual jurisdiction for a considerable period. Its history is connected with that of the Basilian monastery at Csernekhegy near Munkács, established supposedly in 1360 by Duke Theodore Koriatovics, but demonstrably as late as 1418. The history of the diocese falls naturally into three periods. Until 1641, when union with Rome took place, Munkács endeavoured to extend its episcopal jurisdiction over the thirteen districts (Komitate) of Hungary, later its territory.
Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10634a.htm

I give you two published scholarly works and you give me an article from an outdated encyclopedia that has been superceded by said scholarship, unbelieveable.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 04, 2012, 07:39:04 PM
Since the thread appears to be successfully derailed here, this discussion reminds me of a bar full of baseball fans arguing about whether Reggie Jackson should or should not be in the Hall of Fame given his career batting average and how come the Baseball Hall of Fame never has had a unanimous first year inductee, if Ripken was not, how can Jeter be and so on. I wonder if the Super Bowl line-ups will be debated endlessly in two or three hundred years...such discussions, whether in sports or religion are really not that important to the underlying issue and to the present day. At least that's the way I see it.... (sorry Michal and our non North American readers...I suppose there are similar arguments among World Cup fans...)
My apologies, I should know better.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 04, 2012, 08:06:20 PM
Quote
Munkács
Diocese in Hungary, of Greek Catholic Rite, suffragan of Gran. It dates from the fifteenth century. Until then the Greek Ruthenians who had emigrated to Hungary a generation before, 1254, were subject to the See of Przemysl. In 1458 the Diocese of Munkács is mentioned for the first time in a document of King Mathias as a parish with episcopal jurisdiction. It was probably established between 1439 and 1458, as the document mentions that Lucas, the occupant of the see, had already exercised the usual jurisdiction for a considerable period. Its history is connected with that of the Basilian monastery at Csernekhegy near Munkács, established supposedly in 1360 by Duke Theodore Koriatovics, but demonstrably as late as 1418. The history of the diocese falls naturally into three periods. Until 1641, when union with Rome took place, Munkács endeavoured to extend its episcopal jurisdiction over the thirteen districts (Komitate) of Hungary, later its territory.
Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10634a.htm

I give you two published scholarly works and you give me an article from an outdated encyclopedia that has been superceded by said scholarship, unbelieveable.
You mentioned the title of one work not readily available, and another only less so, which you claim supercede what the "Catholic Encyclopedia" says, which is mostly outdated in that it doesn't parse its words with the "spirit of Vatican II."  You gave no citation on which to evaluate your claims.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Schultz on September 04, 2012, 10:21:25 PM
Quote
Munkács
Diocese in Hungary, of Greek Catholic Rite, suffragan of Gran. It dates from the fifteenth century. Until then the Greek Ruthenians who had emigrated to Hungary a generation before, 1254, were subject to the See of Przemysl. In 1458 the Diocese of Munkács is mentioned for the first time in a document of King Mathias as a parish with episcopal jurisdiction. It was probably established between 1439 and 1458, as the document mentions that Lucas, the occupant of the see, had already exercised the usual jurisdiction for a considerable period. Its history is connected with that of the Basilian monastery at Csernekhegy near Munkács, established supposedly in 1360 by Duke Theodore Koriatovics, but demonstrably as late as 1418. The history of the diocese falls naturally into three periods. Until 1641, when union with Rome took place, Munkács endeavoured to extend its episcopal jurisdiction over the thirteen districts (Komitate) of Hungary, later its territory.
Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10634a.htm

I give you two published scholarly works and you give me an article from an outdated encyclopedia that has been superceded by said scholarship, unbelieveable.
You mentioned the title of one work not readily available, and another only less so, which you claim supercede what the "Catholic Encyclopedia" says, which is mostly outdated in that it doesn't parse its words with the "spirit of Vatican II."  You gave no citation on which to evaluate your claims.

Both are readily available via interlibrary loan; a quick search of worldcat shows multiple editions available in a number of university libraries, most of whom participate in interlibrary loan.  Just because something isn't on googlebooks doesn't mean it's not readily available.  And even if Deacon Lance had given chapter and verse, you'd still bitch about him not giving you sources that you can find on the internet or in your local Barnes and Noble.  That's not fair and it's not Deacon Lance's fault if you can't step back and check his sources once you receive them via interlibrary loan, which I know you know how to use.  As for the veracity of the Catholic Encyclopedia, both were written long after the original publication of that title and both most likely contain documentary evidence unavailable at the time of the former's publication, hence the newer conclusions.  It has nothing to do with the so-called Spirit of Vatican II and you most certainly know that.  Quit acting like a boorish ass as you're only hurting your case.

Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on September 04, 2012, 10:53:45 PM
Quote
Munkács
Diocese in Hungary, of Greek Catholic Rite, suffragan of Gran. It dates from the fifteenth century. Until then the Greek Ruthenians who had emigrated to Hungary a generation before, 1254, were subject to the See of Przemysl. In 1458 the Diocese of Munkács is mentioned for the first time in a document of King Mathias as a parish with episcopal jurisdiction. It was probably established between 1439 and 1458, as the document mentions that Lucas, the occupant of the see, had already exercised the usual jurisdiction for a considerable period. Its history is connected with that of the Basilian monastery at Csernekhegy near Munkács, established supposedly in 1360 by Duke Theodore Koriatovics, but demonstrably as late as 1418. The history of the diocese falls naturally into three periods. Until 1641, when union with Rome took place, Munkács endeavoured to extend its episcopal jurisdiction over the thirteen districts (Komitate) of Hungary, later its territory.
Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10634a.htm

I give you two published scholarly works and you give me an article from an outdated encyclopedia that has been superceded by said scholarship, unbelieveable.
You mentioned the title of one work not readily available, and another only less so, which you claim supercede what the "Catholic Encyclopedia" says, which is mostly outdated in that it doesn't parse its words with the "spirit of Vatican II."  You gave no citation on which to evaluate your claims.

Both are readily available via interlibrary loan; a quick search of worldcat shows multiple editions available in a number of university libraries, most of whom participate in interlibrary loan.  Just because something isn't on googlebooks doesn't mean it's not readily available.  And even if Deacon Lance had given chapter and verse, you'd still bitch about him not giving you sources that you can find on the internet or in your local Barnes and Noble.  That's not fair and it's not Deacon Lance's fault if you can't step back and check his sources once you receive them via interlibrary loan, which I know you know how to use.  As for the veracity of the Catholic Encyclopedia, both were written long after the original publication of that title and both most likely contain documentary evidence unavailable at the time of the former's publication, hence the newer conclusions.  It has nothing to do with the so-called Spirit of Vatican II and you most certainly know that.  Quit acting like a boorish ass as you're only hurting your case.



I have to say that I really don't care which long dead Bishop was motivated by whatever reasons to enter in the Unions. We can debate the efficacy of the whole process till the cows come home and we can sling charges and counter-charges against each other's positions for an equally long time.

HOWEVER - I will posit a serious question and one which I am sure many of you will find distasteful.

