Author Topic: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch  (Read 264017 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #495 on: March 19, 2009, 11:15:18 PM »
Isa, did you just post a second copy of the same Constitution of the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America?  If so, why did you have to do that when you had already posted the document once?  (Maybe you should have posted the second version as the only copy, since then we can read the document for ourselves without you interpreting it for us with all that gratuitous highlighting. ::))
My mistake.  I will try to find the supposed current one the AOCA ignores!  I did not do the bold or anything that's too professional for me  ;D
My apologies for confusing you with another poster who does use highlighting as a means of personal commentary.  I got confused by you both using the same avatar.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2009, 11:17:27 PM by PeterTheAleut »
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #496 on: March 20, 2009, 12:16:22 AM »

Constitution of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America.

The Constitution is on the Net in two parts.  It may be a little easier to read it there.

Part 1

http://antiochpat.org/english/news/news.php?newsid=66

Part 2

http://antiochpat.org/english/news/news.php?newsid=67


Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #497 on: March 20, 2009, 01:32:53 AM »

Constitution of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America.

The Constitution is on the Net in two parts.  It may be a little easier to read it there.

Part 1

http://antiochpat.org/english/news/news.php?newsid=66

Part 2

http://antiochpat.org/english/news/news.php?newsid=67


Thank you, Fr. Ambrose.  I like this alternative much better than reading/scrolling through a super-long post where the text of the document is butchered with such uncalled-for highlighting. ::)

Now, could everyone do me a big favor and not quote Replies #492, 495, & 498.  Y'all just don't know how utterly annoying it is to have to scroll through such unending verbiage just to navigate around those posts. :P :P :P
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Abbu-Issa

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 80
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #498 on: March 20, 2009, 07:22:21 AM »

Constitution of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America.

The Constitution is on the Net in two parts.  It may be a little easier to read it there.

Part 1

http://antiochpat.org/english/news/news.php?newsid=66

Part 2

http://antiochpat.org/english/news/news.php?newsid=67


Thank you, Fr. Ambrose.  I like this alternative much better than reading/scrolling through a super-long post where the text of the document is butchered with such uncalled-for highlighting. ::)

Now, could everyone do me a big favor and not quote Replies #492, 495, & 498.  Y'all just don't know how utterly annoying it is to have to scroll through such unending verbiage just to navigate around those posts. :P :P :P
I love Tolkein. 

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,727
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #499 on: March 20, 2009, 07:43:30 AM »
Abbu-Issa, did you just post a second copy of the same Constitution of the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America?  If so, why did you have to do that when someone else had already posted the document once?  (Actually, maybe you should have been here earlier today so you could post your version as the only copy, since then we can read the document for ourselves without Ialmisry interpreting it for us with all his gratuitous highlighting. ::)  As it is, though, the Constitution had already been posted, making your work painfully redundant.)

That wasn't interpreting, that was commentary.

I've had a problem a couple of times getting the document off the Patriarch's website on the links I provided. Figuring other may has also, I posted my own copy (I'm in the midst of doing something besides prattling on the internet).

As for finding the October 15, 2004 version I think what I posted is it, as the Patriarch's web site identifies it as such.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2009, 07:44:51 AM by ialmisry »
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #500 on: March 20, 2009, 07:51:37 AM »

I've had a problem a couple of times getting the document off the Patriarch's website on the links I provided. Figuring other may has also, I posted my own copy

Isa,

I think you have done us a favour since it seems that the Constitution is no longer available on the Patriarchate's website.   And nor can it be brought up with the

Offline SDMPNS

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 540
  • Praise God for the beauty of Creation
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #501 on: March 20, 2009, 08:13:04 AM »
wow,,,an erased Constitution...as they said in Watergate,,Follow the money !
I must say the Antiochian clergy have been very quiet,..they must be really frightened. As I said yesterday where is St. Nicholas when we need him?

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #502 on: March 20, 2009, 08:38:51 AM »
wow,,,an erased Constitution...as they said in Watergate,,Follow the money !
I must say the Antiochian clergy have been very quiet,..they must be really frightened. As I said yesterday where is St. Nicholas when we need him?

The whole business has more than a faint air of the ridiculous! 

Here we have a Patriarchate which has abolished every single Diocese.

All that remain are a few Archdioceses.

Surely that must be a first in the Orthodox world! 

Viva Antiochia and neo-Orthodoxy!


Offline Fr. George

  • formerly "Cleveland"
  • Administrator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 21,447
  • May the Lord bless you and keep you always!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #503 on: March 20, 2009, 08:51:57 AM »
wow,,,an erased Constitution...as they said in Watergate,,Follow the money !
I must say the Antiochian clergy have been very quiet,..they must be really frightened. As I said yesterday where is St. Nicholas when we need him?

The whole business has more than a faint air of the ridiculous! 

Here we have a Patriarchate which has abolished every single Diocese.

All that remain are a few Archdioceses.

While I don't like the move that Antioch has made, and feel it's a step backward for the AOA, I don't want to see it mischaracterized because I think that depersonalizes the issue.  They didn't abolish the diocese; if that were the case, they could claim it was not a move directed at persons, but rather at the structure of the growing Archdiocese.  No, they left the diocese alone, and made the bishops auxiliaries, a strange distinction, but one that must be made based on the letter of, well, the letter.  There is no indication of a change in the division of diocese within the various Archdiocese, just a mandate for a changed status of those who oversee (the root of Episcopos) those diocese.

Surely that must be a first in the Orthodox world! 

Viva Antiochia and neo-Orthodoxy!

It's a first from what I've seen.
How in Mor's good name
one hundred fifty four posts
No Rachel Weisz pic

Selam

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #504 on: March 20, 2009, 09:07:53 AM »
While I don't like the move that Antioch has made, and feel it's a step backward for the AOA, I don't want to see it mischaracterized because I think that depersonalizes the issue.  They didn't abolish the diocese;

I understood that the Dioceses have been reduced to "Regions" once again?

But even if they are still, somewhat misleadingly, labelled Dioceses, it means nothing when there are no longer any Diocesan Bishops to rule them.  It is rather like removing the elected Governors of all the States in the USA and gathering all power in the President who then as he sees fit appoints auxiliaries to run various regions in the States. 

Welcome to Antioch - Orthodoxy's first Diocese-free Church!


Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,727
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #505 on: March 20, 2009, 09:46:57 AM »

I've had a problem a couple of times getting the document off the Patriarch's website on the links I provided. Figuring other may has also, I posted my own copy

Isa,

I think you have done us a favour since it seems that the Constitution is no longer available on the Patriarchate's website.   And nor can it be brought up with the
yes, and it seems it was erased beforehand a la Winston Smith from the Archdiocese website: I vaguely remembering being there before, but I can be wrong.
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline scamandrius

  • A man of many, many turns
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,376
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: DOWAMA of AANA
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #506 on: March 20, 2009, 12:24:24 PM »
The DOWAMA Council of Presbyters headed by Fr. Peter O'Callagan at St. George Cathedral in Wichita wrapped up a meeting they had on Tuesday.  My priest is a memeber of this body and here are a few of his thoughts as to what went on.

First, the meeting ran for seven continuous hours.  Bishop BASIL was not himself present as he does not intervene in this body.  A letter was composed and signed by all of the members, including all of the non-convert, Arab priests, some of whom are from the old country, indicating that this issue is troubling to convert and cradle alike.  This letter was then forwarded on to Bishop BASIL, Met. PHILIP and to His Beatitude, IGNATIUS IV, Patriarch of Antioch.  Met. PHILIP should receive his in a few days, though, it may have been leaked to him, via fax, the same day.  Who knows when or if His Beatitude will receive it.

The letter was a series of questions as to the implementation of this directive from the Holy See of Antioch.  Some of the main questions were of the legal variety.  In reading both the Archdiocesan Constitution and the Patriarchal Constitution, the priests were of the belief that this directive is not legal.  The reasons are many, but here are some of the highlights.  First, there must be a quorum of 10 Metropolitans from the Holy Synod to  vote on this.  There were only nine.  The Patriarch was one of these nine.  Second, a demotion of a bishop or transfer or defrocking of a bishop can only occur if some major injurious event has occurred.  Such has not happened, so why the move?  Third, this move is patently uncanonical as the bishop is the center around the local church, following Ignatius and the councils.  There are other matters as well.

My priest again said that for the average layperson, this will not be any major trouble.  However, with this centralization of power into one man, how can we expect good governance of this land's Antiochian Orthodox from one person's office in Englewood.  It is my understanding that Met. PHILIP does not travel much nor far because of health reasons.  So, how does one effectively deal with problems that are on the other side of the country?

My priest also believes that there are some who will resist this decision and will do so with their pocketbooks by refusing to support the archdiocese financially.  And this could be a huge blow especially as some of the major ANtiochian Orthodox and finanicial contributors are here in DOWAMA which remains steadfastly supportive and behind Bishop BASIL.

We can only wait and see especially for what transpires at the Bright Friday meeting with the hierarchs in Englewood.  Once there is a draft letter available from the council of presbyters, online, I'll be sure to post it here.
Da quod iubes et iube quod vis.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,727
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #507 on: March 20, 2009, 02:53:42 PM »
A letter was composed and signed by all of the members, including all of the non-convert, Arab priests, some of whom are from the old country, indicating that this issue is troubling to convert and cradle alike.

Thanks for posting this part.

Myself, I am one of only three Arabs at my parish.  I haven't talked to one, and the other seems to approve of sticking with our diocesan bishop.  The rest are mostly converts, with a few Greeks, Romanians, etc.

This is NOT a convert issue.
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline Abbu-Issa

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 80
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #508 on: March 21, 2009, 08:09:49 AM »
The DOWAMA Council of Presbyters headed by Fr. Peter O'Callagan at St. George Cathedral in Wichita wrapped up a meeting they had on Tuesday.  My priest is a memeber of this body and here are a few of his thoughts as to what went on.

First, the meeting ran for seven continuous hours.  Bishop BASIL was not himself present as he does not intervene in this body.  A letter was composed and signed by all of the members, including all of the non-convert, Arab priests, some of whom are from the old country, indicating that this issue is troubling to convert and cradle alike.  This letter was then forwarded on to Bishop BASIL, Met. PHILIP and to His Beatitude, IGNATIUS IV, Patriarch of Antioch.  Met. PHILIP should receive his in a few days, though, it may have been leaked to him, via fax, the same day.  Who knows when or if His Beatitude will receive it.