In the lands populated in part at the time of the various unions by Orthodox Christians BUT ruled by Princes and Kings whose loyalties were to Rome or Luther's followers - can we honestly judge the motivations of those bishops and the real pressures that they faced without the benefit of historical perspective? After all, during the same period of time the minority Orthodox populations were not alone in their inability to deal with political pressure and armed force. In England, the forces of Henry VIII persecuted those loyal to the Church of Rome with zeal and force - while on the continent one hundred and fifty years of civil war and strife went on between those loyal to Rome and the various Protestant groups etc.... Looking at the reality of life in those long past centuries, was it unreasonable for some of the episcopacy to 'place their bets' with the local Prince or King? Was it not a real fear that were they not to accede to the terms of union that all which they held dear - that is their loyalty and links to eastern Christianity - might have been completely severed and today those of us who are their descendants might be Lutheran or Roman Catholic?

In England and in the Austro-Hungarian empires things did begin to change in the nineteenth century. In England the Anglo-Catholic movement began while in the east, an Orthodox revival began and played out in the United States as well.

I know I am rambling but had there been no union I suspect there would have been no Orthodox Church either in the lands of the Slovaks, Magyars and Galicians where the Rusyns and Ukrainians were a strong and visible religious and cultural minority and where they were the 'bottom' of the societal ladder of the day.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 05, 2012, 02:48:27 AM
Quote
Munkács
Diocese in Hungary, of Greek Catholic Rite, suffragan of Gran. It dates from the fifteenth century. Until then the Greek Ruthenians who had emigrated to Hungary a generation before, 1254, were subject to the See of Przemysl. In 1458 the Diocese of Munkács is mentioned for the first time in a document of King Mathias as a parish with episcopal jurisdiction. It was probably established between 1439 and 1458, as the document mentions that Lucas, the occupant of the see, had already exercised the usual jurisdiction for a considerable period. Its history is connected with that of the Basilian monastery at Csernekhegy near Munkács, established supposedly in 1360 by Duke Theodore Koriatovics, but demonstrably as late as 1418. The history of the diocese falls naturally into three periods. Until 1641, when union with Rome took place, Munkács endeavoured to extend its episcopal jurisdiction over the thirteen districts (Komitate) of Hungary, later its territory.
Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10634a.htm

I give you two published scholarly works and you give me an article from an outdated encyclopedia that has been superceded by said scholarship, unbelieveable.
You mentioned the title of one work not readily available, and another only less so, which you claim supercede what the "Catholic Encyclopedia" says, which is mostly outdated in that it doesn't parse its words with the "spirit of Vatican II."  You gave no citation on which to evaluate your claims.

Both are readily available via interlibrary loan; a quick search of worldcat shows multiple editions available in a number of university libraries, most of whom participate in interlibrary loan.  Just because something isn't on googlebooks doesn't mean it's not readily available.
According to World Cat, the nearest copy for the one is on the other side of Indiana, and the one is further off.  Readily available means I can get it in a few days.

And even if Deacon Lance had given chapter and verse, you'd still bitch about him not giving you sources that you can find on the internet or in your local Barnes and Noble.

I can't get them at the University of Chicago Library either.  I had a similar beef about references to the work of Met. Maximos of Sardes on the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which I did find finally in a French translation at Loyola (I'd still like to see the Greek), and at last has been put on line at google.

That's not fair and it's not Deacon Lance's fault if you can't step back and check his sources once you receive them via interlibrary loan, which I know you know how to use.  As for the veracity of the Catholic Encyclopedia, both were written long after the original publication of that title and both most likely contain documentary evidence unavailable at the time of the former's publication, hence the newer conclusions.
Deacon Lance's sources draw on the same source the CE does, without, it seems, coming up with newer conclusions.
http://books.google.com/books?id=KgkOAQAAMAAJ&q=%22Indeed+in+his+report+of+1652+he+added+that+the+consecrator+had+said+with+a+sigh%22&dq=%22Indeed+in+his+report+of+1652+he+added+that+the+consecrator+had+said+with+a+sigh%22&source=bl&ots=65GnpCukIl&sig=4OeA2MdjsA3M3ayKnJUzpfgKPsI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=HMtGUKviCMjsrQGeyoF4&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA
Quote
So, the electors, without waiting for confirmation from Rome, sent off Peter Parthenius immediately after his election to Transylvania to the archbishop and metropolitan of Alba Julia, Stephen Simonovic, who, with two other bishops; Sava of Bystritsa and Gregory of Moldavia assisting, proceeded to consecrate him.

Lippay informed Rome that Archbishop Simonovic knew that Parthenius was already united and that, as such, he had consecrated him willingly.   Indeed in his report of 1652 he added that the consecrator had said with a sigh: "Would that I too could profess the same Union", which proves that Stephen Simonovic was sympathetic to Union and gives the reason why he did not demand from Parthenius "a schismatical profession of faith."

When all had been duly done, Archibishop Simonovic gave Parthenius testimonial letters, in which he first enumerated all the documents that Parthenius had produced to prove the legitimacy of his election, then he attested that Parthenius had then he attested that Parthenius had been properly concecrated in accordance with the sacred canons and constituted bishop of Mukacevo to succeed Basil Tarasovic "lately dead."  Archbishop Lippay sent a copy of this document to Rome with his own letter and it is probablypreserved in the archives of the Congregation of the Holy Office with the other papers that deal with the confirmation of Parthenius. We have the text of another copy, that has been edited by Hodinka.
That is, A. Hodinka, A munkácsi görög-katholikus püspökség története "History of the Greek Catholic See of Munkács" (Budapest, 1910), i.e the SAME source for the old CE article.

Couple of problems with all this, starting with the concern about denying that St. Stefan Simonovci (he was glorified last year, feast day April 24) "did not demand from Parthenius "a schismatical profession of faith.""  György Lippay was the Vatican's Archbishop of Esztergom, primate of the Kingdom of Hungary.  He had plenty of his own bishops to ordain Parthenius, why didn't he?  Why did they insist on Orthodox bishops consecrating Parthenius, especially when there was an known Orthodox candidate, Johannicius Zajkán, and two days after the "consecration," György Lippay was requesting that the Vatican dispense the irregularity in Parthenius' admission to the episcopate?
(for these issues, see István Baán, Appointments to the episcopal see in Munkács 1650−1690)  byzantinohungarica.hu/sites/default/files/baan_angol_nilles.pdf
Like the rush "synod" of Damascus in 1724, the Robber Synod of Brest in 1596 (complete with its forged seals of the bishops who refused to sign), and the "Holy Roman Emperor" delegation of Athanasius to Bucharest for consecration for the "union" of Alba Iulia, the sending of Parthenius to Alba Iulia took its place in the chronicles of the "return to catholic communion" so called.  All come from the same aim: attempting to legitimize the illegitimate.

Somewhere here (or perhaps Byzcath) someone (Deacon Lance?) posted that St. Stefan consecrated Parfenii knowing that he was not Orthodox(whoever it was who posted it, they made the mistake that it was a Moldavian bishop with Transylvanian bishops in attendance). It seems that his source, Lacko, just swallows Lippay's account that 'that the consecrator had said with a sigh: "Would that I too could profess the same Union", which proves that Stephen Simonovic was sympathetic to Union and gives the reason why he did not demand from Parthenius "a schismatical profession of faith""-I trust that you know hearsay when you see it.

St. Stefan had taken the see of Belgrad/Alba Iulie at a time when he had to preserve the Orthodox Church under the Calvinist facade of the Superintendent, which he did.  A few years earlier the whole Orthodox world gathered in Moldavia-Gregory's homeland and St. Stefan's neighbor and kin-to adopt St. Peter Movila (also from Moldavia)'s Orthodox Confession, but only after, over St. Peter's strenous objections, it had been revised to purge its Latinizations and Vatican influence. Given the opposition to such teaching, addressed by St. Stefan himself (he used the Calvinist doctrine to publish the New Testament, Psalter etc. in Romanian, with annotations to the reader), and the fact that the "Most Catholic Majesty" the Habsburg could not control his Calvnist vassal in Transylvania, no reason is forthcoming on why St. Stefan would "sigh."  If nothing else, he could easily joined ranks with the Vatican considerable flock in Transylvania and turned the tables on the Calvnisits, as was attempted when the Habsburgs instituted direct rule a 30 years later.

Why the insistence that "a schismatical profession of faith"-i.e. the confession of the Orthodox Faith demanded before any consecration-was not demanded, except that it would expose the fraud for what it was.  We know that the "unions" were not above it, as we know the scheme a few decades later with St. Stefan's successor Athansius in some detail-Patriarch Dositheus of Jerusalem was in Bucharest for the consecration and left behind detailed instructions given to and demanded of Athanasius, who, once consecrated, went back to Alba Iulia to break his sacred vows.  The "consecration" of Cyril VI as "Patriarch of Antioch" in Damascus avoided that problem-it was done in the Latin rite, by three bishops in the Patriarchate only because the Sultan's firman outlawed leaving it.

It has nothing to do with the so-called Spirit of Vatican II and you most certainly know that.
They don't come out and spit out what they say anymore.  Like this idea of "joint communion."  It is insisted now that, for instance, Kiev was in communion with both Old and New Rome, offered as a proof that the schism wasn't real or the Easterners thirsted for the Vatican's chalice, could be in communion with the Latin Pope but keep their Eastern traditions, etc. etc. etc.  Earlier, the likes of Fortescue would underline that the Vatican demanded that those who submitted to it cease communion with the Orthodox, a stipulation that many find impolite to admit now.

Quit acting like a boorish ass as you're only hurting your case.
Amongst the minutiae of details of history, I like to have a few irrefutable facts, sort of trip wires for my BS meter.  When someone trips it, it goes off.

Among them is this idea that were it not for the Czar and not for the Sultan, we all would have submitted to the Vatican and been one happy family.  Without the "help" of the pope's crusading legions.

On Parfenii's successor, Deacon Lance's source says
Quote
He also confirms the fact that, after the Union of Brest, the bishops of Mukacevo no longer received their consecration from the Metropolitan of Kiev, because he was a Catholic. Susza did not know where they were consecrated. We do...The metropolitan of Kiev urged the ancient dependence of the See of Mukacevo on his ecclesiastical province, and deputed James Susza, Bishop of Chelm, to uphold his cause in Rome.
http://books.google.com/books?id=KgkOAQAAMAAJ&q=%22The+metropolitan+of+Kiev+urged+the+ancient+dependence+of+the+See+of+Mukacevo+on+his+ecclesiastical+province.&dq=%22The+metropolitan+of+Kiev+urged+the+ancient+dependence+of+the+See+of+Mukacevo+on+his+ecclesiastical+province.&source=bl&ots=65GnpDvdzl&sig=uUgTcxKdIZiGlzZzXNvbBlB80Xk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=_vJGULnkH4TLqAHs1IGABg&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAQ
http://books.google.com/books?id=KgkOAQAAMAAJ&q=%22He+also+confirms+the+fact+that,+after+the+Union+of+Brest,+the+bishops+of+Mukacevo+no+longer+received+their+consecration+from+the+Metropolitan+of+Kiev%22&dq=%22He+also+confirms+the+fact+that,+after+the+Union+of+Brest,+the+bishops+of+Mukacevo+no+longer+received+their+consecration+from+the+Metropolitan+of+Kiev%22&source=bl&ots=65GnpDvjBj&sig=kQaJtKz2q5TVuQ0CFXks4OTdBus&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aPVGUNS3JsTcqgHzxYGQBA&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA
how this squares with Deacon Lance's assertion "Before the union of Uzhorord, Mukachevo answered to Constantinople via Transylvania whose metropolitans ordained the bishops for Mukachevo.  It was never under Kyiv or Lviv" I can't tell.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 05, 2012, 04:47:03 PM
and cases of ouzo in place of Becherova

They taste alike. Both are undrinkable.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on September 05, 2012, 04:57:58 PM
and cases of ouzo in place of Becherova

They taste alike. Both are undrinkable.

At the risk of being kicked out of the Rusyn Club, I have to agree with you on this one! Pass me a cold Saris Beer! :)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on September 05, 2012, 05:13:34 PM
I haven't been to Slovakia for about 5 years... Sharish indeed is good.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on September 05, 2012, 06:28:01 PM
and cases of ouzo in place of Becherova

They taste alike. Both are undrinkable.

At the risk of being kicked out of the Rusyn Club, I have to agree with you on this one! Pass me a cold Saris Beer! :)
At the risk of being kicked out of the Hellenic-Rusyn Club, I must agree.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 05, 2012, 07:34:27 PM

Isa's cut and paste:
On Parfenii's successor, Deacon Lance's source says
Quote
He also confirms the fact that, after the Union of Brest, the bishops of Mukacevo no longer received their consecration from the Metropolitan of Kiev, because he was a Catholic. Susza did not know where they were consecrated. We do...The metropolitan of Kiev urged the ancient dependence of the See of Mukacevo on his ecclesiastical province, and deputed James Susza, Bishop of Chelm, to uphold his cause in Rome.