The letter was a series of questions as to the implementation of this directive from the Holy See of Antioch.  Some of the main questions were of the legal variety.  In reading both the Archdiocesan Constitution and the Patriarchal Constitution, the priests were of the belief that this directive is not legal.  The reasons are many, but here are some of the highlights.  First, there must be a quorum of 10 Metropolitans from the Holy Synod to  vote on this.  There were only nine.  The Patriarch was one of these nine.  Second, a demotion of a bishop or transfer or defrocking of a bishop can only occur if some major injurious event has occurred.  Such has not happened, so why the move?  Third, this move is patently uncanonical as the bishop is the center around the local church, following Ignatius and the councils.  There are other matters as well.

My priest again said that for the average layperson, this will not be any major trouble.  However, with this centralization of power into one man, how can we expect good governance of this land's Antiochian Orthodox from one person's office in Englewood.  It is my understanding that Met. PHILIP does not travel much nor far because of health reasons.  So, how does one effectively deal with problems that are on the other side of the country?

My priest also believes that there are some who will resist this decision and will do so with their pocketbooks by refusing to support the archdiocese financially.  And this could be a huge blow especially as some of the major ANtiochian Orthodox and finanicial contributors are here in DOWAMA which remains steadfastly supportive and behind Bishop BASIL.

We can only wait and see especially for what transpires at the Bright Friday meeting with the hierarchs in Englewood.  Once there is a draft letter available from the council of presbyters, online, I'll be sure to post it here.

  The Constitution of the AOCA did disappear off the Patriarchal Website a few days ago.  I found it by googling it, but reproduced from their website.  Does anyone have a shredder?  What mischeif are they really up to?  Watching the comments on this web site and OCAnews, I  am more than a little discouraged.  It seems few understand that Metropolitan Philip and the Holy Synod of Antioch has LTTLE to No REGARD of the HOLY CANONS!  They only use them when helpful and disregard them when they get in the way!  
   
Here is what we are really talking about :

1.)  The AOCA Constitution and the Constitution from the Patriarchate do not agree.
2.)  Does it really matter since Metropolitan Philip, the Patriarchate and the Holy Synod have acted unilaterally without regard to either Constitution?  the Diocesan Bishops? the Clergy (except the CHOSEN)? the Board of Trustees (Except the CHOSEN)? and the Laity?
3.)If Philip reposes now will they simply do what they want as in this instance? Those who ignore history are doomed to see it repeated!
4.) Why have the Diocesan Bishops been ignored? The clergy (Except the CHOSEN)? the Board of Trustees (except a few who cannot be trusted!)? The Laity?
5.)Why do they all continue to be ignored by Metropolitan Philip?
6.)  If history is any indicator, like with Joe Allen, Fr John Namee lost his housing allowance when he disagreed.
7.) If history is any indicator, he will simply pull rank and shut down dialogue as he did in Detroit over the issue of tithing, when he humiliated the V Rev. Fr Elias Bitar and the Rt Rev Michael Evans! Metropolitan Philip does not function well when confronted with facts!
8.)  What will he do when he realizes that the only way the faithful may communicate their opinions to him is through LACK of MONEY or with their feet?

I find in 2005 the department of Legal Affairs of THE AOCA  stated un-categorically the AOCA Constitution could not be amended by the Patriarchate,

January 27, 2005

IMPORTANT MESSAGE REGARDING OUR CONSTITUTION

TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE PARISH BULLETIN

Beloved Hierarchs, Clergy, Members of the Board of Trustees and Faithful of this God-Protected and Self-Ruled Archdiocese:

It has come to our attention that many of you may have received an email from Tarek Mitri dated January 25, 2005, with the subject “The North American Constitution.” Please be advised that this email is considered a serious intrusion into the affairs of this Archdiocese by Tarek Mitri, who has no ecclesiastical capacity to send such a communication to our clergy under his own signature.

Communications under the direct signature of His Beatitude Patriarch IGNATIUS IV to Metropolitan Philip and this Archdiocese are, of course, always welcome.

As you all know, the Archdiocese Constitution that was legally adopted by our Special Convention held in July 2004 in Pittsburgh is in harmony with the Synodal self-rule resolution of October 9, 2003 which was adopted unanimously by the Holy Synod, and signed by His Beatitude Patriarch IGNATIUS IV and all of the members of the Holy Synod. The Pittsburgh Constitution was submitted to the Holy Synod by Metropolitan PHILIP on October 13, 2004.

There is a very serious inaccuracy in the last sentence of the email from Tarek Mitri. In referring to our legally adopted Pittsburgh Constitution, he states that “It was discussed during the course of the meeting of the Holy Synod, October 13-15, 2004, and the attached revised constitution was unanimously approved.” Contrary to this statement, the proposed October 15, 2004 constitution (which was attached to Tarek Mitri’s email), although read by the Patriarch’s legal adviser in the meeting, was not even discussed in detail by the members of the Holy Synod nor was it unanimously approved.