The paragraph without Isa's deletion:
Quote
He also confirms the fact that, after the Union of Brest, the bishops of Mukacevo no longer received their consecration from the Metropolitan of Kiev, because he was a Catholic. Susza did not know where they were consecrated. We do.  They were most frequently consecrated by the Metropolitan of Moldavia. (Lacko Pg 45)

One must also understand the motivation of the Bishop of Chelm.   Bishop James Susza and his predecessor tried to assert their jurisdiction in the area so of course they were going to claim it was part of Kyiv-Halych to bolster their claim. 
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 05, 2012, 07:39:35 PM
Quote
Munkács
Diocese in Hungary, of Greek Catholic Rite, suffragan of Gran. It dates from the fifteenth century. Until then the Greek Ruthenians who had emigrated to Hungary a generation before, 1254, were subject to the See of Przemysl. In 1458 the Diocese of Munkács is mentioned for the first time in a document of King Mathias as a parish with episcopal jurisdiction. It was probably established between 1439 and 1458, as the document mentions that Lucas, the occupant of the see, had already exercised the usual jurisdiction for a considerable period. Its history is connected with that of the Basilian monastery at Csernekhegy near Munkács, established supposedly in 1360 by Duke Theodore Koriatovics, but demonstrably as late as 1418. The history of the diocese falls naturally into three periods. Until 1641, when union with Rome took place, Munkács endeavoured to extend its episcopal jurisdiction over the thirteen districts (Komitate) of Hungary, later its territory.
Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10634a.htm

That piece is based on the fact that Bishop Athanasius Krupeckyj of Peremysl exercised jurisdiction in parts of the county of Spis which were parts of the Polish Kingdom at that time. (Lacko 43-44)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 05, 2012, 07:57:39 PM

Isa's cut and paste:
On Parfenii's successor, Deacon Lance's source says
Quote
He also confirms the fact that, after the Union of Brest, the bishops of Mukacevo no longer received their consecration from the Metropolitan of Kiev, because he was a Catholic. Susza did not know where they were consecrated. We do...The metropolitan of Kiev urged the ancient dependence of the See of Mukacevo on his ecclesiastical province, and deputed James Susza, Bishop of Chelm, to uphold his cause in Rome.

The paragraph without Isa's deletion:
Quote
He also confirms the fact that, after the Union of Brest, the bishops of Mukacevo no longer received their consecration from the Metropolitan of Kiev, because he was a Catholic. Susza did not know where they were consecrated. We do.  They were most frequently consecrated by the Metropolitan of Moldavia. (Lacko Pg 45)

One must also understand the motivation of the Bishop of Chelm.   Bishop James Susza and his predecessor tried to assert their jurisdiction in the area so of course they were going to claim it was part of Kyiv-Halych to bolster their claim. 
No deletion.  Your source refers to the bishops of Mukacevo receiving their consecration from the Metropolitan of Kiev as a fact, one that didn't apply after 1596, after which they received consecration from the Metropolitan of Moldavia (who had exercised jurisdiction in Galicia, and vice versa, at times).  Given that I gave at LENGTH the facts of the consecration of Petru Parfenii in 1651, i.e. after 1596, including the involvement of the Metropolitan of Moldavia, there was no reason to belabor that point when talking about the erection of the diocese and its prior history, which we know pre-dated 1596.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 05, 2012, 09:14:40 PM
Quote
Munkács
Diocese in Hungary, of Greek Catholic Rite, suffragan of Gran. It dates from the fifteenth century. Until then the Greek Ruthenians who had emigrated to Hungary a generation before, 1254, were subject to the See of Przemysl. In 1458 the Diocese of Munkács is mentioned for the first time in a document of King Mathias as a parish with episcopal jurisdiction. It was probably established between 1439 and 1458, as the document mentions that Lucas, the occupant of the see, had already exercised the usual jurisdiction for a considerable period. Its history is connected with that of the Basilian monastery at Csernekhegy near Munkács, established supposedly in 1360 by Duke Theodore Koriatovics, but demonstrably as late as 1418. The history of the diocese falls naturally into three periods. Until 1641, when union with Rome took place, Munkács endeavoured to extend its episcopal jurisdiction over the thirteen districts (Komitate) of Hungary, later its territory.
Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10634a.htm

That piece is based on the fact that Bishop Athanasius Krupeckyj of Peremysl exercised jurisdiction in parts of the county of Spis which were parts of the Polish Kingdom at that time. (Lacko 43-44)
Since he usurped the see of Bp. Michael Kopystynski of Peremysl and submitted to the Vatican, he shouldn't have been exercising jurisdiction in any part of the diocese.  On his jurisdiction, however:
Quote
The southern border of the Przemyśl diocese, along the peak of the Carpathian Mountains, was the State border between Poland and Hungary
Jacek Krochmal "Catholic-Orthodox Relations in the Diocese of Przemyśl" in Litauen und Ruthenien: Studien zu einer transkulturellen ...
 edited by Stefan Rohdewald, David A. Frick, Stefan Wiederkehr
http://books.google.com/books?id=iB8vTQZSSSkC&pg=PA215&lpg=PA215&dq=%22The+southern+border+of+the+PrzemySl+diocese,+along+the+peak+of+the+Carpathian+Mountains,+was+the+state+border+between+Poland+and+Hungary%22&source=bl&ots=1c_bn1XPpE&sig=vdX71tY3gGGLwyqnTbDQVsxKfgc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=EOxHUMLpMYPdqgGYt4CIDQ&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22The%20southern%20border%20of%20the%20PrzemySl%20diocese%2C%20along%20the%20peak%20of%20the%20Carpathian%20Mountains%2C%20was%20the%20state%20border%20between%20Poland%20and%20Hungary%22&f=false
The diocese of the successor of Bp. Kopystynski was larger, as
Quote
Unlike the Catholic Przemysl diocese, which was surrounded by other Catholic church administration units (albeit belonging to three different metropolitanates: Gniezno, Lviv, and Esztergom), the Orthodox Przemysl diocese was rather a border, or even peripheral diocese. It was a part of Kiev metropolitanate...in part, the southern borders of the Przemysl diocese were at the same time the borders of the Orthodox metropolitanate of Kiev, marking the boundary of Orthodox Settlements. The territory of the Przemysl Orthodox eparchy was larger than the Przemysl Catholic diocese by about 5.5 thousand km", as its area is estimated to be 23.6 thousand km . The differences in territory between the two religions resulted both from the boundaries of the Ruthenian, Lemko, and Wallachian Settlements, as well as from the lack of any other Orthodox Church administrative unit in the west...it went much further than the Catholic diocese in the south-western area.  This was related to Orthodox settlements in the Carpathian region (Lemko territories), which expanded westwards, into the southern part of Catholic Cracow diocese, reaching as far as Spis in Slovakia.  As a result, the western border of the Przemysl Orthodox diocese was about 70 km further west than the border of the Przemysl Catholic diocese.
http://books.google.com/books?id=iB8vTQZSSSkC&pg=PA215&lpg=PA215&dq=%22Unlike+the+Catholic+Przemysl+diocese,+which+was+surrounded%22&source=bl&ots=1c_bn1YOqD&sig=ustcuWTKperHtux_0J5OPdePsWg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ne9HUN-qEcG5rQHEiIEY&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Unlike%20the%20Catholic%20Przemysl%20diocese%2C%20which%20was%20surrounded%22&f=false
As Mukacheve, like Peremyshl, was clinging to Orthodoxy at the time, the history of this later is on point.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Deacon Lance on September 05, 2012, 09:31:37 PM
No deletion.  Your source refers to the bishops of Mukacevo receiving their consecration from the Metropolitan of Kiev as a fact, one that didn't apply after 1596, after which they received consecration from the Metropolitan of Moldavia (who had exercised jurisdiction in Galicia, and vice versa, at times).  Given that I gave at LENGTH the facts of the consecration of Petru Parfenii in 1651, i.e. after 1596, including the involvement of the Metropolitan of Moldavia, there was no reason to belabor that point when talking about the erection of the diocese and its prior history, which we know pre-dated 1596.

He is reporting wat Bishop Susza was saying.  The same bishop also claimed in 1665 that the See of Mukachevo was recently erected being under Peremysl 200 years ago.  Hondinka, who you cited earlier, reports a Luke being bishop around 1440.  Petrov thinks Luke was only an archimadrite and John was first bishop around 1490, where he came from nobody knows.  The record is silent again until 1551 when Ladislas is named, in 1606 Sergius, in 1623 Petronius, in 1627 John Gregorovic, in 1635 Basil Tarasovic.  My source also reports:
"The position of the eparchy of Mukachevo in respect of a metropolitan is not clear.  On the one hand, it never seems to have been strictly subject to any metropolitan, but on the other, there are indications of relations with the metropolitan See of Kiev, where it is very likely that its earliest bishops were consecrated.  It is, however, certain that in the seventeenth century before the union of Uzhorod it bishops were consecrated by the metropolitans of Moldavia"(Lacko 31).

That the Rusyns kept poor or no records is not surprising.  That Kyiv which has very good records never mentions Mukachevo until the unions started and in a bid to extend its authority does not add to its credibility.  The selection of the bishop also weighs against this.  The monks of St Nicholas and the priests voted for him or the Prince or Count appointed him, never is it mentioned that the Metropolitan or Synod of Kyiv did.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 05, 2012, 09:44:21 PM
No deletion.  Your source refers to the bishops of Mukacevo receiving their consecration from the Metropolitan of Kiev as a fact, one that didn't apply after 1596, after which they received consecration from the Metropolitan of Moldavia (who had exercised jurisdiction in Galicia, and vice versa, at times).  Given that I gave at LENGTH the facts of the consecration of Petru Parfenii in 1651, i.e. after 1596, including the involvement of the Metropolitan of Moldavia, there was no reason to belabor that point when talking about the erection of the diocese and its prior history, which we know pre-dated 1596.

He is reporting wat Bishop Susza was saying.
Poor use of quotation, or in choice of words, then.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on September 05, 2012, 10:26:47 PM
No deletion.  Your source refers to the bishops of Mukacevo receiving their consecration from the Metropolitan of Kiev as a fact, one that didn't apply after 1596, after which they received consecration from the Metropolitan of Moldavia (who had exercised jurisdiction in Galicia, and vice versa, at times).  Given that I gave at LENGTH the facts of the consecration of Petru Parfenii in 1651, i.e. after 1596, including the involvement of the Metropolitan of Moldavia, there was no reason to belabor that point when talking about the erection of the diocese and its prior history, which we know pre-dated 1596.

He is reporting wat Bishop Susza was saying.
Poor use of quotation, or in choice of words, then.

The point, however, is moot.
Quote
Further developments will prove that the relative confidence and gratitude, expressed by Philotheos towards the Polish king were not justified: the Polish conquest was soon followed with further development of the established Latin hierarchy in 'Little Russia' and with violent measures of discrimination against the Orthodox. However, Philotheos may well have been right in appointing Anthony [1371, as Metropolitan of Galicia], who, in spite of adverse circumstances, succeeded in maintaining the Orthodox faith in the region, and also in ordaining Orthodox bishops in neighbouring Moldavia, where Polish and Roman Catholic pressure was also strong and where a separate metropolitanate was established only in 1401...In 1397, however, [Ecumenical] Patriarch Anthony appointed Michael of Bethlehem - about whom we now learn that he was familiar with the Slavic language - as administrator of both Galicia and 'Mavrovalachia.'  He also asked King Jagiello to expel John Baba [the bishop of Lutsk named Metropolitan of Galica by King Jagiello, deposed on complaint of Met. Cyprian of Kiev to Constantinople] from Galicia, and to recognize the temporary authority of Michael of Bethlehem with the option of nominating another candidate for the Metropolitanate of Galicia. Meanwhile  Cyprian had made attempts to annex Galicia to the Metropolitanate of Kiev, and even to administer the see of Mavrovlachia. On these two points, he faced a rebuke from Anthony, who confirmed the decision of Patriarch Philotheos taken in 1370: both provinces, Mavrovlachia and Galicia, are to be administered by primates appointed in Constantinople, and not from Kiev or Moscow [where the Metropolitan of Kiev was resident]....The ecclesiastical affairs in 'Maurovlachia, or Moldavia were even more confused than in Galicia. Episcopal consecrations had been performed there by the Metropolitan of Galicia. In 1394, however, a Greek, Jeremiah, was appointed metropolitan by Constantinople, but was rejected by the local princes. A compromise solution was found only in 1401, when Joseph, one of the bishops previously consecrated in Halich and rejected by the patriarch, was appointed metropolitan by Patriarch Matthew
Byzantium and the Rise of Russia: A Study of Byzantino-Russian relations in the Forteenth Century By John Meyendorff
http://books.google.com/books?id=bFRXmG5GdkEC&pg=PA249&lpg=PA249&dq=Rise+of+Russia+Moldavia&source=bl&ots=8mk1rbo0EE&sig=ZWTEegZslvBa30JC5reWEtmqwE0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cQBIUNqyKsqArAG5oIG4BQ&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Rise%20of%20Russia%20Moldavia&f=false

Met. Cyrpian, however, got his way in the end, and the Metropolitanate of Galicia returned to the Metropolitanate of Kiev and All Rus'.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: serb1389 on September 06, 2012, 11:12:27 AM
I forgot the maps
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: katherineofdixie on September 10, 2012, 12:25:58 PM
Still, it is strange that ACROD gets a Greek bishop,

What is strange about an Orthodox diocese of Americans of Carpatho-Russian descent getting an American of Greek descent for bishop?
From the testimony of those here who know him well over the years, it is clear that he is neither arrogant nor a fool.


I can personally attest that Bishop-elect Gregorios is neither arrogant nor a fool. On the contrary, he is an intelligent, able, compassionate priest with an excellent sense of humor.
He does, however, hold heretical views on ACC vs. SEC football.  ;)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on September 10, 2012, 12:35:38 PM
Still, it is strange that ACROD gets a Greek bishop,

What is strange about an Orthodox diocese of Americans of Carpatho-Russian descent getting an American of Greek descent for bishop?
From the testimony of those here who know him well over the years, it is clear that he is neither arrogant nor a fool.