Our Metropolitan PHILIP in not supporting such proposed constitution, pointed out to the members of the Holy Synod that our Constitution, by law, could only be amended by our General Assembly in the ways provided by our Constitution. Moreover, any amendments to our Constitution became effective immediately upon adoption at a General or Special Convention and the approval of our Metropolitan. Therefore the proposed constitution of October 15, 2004 could only be considered as suggested changes to our Constitution. These suggestions were submitted to the Department of Legal Affairs to avoid any inconsistencies with our existing Constitution and the Holy Synod’s self-rule Resolution of October 9, 2003.
The legal department in reviewing the suggestions of the legal advisor to the Patriarch in the proposed Constitution has noted that:

1. The proposed October 15, 2004 constitution violates the spirit and letter of the irrevocable Synodal self-rule resolution of October 9, 2003, which was itself immediately effective. Moreover it is not appropriate for any person to attempt to rewrite the Constitution of this self-ruling Archdiocese and to attempt to negate self-rule and give less authority to the Archdiocese than it had prior to the Synodal Resolution of October 9, 2003.
2. Under Section 8 of the October 9, 2003 self-rule resolution, the Holy Synod of Antioch was required to approve the Pittsburgh Constitution insofar as it was consistent with that resolution. Since the Pittsburgh Constitution is entirely consistent with the Synodal Resolution none of the suggested changes apply and any required approval has been given.

3. The proposed October 15, 2004 constitution did not receive enough scrutiny by the Holy Synod, nor was it discussed in detail in the Holy Synod meeting.


We will, at all times in this Archdiocese, be bound by our legally adopted constitution and the civil laws of this land in which we reside. Article VII of our constitution allows timely proposed amendments to be submitted for consideration only by any of the following procedures:

1. by a majority vote of the General Assembly of a Regular or Special Convention

2. by a recommendation from the Archdiocese Department of Legal Affairs

3. by a recommendation from the Archdiocese Board of Trustees

4. by a recommendation from any parish of this Archdiocese in good standing


Under all of the above procedures, any proposed amendments are “to be certified by the sponsor and submitted to the Metropolitan Archbishop and the Department of Legal Affairs for the purpose of studying and determining the legality of such proposed change.” As a courtesy, the proposed October 15, 2004 constitution was submitted to the Department of Legal Affairs for review.

As communicated in the press release of January 18th, 2005, the Department of Legal Affairs rendered a decision that the “major appropriate suggested changes do not require amendments to the Pittsburgh Constitution” and the legally adopted Pittsburgh Constitution “stands as the Constitution of this Archdiocese, without the need for further revision.”

Yours in Christ,

The Department of Legal Affairs

Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America


http://www.antiochian.org/newsjan272005

Why are we not hearing from the Department of Legal Affairs NOW????


Metropolitain PHILIP on the direction of the Archdiocese
“Sometimes, during my hours of solitude, like most of you, I think about
the future of this beloved Archdiocese. I know and you know that all of
us are mortal beings. The question is: “What about the future?”
I appeal to you, my beloved children and friends, not to let any group
of people, or any group of bishops or any Synod, local or foreign,
divide you and destroy what we have built for the past forty-one years.

This Archdiocese must remain a beacon of light and a good example to be
emulated by all Orthodox in North America. We have enough Orthodox
fragmentations and we do not need any more. “



— Metropolitan Philip, 2007 Convention Speech.

Offline Anastasios

  • Webdespota
  • Administrator
  • Merarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,521
  • St. Chrysostomos the New
    • AnastasiosHudson.com
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #509 on: March 21, 2009, 12:14:33 PM »
I have cleaned up this thread a bit:

1) Deleted entire quoting of previous long posts
2) Removed all size formatting. From here on out, please do not increase the size of the font in order to make a statement. Bold, italics, and underline work fine.

Thank you,

Fr Anastasios
Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism and may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,727
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #510 on: March 21, 2009, 01:37:26 PM »
I have cleaned up this thread a bit:

1) Deleted entire quoting of previous long posts
2) Removed all size formatting. From here on out, please do not increase the size of the font in order to make a statement. Bold, italics, and underline work fine.

Thank you,

Fr Anastasios


One point of order: when I do 12 point, it is because of the request of Fr. Ambrose for his eyes.
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #511 on: March 21, 2009, 02:14:21 PM »
Now, could everyone do me a big favor and not quote Replies #492, 495, & 498.
With the work Fr. Anastasios just completed, my request extends now to Reply #492 alone.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 02:15:02 PM by PeterTheAleut »
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #512 on: March 21, 2009, 09:52:08 PM »
3.19.09

From the Canons and History to the Innovative Anomaly of Antioch, 2009


"When the recent decision of the synod of Antioch regarding diocesan bishops first became public knowledge, my initial reaction was one of surprise and incredulity. Surely, I thought, this could not really be true. Did I understand the decision correctly? Were there to be no diocesan bishops—only metropolitans and auxiliary bishops?

"It was not clear to me why such a decision was made. Soon enough, I was given two explanations. I was told that it was a personal favor to Metropolitan PHILIP and that it had to do with friends of Metropolitan PHILIP not caring for decisions made by at least two diocesan bishops. After this, I had a priest tell me that he and others were upset but since there was nothing “uncanonical” about the act, on what basis could one object?


"Although many have no doubt continued discussing the various angles to this recent decision, further thought and prayer led me to revisit the canonicity of this act. Is it really in keeping with the canons? More broadly, is it really “standard” or “normative” behavior for Orthodox patriarchates?"

Continue at ::  http://www.ocanews.org/Anomaly3.19.09.html



Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #513 on: March 21, 2009, 10:01:23 PM »
Now, could everyone do me a big favor and not quote Replies #492, 495, & 498.
With the work Fr. Anastasios just completed, my request extends now to Reply #492 alone.