I can personally attest that Bishop-elect Gregorios is neither arrogant nor a fool. On the contrary, he is an intelligent, able, compassionate priest with an excellent sense of humor.
He does, however, hold heretical views on ACC vs. SEC football.  ;)

As you no doubt know, given that most of our faithful are from the Northeast and Mid-atlantic states, we were able to arrange for Pitt and Syracuse to join the ACC this coming year in honor of His Grace, the Bishop-elect! :)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: katherineofdixie on September 10, 2012, 12:41:29 PM
Still, it is strange that ACROD gets a Greek bishop,

What is strange about an Orthodox diocese of Americans of Carpatho-Russian descent getting an American of Greek descent for bishop?
From the testimony of those here who know him well over the years, it is clear that he is neither arrogant nor a fool.


I can personally attest that Bishop-elect Gregorios is neither arrogant nor a fool. On the contrary, he is an intelligent, able, compassionate priest with an excellent sense of humor.
He does, however, hold heretical views on ACC vs. SEC football.  ;)

As you no doubt know, given that most of our faithful are from the Northeast and Mid-atlantic states, we were able to arrange for Pitt and Syracuse to join the ACC this coming year in honor of His Grace, the Bishop-elect! :)



LOL! Priceless! :-*
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on October 17, 2012, 04:54:44 AM
Bishop-Elect Gregory Of Nyssa To Be Ordained to the Episcopacy November 27

http://www.acrod.org/news/releases/consecration-announcement
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: katherineofdixie on October 17, 2012, 11:00:40 AM
Bishop-Elect Gregory Of Nyssa To Be Ordained to the Episcopacy November 27

http://www.acrod.org/news/releases/consecration-announcement


Axios! Many years!
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on November 27, 2012, 05:31:32 PM
Bishop-elect Gregory was ordained "Bishop of Nyssa" and enthroned in the Christ the Saviour Cathedral of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of the U.S.A., in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, today.  The ordaining hierarchs were Archbishop Demetrios of America, Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople (GOAA), Metropolitan Antony of Irinopolous, Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A., Metropolitan Alexios of Atlanta (GOAA), and Metropolitan Savas of Pittsburgh, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh-Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.

"Axios," "Axios," "He is Worthy!"  

"Ton Despotin, Ke Archierea imon, Kyrie Philate, Eis Polla Eti."  ("Our Master, and Archierarch, Protect him O Lord, for Many Years!")
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Fr. George on November 27, 2012, 09:57:42 PM
Bishop Daniel of the Ukranian Church of the USA was also a concelebrating hierarch.

5 hierarchs (plus the newly-ordained), 9 priests (including yours truly), and 2 deacons concelebrated, with what appeared to be well over 100 other priests and deacons in attendance.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on November 28, 2012, 05:36:44 AM
Sad there were no non=EP bishops.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Orest on November 28, 2012, 09:38:14 AM
Sad there were no non=EP bishops.
Why is it sad?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: mike on November 28, 2012, 01:51:02 PM
Sad there were no non=EP bishops.
Why is it sad?

Orthodox unity and all that stuff.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on November 28, 2012, 06:59:14 PM
It doesn't make an exceptionally joyous event in the history of the diocese, the ordination and enthronement of their diocesan bishop, "sad."
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on November 28, 2012, 07:24:30 PM
It doesn't make an exceptionally joyous event in the history of the diocese, the ordination and enthronement of their diocesan bishop, "sad."
Disturbing?
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: kijabeboy03 on November 28, 2012, 07:32:55 PM
Is Metropolitan Antony no longer "of Hierapolis" or whichever extinct city he supposedly belonged to when he was based in NYC?

Bishop-elect Gregory was ordained "Bishop of Nyssa" and enthroned in the Christ the Saviour Cathedral of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of the U.S.A., in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, today.  The ordaining hierarchs were Archbishop Demetrios of America, Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople (GOAA), Metropolitan Antony of Irinopolous, Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A., Metropolitan Alexios of Atlanta (GOAA), and Metropolitan Savas of Pittsburgh, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh-Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.

"Axios," "Axios," "He is Worthy!"  

"Ton Despotin, Ke Archierea imon, Kyrie Philate, Eis Polla Eti."  ("Our Master, and Archierarch, Protect him O Lord, for Many Years!")
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on November 29, 2012, 12:40:44 AM
It doesn't make an exceptionally joyous event in the history of the diocese, the ordination and enthronement of their diocesan bishop, "sad."
Disturbing?

Neither.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on November 29, 2012, 01:05:16 AM
Is Metropolitan Antony no longer "of Hierapolis" or whichever extinct city he supposedly belonged to when he was based in NYC?

Bishop-elect Gregory was ordained "Bishop of Nyssa" and enthroned in the Christ the Saviour Cathedral of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of the U.S.A., in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, today.  The ordaining hierarchs were Archbishop Demetrios of America, Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople (GOAA), Metropolitan Antony of Irinopolous, Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A., Metropolitan Alexios of Atlanta (GOAA), and Metropolitan Savas of Pittsburgh, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh-Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.

"Axios," "Axios," "He is Worthy!"  

"Ton Despotin, Ke Archierea imon, Kyrie Philate, Eis Polla Eti."  ("Our Master, and Archierarch, Protect him O Lord, for Many Years!")
Doesn't matter. Any titular see will do. I think only the Greek, i.e. the real hierarchy, are allowed sees where they actually are.

Axios! and Mnohaya Lyeta! in any case.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on November 29, 2012, 04:46:01 AM
Is Metropolitan Antony no longer "of Hierapolis" or whichever extinct city he supposedly belonged to when he was based in NYC?

Bishop-elect Gregory was ordained "Bishop of Nyssa" and enthroned in the Christ the Saviour Cathedral of the American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of the U.S.A., in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, today.  The ordaining hierarchs were Archbishop Demetrios of America, Exarch of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople (GOAA), Metropolitan Antony of Irinopolous, Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A., Metropolitan Alexios of Atlanta (GOAA), and Metropolitan Savas of Pittsburgh, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh-Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America.

"Axios," "Axios," "He is Worthy!"  

"Ton Despotin, Ke Archierea imon, Kyrie Philate, Eis Polla Eti."  ("Our Master, and Archierarch, Protect him O Lord, for Many Years!")

"Irenoupolis" (I'm not spelling it correctly) is the titular see in which Metropolitan Constantine, of Blessed Memory, served while he held the primacy of the UOC-USA, and to which Metropolitan Antony was assigned when he was elevated to the primacy.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on November 29, 2012, 11:21:32 AM
Titles - schmitles ---- the measure of a man is how he acts, not what he is called or addressed by.

His Grace, Gregory was installed as ruling Bishop of the Carpatho-Russian Diocese. Having been a part of this little, but successful Diocese of hard scrapple descendents of miners,mill workers, teamsters and shoemakers, for all of my life I can honestly state that none of our Bishops have ever acted as anything less than a ruling Bishop of a properly formulated diocese. This goes to their relationships with the exarchs of the EP over the decades. We fully expect that to be case with our new hierarch. Our Ukrainian brothers, although not under the omophor of the EP for as long as the Carpatho-Russians, would likely tell the same story. The whole 'titular' issue is something of a red herring - to the Greeks I suppose it is an intellectual method to justify installing a Bishop in a non-geographical unit. Install him as a Bishop of a now non-existent see and 'assign' him to rule a distant group almost in a  diplomatic-like status  and - voila - you 'get around' the niceties of canon law. To some within the OCA and elsewhere, I suppose it is viewed as an intrusion on 'their' prerogatives. I suspect that in the eyes of our Lord, such matters are of little consequence in the 'big picture' of things.

Upon the presentation of the Pastoral Staff the Archbishop offered this prayer: ' Receive this Staff to shepherd the flock of Christ entrusted to you. To the obedient let it be a help and a support. With it, lead the disobedient and the wayward to admonishment and instruction.' Upon the setting of the Mitre on his head, this prayer: 'The Lord has set upon your head a crown of precious stones. You ask like of Him and He gave you length of days, always, now ane ever and unto the ages of ages. Amen.' Bishop Gregory is vested with all of the power and responsibility of a diocesan Bishop with respect to the Carpatho-Russians.

I don't really 'know' Bishop Gregory having only met him briefly on two occasions. However, I have trust in the judgment of the men who having at length met him, discussed the challenges he faced, considered the strengths he offered us before submitted us him name and I trust in God's providence. Having heard him preach several times, having heard him speak about being a priest and what it means to him and seeing him interact with hundreds of strangers to him on a most remarkable and extremely long day, I am confident he is the right man in the right time.

If an American man, educated in the secular higher education system and the religious one, who is a monk, a pastor, an accomplished preacher and youth leader can not succeed due to his 'ethnicity' than we are doomed - not just my little diocese, but our Holy Orthodox Church on this continent. I have no doubt have measured him up based on my experiences with him and the words of others - including Fr. George of this forum - that he is up to the job and he will make his mark not just on the Carpatho-Russians, but on all of the Orthodox.

Axios! Many years, Vladyka!

(A bit of historical accuracy is needed, on another website, much was made about the symbolism of the choice of Nyssa as the titular see of the new bishop. For the record, Bishop Gregory is the second ACROD hierarch assigned the honor of this most ancient of sees. His Grace, Bishop John of thrice blessed memory was the first to hold this see from 1966 though his passing in 1984. The priest's wife interviewed by channel 6 is most certainly a Carpatho-Russian, being a native of Johnstown and the Cathedral. This is how misinformation is spread - publish it and it gains a life of its own.  As to the OCA not being invited - well , in a perfect world I would agree that all local bishops - including the ROCOR and Antiochian - should have been present, but we are where we are in this life. Perhaps in my lifetime such will be the norm. Anyway, the relationship between the Metropolia/OCA and ACROD has always been historically awkward - not so much on the parish to parish level but on the 'higher ups.' After all, the founders of ACROD refused to go under the omophor of the Russian influenced groups back in 1937 and a fair amount of parish swapping used to be the norm. As to the presence of non-Orthodox guests - all were personal friends of the late Metropolitan and the Carpatho-Russians and the Byzantine Catholic hierarchs have been attending their respective ceremonial events for about the past ten years in an effort to bury the enmity of the past. They played no role in the ceremony or the banquet but they were present as a sign of mutual respect. I suspect that upon the enthronement of Metropolitan Tikhon similar invitations to non-Orthodox have been extended. Finally as to the Archons, it is NOT a requirement that money be presented to the EP in exchange for the honor - at least among the Carpatho-Russian and Ukrainian Archons - very few of them are 'deep pocket' men but all from ACROD have been generous with their time, energy and money to the ACROD and her parishes - not the Archdiocese. I know five of them from my parish and the neighboring parish, and the idea that they could have given generously in cash to Constantinople is laughable - for one thing their wives would have chased them with a broom if they tried such a thing!)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Basil 320 on November 29, 2012, 01:29:03 PM
ACROD operates under the authority of its charter that was approved by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, and grants full canonical authority for diocesan governance to ACROD.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: katherineofdixie on December 03, 2012, 11:31:48 AM
If an American man, educated in the secular higher education system and the religious one, who is a monk, a pastor, an accomplished preacher and youth leader can not succeed due to his 'ethnicity' than we are doomed - not just my little diocese, but our Holy Orthodox Church on this continent. I have no doubt have measured him up based on my experiences with him and the words of others - including Fr. George of this forum - that he is up to the job and he will make his mark not just on the Carpatho-Russians, but on all of the Orthodox....

Axios! Many years, Vladyka!




Amen! Of course, I am not at all objective, having known His Grace and worked with him for several years. He is indeed the right man at the right time. May God bless his ministry and the clergy and Faithful of ACROD.
(P.S. we certainly will miss him!)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on December 04, 2012, 12:05:57 PM
Titles - schmitles ---- the measure of a man is how he acts, not what he is called or addressed by.

His Grace, Gregory was installed as ruling Bishop of the Carpatho-Russian Diocese. Having been a part of this little, but successful Diocese of hard scrapple descendents of miners,mill workers, teamsters and shoemakers, for all of my life I can honestly state that none of our Bishops have ever acted as anything less than a ruling Bishop of a properly formulated diocese. This goes to their relationships with the exarchs of the EP over the decades. We fully expect that to be case with our new hierarch. Our Ukrainian brothers, although not under the omophor of the EP for as long as the Carpatho-Russians, would likely tell the same story. The whole 'titular' issue is something of a red herring - to the Greeks I suppose it is an intellectual method to justify installing a Bishop in a non-geographical unit. Install him as a Bishop of a now non-existent see and 'assign' him to rule a distant group almost in a  diplomatic-like status  and - voila - you 'get around' the niceties of canon law. To some within the OCA and elsewhere, I suppose it is viewed as an intrusion on 'their' prerogatives. I suspect that in the eyes of our Lord, such matters are of little consequence in the 'big picture' of things.
There's a bigger picture all right.  I lay aside the prerogatives, i.e. jurisdiction, of the OCA aside, as obvious.

Johnstown is real town that exists in reality.  It has real Orthodox who live in it and the surrounding area in reality.  A real diocese in reality.  That reality can be admitted, finally, by the powers that be, in Pittsburgh, why not in Johnstown?

His grace has a brother bishop in Pittsburgh, in Boston, in Chicago, New York, Detroit, Denver, Atlanta, San Francisco, New Jersey, New York-just to go by the "real" hierarchy.  Enough for a Holy Synod. And not a "Holy Synod" as delineated in the charter imposed, er, granted, by the Phanar to its exarchate, i.e. the "real hierarchy of North America," to wit, a pan-continental ethnic club caught in a time warp acting as a colonial office or Congregation of the Eastern Churches [in the West] and a curia rather than a "Holy Synod."

Canonically, it is the successful diocese which is non-existent, a status maintained by shuffling it under bishops of various abandoned sees, rather than its real, inhabited, see.

And how does the Phanar come under the condemnation of its own phyletist synod of 1870, setting up a Church on an ethnic basis? And one on top of others to boot?