The American Antiochian Constitution has been removed from all Antiochian websites.

So I am grateful that Isa actually tabled it here on OC.net.

On one or two other Orthodox lists, when clergy have complained that the Constitution has been lost, I have recommeded that they come to OC.net and take a copy from here.  Hopefully this will also generate more members for OC.net and we shall see more interaction here from clergy.

I recommend that a copy of the Constitution be allowed to remain here  - unless of course Fr Anastasios or Fr Chris have been instructed by their bishops to remove it.  In which case it will have to circulate, as in the days of the Soviet Union, in underground samizdat forms.


Offline Abbu-Issa

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 80
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #514 on: March 21, 2009, 10:36:45 PM »
Now, could everyone do me a big favor and not quote Replies #492, 495, & 498.
With the work Fr. Anastasios just completed, my request extends now to Reply #492 alone.

The American Antiochian Constitution has been removed from all Antiochian websites.

So I am grateful that Isa actually tabled it here on OC.net.

On one or two other Orthodox lists, when clergy have complained that the Constitution has been lost, I have recommeded that they come to OC.net and take a copy from here.  Hopefully this will also generate more members for OC.net and we shall see more interaction here from clergy.

I recommend that a copy of the Constitution be allowed to remain here  - unless of course Fr Anastasios or Fr Chris have been instructed by their bishops to remove it.  In which case it will have to circulate, as in the days of the Soviet Union, in underground samizdat forms.


Please see Article IV of the Constitution of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America:

Quote:
ARTICLE IV
GOVERNMENT

Section 1. The governing code for this Archdiocese shall be the Holy Scripture, Sacred Tradition, Holy Canons, the Constitution of the Church of Antioch and the Constitution of the Archdiocese as approved by the Holy Synod of Antioch.

Section 2. The Archdiocesan Synod comprised of the Metropolitan Archbishop and the Diocesan Bishops shall be the governing ecclesiastical authority of the Archdiocese. The Metropolitan Archbishop shall preside over the Archdiocesan Synod. The Synod shall determine the number of dioceses, their boundaries, and the respective diocese(s) and/or area of responsibility of each bishop. It shall also determine all matters of hierarchical discipline of bishops of the Archdiocese.

Section 3. The decisions of the Archdiocesan Synod may be appealed to the Patriarch and Holy Synod of Antioch who shall be the final judge on the matter.

Section 4. All administrative authority is vested in the Metropolitan Archbishop and the Archdiocesan Board of Trustees as hereinafter provided.

Section 5. All legislative authority is vested in the General Convention of the Archdiocese as approved by the Metropolitan Archbishop and by the Archdiocesan Synod.

Section 6. The decisions of the Holy Synod of Antioch shall be binding on the Archdiocese on matters of doctrine, liturgy, sacraments, relations with autocephalous Orthodox Churches and ecumenical policy with regard to other Christian and non-Christian bodies.

It seems to me that the decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch conflicts with the Constitution of the Archdiocese previously approved by the same Holy Synod of Antioch and published by His Beatitude the Patriarch.

In particular, the Archdiocesan Synod, according to Section 2, "shall determine the number of dioceses, their boundaries, and the respective diocese(s) and/or area of responsibility of each bishop. It shall also determine all matters of hierarchical discipline of bishops of the Archdiocese." Therefore, any change in the status of the diocesan Bishops should be decided by the Archdiocesan Synod, with a right of appeal to the Patriarch and Holy Synod of Antioch (Section 3).

Furthermore, according to Section 6, "The decisions of the Holy Synod of Antioch shall be binding on the Archdiocese on matters of doctrine, liturgy, sacraments, relations with autocephalous Orthodox Churches and ecumenical policy with regard to other Christian and non-Christian bodies." Thus, it would seem that the Holy Synod of Antioch is not competent to reduce diocesan Bishops within the Archdiocese to the status of Auxiliary Bishops.

Offline Anastasios

  • Webdespota
  • Administrator
  • Merarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,521
  • St. Chrysostomos the New
    • AnastasiosHudson.com
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #515 on: March 21, 2009, 10:41:34 PM »


I recommend that a copy of the Constitution be allowed to remain here  - unless of course Fr Anastasios or Fr Chris have been instructed by their bishops to remove it.  In which case it will have to circulate, as in the days of the Soviet Union, in underground samizdat forms.



What possesses you to say such strange things?

Fr Anastasios
Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism and may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #516 on: March 21, 2009, 10:48:54 PM »


I recommend that a copy of the Constitution be allowed to remain here  - unless of course Fr Anastasios or Fr Chris have been instructed by their bishops to remove it.  In which case it will have to circulate, as in the days of the Soviet Union, in underground samizdat forms.



What possesses you to say such strange things?

Fr Anastasios

Life experience.

Although I am not quite sure which of the three things you are refering to?

1. It's good to have the Constitution on OC.net

2. Bishops may issue instructions to their presbyters.

3. Samizdat circulation.

Offline Tamara

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,208
  • +Pray for Orthodox Unity+
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #517 on: March 21, 2009, 11:29:36 PM »


I recommend that a copy of the Constitution be allowed to remain here  - unless of course Fr Anastasios or Fr Chris have been instructed by their bishops to remove it.  In which case it will have to circulate, as in the days of the Soviet Union, in underground samizdat forms.