"From the rising to the setting of the sun the name of the Lord shall be praised."  The sun doesn't rise in Constantinople, nor does it set in Athens.  "All nations" means just that.  There are no Supreme Mothers and perpetual daughters in the Church (if there were, Constantinople would be in trouble).  That's the big picture.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on December 04, 2012, 12:18:25 PM
Titles - schmitles ---- the measure of a man is how he acts, not what he is called or addressed by.

His Grace, Gregory was installed as ruling Bishop of the Carpatho-Russian Diocese. Having been a part of this little, but successful Diocese of hard scrapple descendents of miners,mill workers, teamsters and shoemakers, for all of my life I can honestly state that none of our Bishops have ever acted as anything less than a ruling Bishop of a properly formulated diocese. This goes to their relationships with the exarchs of the EP over the decades. We fully expect that to be case with our new hierarch. Our Ukrainian brothers, although not under the omophor of the EP for as long as the Carpatho-Russians, would likely tell the same story. The whole 'titular' issue is something of a red herring - to the Greeks I suppose it is an intellectual method to justify installing a Bishop in a non-geographical unit. Install him as a Bishop of a now non-existent see and 'assign' him to rule a distant group almost in a  diplomatic-like status  and - voila - you 'get around' the niceties of canon law. To some within the OCA and elsewhere, I suppose it is viewed as an intrusion on 'their' prerogatives. I suspect that in the eyes of our Lord, such matters are of little consequence in the 'big picture' of things.
There's a bigger picture all right.  I lay aside the prerogatives, i.e. jurisdiction, of the OCA aside, as obvious.

Johnstown is real town that exists in reality.  It has real Orthodox who live in it and the surrounding area in reality.  A real diocese in reality.  That reality can be admitted, finally, by the powers that be, in Pittsburgh, why not in Johnstown?

His grace has a brother bishop in Pittsburgh, in Boston, in Chicago, New York, Detroit, Denver, Atlanta, San Francisco, New Jersey, New York-just to go by the "real" hierarchy.  Enough for a Holy Synod. And not a "Holy Synod" as delineated in the charter imposed, er, granted, by the Phanar to its exarchate, i.e. the "real hierarchy of North America," to wit, a pan-continental ethnic club caught in a time warp acting as a colonial office or Congregation of the Eastern Churches [in the West] and a curia rather than a "Holy Synod."

Canonically, it is the successful diocese which is non-existent, a status maintained by shuffling it under bishops of various abandoned sees, rather than its real, inhabited, see.

And how does the Phanar come under the condemnation of its own phyletist synod of 1870, setting up a Church on an ethnic basis? And one on top of others to boot?

"From the rising to the setting of the sun the name of the Lord shall be praised."  The sun doesn't rise in Constantinople, nor does it set in Athens.  "All nations" means just that.  There are no Supreme Mothers and perpetual daughters in the Church (if there were, Constantinople would be in trouble).  That's the big picture.

And I pray that the example of having an American Bishop of sound character and quality shall shine as a beacon to the rest of us who may fear change and the loss of 'ethnic' identity. In ACROD at least, 'ethnic' identity is surely present but in little doses these days and it has been that way for the better part of thirty years.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: ialmisry on December 04, 2012, 12:48:05 PM
Titles - schmitles ---- the measure of a man is how he acts, not what he is called or addressed by.

His Grace, Gregory was installed as ruling Bishop of the Carpatho-Russian Diocese. Having been a part of this little, but successful Diocese of hard scrapple descendents of miners,mill workers, teamsters and shoemakers, for all of my life I can honestly state that none of our Bishops have ever acted as anything less than a ruling Bishop of a properly formulated diocese. This goes to their relationships with the exarchs of the EP over the decades. We fully expect that to be case with our new hierarch. Our Ukrainian brothers, although not under the omophor of the EP for as long as the Carpatho-Russians, would likely tell the same story. The whole 'titular' issue is something of a red herring - to the Greeks I suppose it is an intellectual method to justify installing a Bishop in a non-geographical unit. Install him as a Bishop of a now non-existent see and 'assign' him to rule a distant group almost in a  diplomatic-like status  and - voila - you 'get around' the niceties of canon law. To some within the OCA and elsewhere, I suppose it is viewed as an intrusion on 'their' prerogatives. I suspect that in the eyes of our Lord, such matters are of little consequence in the 'big picture' of things.
There's a bigger picture all right.  I lay aside the prerogatives, i.e. jurisdiction, of the OCA aside, as obvious.

Johnstown is real town that exists in reality.  It has real Orthodox who live in it and the surrounding area in reality.  A real diocese in reality.  That reality can be admitted, finally, by the powers that be, in Pittsburgh, why not in Johnstown?

His grace has a brother bishop in Pittsburgh, in Boston, in Chicago, New York, Detroit, Denver, Atlanta, San Francisco, New Jersey, New York-just to go by the "real" hierarchy.  Enough for a Holy Synod. And not a "Holy Synod" as delineated in the charter imposed, er, granted, by the Phanar to its exarchate, i.e. the "real hierarchy of North America," to wit, a pan-continental ethnic club caught in a time warp acting as a colonial office or Congregation of the Eastern Churches [in the West] and a curia rather than a "Holy Synod."

Canonically, it is the successful diocese which is non-existent, a status maintained by shuffling it under bishops of various abandoned sees, rather than its real, inhabited, see.

And how does the Phanar come under the condemnation of its own phyletist synod of 1870, setting up a Church on an ethnic basis? And one on top of others to boot?

"From the rising to the setting of the sun the name of the Lord shall be praised."  The sun doesn't rise in Constantinople, nor does it set in Athens.  "All nations" means just that.  There are no Supreme Mothers and perpetual daughters in the Church (if there were, Constantinople would be in trouble).  That's the big picture.

And I pray that the example of having an American Bishop of sound character and quality shall shine as a beacon to the rest of us who may fear change and the loss of 'ethnic' identity. In ACROD at least, 'ethnic' identity is surely present but in little doses these days and it has been that way for the better part of thirty years.
I'm not worried about his or ACROD's ethnicity, except that the Phanar views it differently.

There is no reason why His Grace is not the bishop of Johnstown.  It's borer-line heresy to say he is not.  And it is a serious aberration of Orthodox ecclessialogy to have a diocese exist on an ad hoc semi-auxiliary basis.
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: Αριστοκλής on December 04, 2012, 01:57:10 PM
Isa, you're my buddy, but you're stirring the wrong pot. Having a bad day?  ;)
Title: Re: Successor Hierarch for the ACROD?
Post by: podkarpatska on December 04, 2012, 04:20:21 PM
Isa's recent posts state the obvious - although the 'borderline heresy' is a bit melodramatic. None of us would argue that the current state of jurisdictional affairs in the USA is 'proper' and most would agree that it needs to be resolved through consensus and agreement. Knowing the Carpatho-Russians and Ukrainians rather well, I would daresay that although we honor and reverence the Patriarch, he would not get too far were he to directly 'meddle' in parish or diocesan affairs or property of either of us.