St. Andrew's House or the OCL (Orthodox Christian Laity) website would probably be happy to archive it. But the OCL site would probably be the best choice.

ps. I sent a message to my Greek-American friend to see if he thinks OCL would be the right place. It is important for Antiochian clergy and laity to be able to pull it up from somewhere safe.

« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 11:34:28 PM by Tamara »

Offline Abbu-Issa

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 80
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #518 on: March 22, 2009, 12:08:50 AM »


I recommend that a copy of the Constitution be allowed to remain here  - unless of course Fr Anastasios or Fr Chris have been instructed by their bishops to remove it.  In which case it will have to circulate, as in the days of the Soviet Union, in underground samizdat forms.



St. Andrew's House or the OCL (Orthodox Christian Laity) website would probably be happy to archive it. But the OCL site would probably be the best choice.

ps. I sent a message to my Greek-American friend to see if he thinks OCL would be the right place. It is important for Antiochian clergy and laity to be able to pull it up from somewhere safe.


The OCL website may not be the best choice as the AOCA have a significant member involved that would prove to be a conflict of interest.  Perhaps both places would be best!

Offline Tamara

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,208
  • +Pray for Orthodox Unity+
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #519 on: March 22, 2009, 01:59:01 AM »


I recommend that a copy of the Constitution be allowed to remain here  - unless of course Fr Anastasios or Fr Chris have been instructed by their bishops to remove it.  In which case it will have to circulate, as in the days of the Soviet Union, in underground samizdat forms.



St. Andrew's House or the OCL (Orthodox Christian Laity) website would probably be happy to archive it. But the OCL site would probably be the best choice.

ps. I sent a message to my Greek-American friend to see if he thinks OCL would be the right place. It is important for Antiochian clergy and laity to be able to pull it up from somewhere safe.


The OCL website may not be the best choice as the AOCA have a significant member involved that would prove to be a conflict of interest.  Perhaps both places would be best!

You are right about the OCL, but most of the board members are still GOA members so the AOCA members could say they were outvoted if Met. Philip puts the squeeze on them to have it removed.
I just checked St. Andrew's forum and Dean Calvert just posted the constitution on his site. I will ask him if he can archive it.

Offline Αριστοκλής

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,031
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #520 on: March 22, 2009, 06:32:00 AM »
I have cleaned up this thread a bit:

1) Deleted entire quoting of previous long posts
2) Removed all size formatting. From here on out, please do not increase the size of the font in order to make a statement. Bold, italics, and underline work fine.

Thank you,

Fr Anastasios


One point of order: when I do 12 point, it is because of the request of Fr. Ambrose for his eyes.
Perhaps Father Ambrose can adjust his browser to display larger. I had to set my father's to do so for same reason.
"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides

Offline Anastasios

  • Webdespota
  • Administrator
  • Merarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,521
  • St. Chrysostomos the New
    • AnastasiosHudson.com
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #521 on: March 22, 2009, 04:08:40 PM »
I have cleaned up this thread a bit:

1) Deleted entire quoting of previous long posts
2) Removed all size formatting. From here on out, please do not increase the size of the font in order to make a statement. Bold, italics, and underline work fine.

Thank you,

Fr Anastasios


One point of order: when I do 12 point, it is because of the request of Fr. Ambrose for his eyes.

Thank you for trying to be helpful to him, but I don't like the way it makes the threads look, and in fact it was causing threads that were so long that they were unviewable.  Those using a standard browser such as Firefox can easily increase the font size many times over by using the control, shift, and = keys, while those with nonstandard browsers such as Internet Explorer 6.0 can have some success using View --> Text Size --> Largest.  It does not of course work as well as Firefox, which is why Internet Explorer 6.0 is a nonstandard browser. I am not sure if subsequent versions allow for better text manipulation.

Some Microsoft Windows computers have a magnify function by typing function and the space bar, and screen resolution can also be set.  These modifications of the user's machine are the appropriate method to deal with text size, since otherwise we are making modifications for the benefit of one poster which have adverse effects on other posters.
Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism and may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,727
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #522 on: March 22, 2009, 05:32:26 PM »
The DOWAMA Council of Presbyters headed by Fr. Peter O'Callagan at St. George Cathedral in Wichita wrapped up a meeting they had on Tuesday.  My priest is a memeber of this body and here are a few of his thoughts as to what went on.

First, the meeting ran for seven continuous hours.  Bishop BASIL was not himself present as he does not intervene in this body.  A letter was composed and signed by all of the members, including all of the non-convert, Arab priests, some of whom are from the old country, indicating that this issue is troubling to convert and cradle alike.  This letter was then forwarded on to Bishop BASIL, Met. PHILIP and to His Beatitude, IGNATIUS IV, Patriarch of Antioch.  Met. PHILIP should receive his in a few days, though, it may have been leaked to him, via fax, the same day.  Who knows when or if His Beatitude will receive it.

I have received more information, and I post a few now that I have perhaps only alluded to.

Met. Philip is facing pressures from a variety of fronts.  A similar letter from another deanery was proposed, and an Arab priest, immigrant,  disuaded them, citing that the letter would put Met. Philip in a corner, where he cannot be.  (I personally the priest in question, and know that while a proud Arab, he is not ethnocentric not only promoting English but also Spanish in the DL).  As I said on another thread, treat Met. Philip with respect and consideration: he has earned it.

As to these other pressures that perhaps I have only alluded to, I have received more word on that.  On the lead of someone I trust, I provide the lines between which the reader must read.

The fish doesn't know he is wet.

Quote
Challenges of Orthodoxy in America
And the Role of the Ecumenical Patriarchate
Chief Secretary of the Holy and Sacred Synod
(Chapel of the Holy Cross, March 16, 2009)
 Having attempted this general evaluation of the American Orthodoxy, allow me to consider briefly the Holy Archdiocese of America, this most important eparchy of the Ecumenical Throne.

            The image we depicted above in rough brushstrokes holds also true for the Archdiocese. Thanks to the selfless dedication of our immigrants and under the protection of the first See in the Orthodox world, a strong Archdiocese was created that, in time, reached a level of maturity and excellence and it is today the pride of the Church of Constantinople. The Archdiocese took advantage of the possibilities that a deeply democratic, meritocratic and progressive state, like the United States, was able to offer, in order that the Orthodox faith of our fathers take root deep in the American land.



To this effect, the active participation of the lay element was, as we have seen, very important. We believe that the younger generations of the omogeneia are free of the past’s prejudices and complexes, according to which, if you wish to succeed in America you have to forget your cultural patrimony and your language in order to be left naked, so to speak, in the thorny desert of the Wild West. Today’s omogeneia has overcome that denial and has come to understand that the secret of the American civilization’s success does not lie in the obliteration of one’s cultural background but rather in the free and harmonious co-existence of people and races who have come to this hospitable land seeking a life in freedom, in faith and in dignity. Our cultural heritage and our national conscience is not, by any means, an obstacle for our progress and for the successful witness to our faith, especially insofar as ecumenicity (οἰκουμενικότης) is the heart of Hellenism and by definition alien to any form of nationalism or cultural chauvinism.

The Holy Archdiocese of America under the Ecumenical Patriarchate is the most organized, well-structured and successful presence of Orthodoxy today. This is not accidental. This success was not achieved by foregoing its cultural identity. It was not achieved by ignoring the sacred canons and the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils. It was not achieved by succumbing to the temptation of secularism. It was not achieved by imprisoning itself in the darkness of the extreme fundamentalism, nationalism and sterile denial.

            Precisely because the Holy Archdiocese of America occupies such an esteemed position in this country we are obliged to offer a self-criticism but also to defend ourselves against the unjust accusations that target this jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

Examining, then, ourselves, I believe that we ought to be more careful towards the easiness with which we are ready to abandon our Hellenism, both as language and as tradition. As we have already said, it is nothing but a myth the opinion that Hellenism is an obstacle to the creative and successful incorporation in the American reality. Hellenism is identified with its ecumenical character and for that reason it can never be nationalistic for both of its manifestations, its culture and its Orthodox faith are concepts that transcend the boundaries of the national.

Speaking now of your Theological School, do you think that the Church’s expectation that the graduates of this School know theology, canon law, Byzantine music, be able to celebrate the service of matins, vespers and the sacraments, be able to preach the Word of God and instruct our youth in the catechism is unreasonable or excessive?

            My dear brothers and sisters, allow me now to return to the problem of the diaspora and the jurisdictional diversity that one observes in the USA.

First of all, allow me to remind you that the term “diaspora” is a technical term denoting those regions that lie beyond the borders of the local autocephalous Churches. It does not mean that the Orthodox people who dwell in these regions live there temporally, as misleadingly it was argued by His Eminence Phillip in a recent article (“The Word”). According to the 28th Canon of the 4th Ecumenical Council one of the prerogatives of the Ecumenical Patriarch is precisely His jurisdiction exactly over these regions, which lie beyond the predescribed borders of the local Churches. The canon in question uses the technical term “barbaric” in order to denote these lands, since it was precisely referring to the unknown lands beyond the orbit of the Roman Empire.

On account of this canon, the Ecumenical Patriarchate has suffered the unfair and unjust criticism of two American Orthodox Hierarchs: Metropolitan Phillip and the newly elected Metropolitan Jonas.

            It is my duty to refute the injustice directed against the Mother Church of Constantinople for the sake of historical truth and for the sake of moral conscience.


Metropolitan Jonas, while he was still an abbot, in one of his speeches presented what he called “a monastic perspective” on the subject “Episcopacy, Primacy and the Mother Churches”. In the chapter on autocephaly and primacy he claims that “there is no effective overarching primacy in the Orthodox Church.” He seems to be in opposition to the institution of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, because he considers that such an institution “is based on primacy over an empire-wide synod” and that this “has long become unrealistic.” What surprised me the most in this “monastic perspective” of His Eminence Jonas was the claim that allegedly “now only the Greek ethnic Churches and few others recognize the Ecumenical Patriarchate to be what it claims to be.” It is indeed saddening the ignorance of this Hierarch not only on account of History and canonical order but even on account of the current state of affairs. How is it possible that he ignores that there is no Church that does not recognize the Ecumenical Patriarchate? Perhaps he is carried away by the fact that the ecclesial schema over which he presides and which has been claimed as “autocephalous” in rampant violation of every sense of canonicity, is not recognized but by few Churches and it is not included in the diptychs of the Church.

Please allow me, by way of illustration, to sample a few other points of the same article that should not remain unanswered.

            Metropolitan Jonas claims that in America “there is no common expression of unity that supersedes ethnic linguistic and cultural divisions.” Does His Eminence ignore the fact that under the canonical jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in America belong Greeks, Palestinians, Albanians, Ukrainians and Carpathorussians? Is this not proof enough of a common structure that supersedes ethnic and cultural divisions? Does he imply perhaps that SCOBA either constitutes a common expression of unity that supersedes such divisions?

Instead of acknowledging the mercifulness of the other Patriarchates which, in spite the uncanonical status of the so-called OCA, accept it in communion, its representatives choose to subject them to such an unfair treatment that contributes nothing to the common cause of Orthodox unity. I would be interested to hear an explanation from His Eminence in response to the question “How will the so-called OCA contribute to our common Orthodox witness in diaspora by electing bishops holding titles which already exist for the same city”. Especially our Ecumenical Patriarchate not only is it not “unable to lead” as most unfortunately Metropolitan Jonas claims, but already since last October (in order to limit myself to the most recent example) has launched under the presidency of His All Holiness the process for the convocation of the Holy and Great Synod. I am not sure whether His Eminence, upon his ordination to the episcopacy, refused to put on the vestments of a bishop, which he, in the same article, and while he was still an abbot, had called as unfitting to the real nature of the arch-pastorship (p. 11).

Let me add that the refusal to recognize primacy within the Orthodox Church, a primacy that necessarily cannot but be embodied by a primus (that is by a bishop who has the prerogative of being the first among his fellow bishops) constitutes nothing less than heresy. It cannot be accepted, as often it is said, that the unity among the Orthodox Churches is safeguarded by either a common norm of faith and worship or by the Ecumenical Council as an institution. Both of these factors are impersonal while in our Orthodox theology the principle of unity is always a person. Indeed, in the level of the Holy Trinity the principle of unity is not the divine essence but the Person of the Father (“Monarchy” of the Father), at the ecclesiological level of the local Church the principle of unity is not the presbyterium or the common worship of the Christians but the person of the Bishop, so to in the Pan-Orthodox level the principle of unity cannot be an idea nor an institution but it needs to be, if we are to be consistent with our theology, a person.

The second article that I have to mention here is that of His Eminence the Antiochean Metropolitan Phillip under the title “Canon 28 of the 4th Ecumenical Council—Relevant or Irrelevant Today?”

            Metropolitan Phillip begins his argument with an entirely anti-theological distinction  of the holy canons into three categories 1) dogmatic, 2) contextual and, 3) “dead”.

            I would like to know in which of these three categories, following his reasoning, His Eminence would classify the canons of the Ecumenical Councils that demarcate the jurisdictions of the ancient Patriarchates. Are they “contextual”—subject, as it is, to change? Does His Eminence believe that in this way he serves the unity among Orthodox, by subjugating the holy and divine canons under the circumstantial judgment of some bishop?

            Based on the above distinction, and although he accepts that canon 28 of the 4th Ecumenical Council is not “dead” (since there is so much debate about it), he affirms that indeed it gives certain prerogatives to the Ecumenical Patriarch, on the other hand, however, he claims that this happened for secular and political reasons that have nothing to do with today’s state of affairs. Implicitly and yet all too clearly, Metropolitan Phillip implies that the prerogatives of the Ecumenical Patriarch can be doubted. The question then is: does His Eminence know of any Church whose status (Patriarchal or Autocephalous) were not decided according to the historical conditions that they were current at the time? Or, does His Eminence know of any Church that has received its status on the basis of theological reasons exclusively? Every administrative decision of an Ecumenical Council is equally respected to perpetuity together with its dogmatic decisions. Imagine the consequences for the Orthodox Church if we begin to re-evalutate the status of each local Church!

            The correct interpretation of canon 28 is considered by His Eminence as “novelty”, by invoking only sources of the 20th century, while it has been scientifically established already by the late Metropolitan of Sardeis Maximos the uninterrupted application of the canon in question during the history of the Church of Constantinople


Summarizing my lecture, I wish to call your attention to the following points:

1.   The Ecumenical Patriarchate is a Church that undergoes martyrdom, a Church that often has received unfair criticism, especially by those Churches which were most richly benefited by it. At no point, the spirit of nationalism took hold of the Ecumenical Patriarchate because that is incompatible with the concepts of Hellenism and Ecumenicity (ecumenical character) as well as with the Christian Orthodox faith. The proof of this emerges in the most decisive manner throughout the 17 centuries of its history, during which it never Hellenized, not even attempted to Hellenize the nations to which it gave through its apostolic missions the undying light of Christ. What better example than the Slavic tribes which owe even their alphabet to the Thessalonian brothers Cyril and Methodios. I, who speak to you tonight, although I am an Antiochean from my maternal side, nevertheless I serve as the Chief-Secretary of the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Church of Constantinople.

For several centuries the Patriarchs of Antioch were just ornaments of the court of New Rome.  The rites of Antioch, more ancient than Constantinople's (themselves derived from Antioch's) were suppressed by the Constantinoplean Pat. Balsamon, who evidently never set foot in his patriarchate.  And it was the insistence that the Arab Orthodox were just Arabized Greeks and other things coming out of Istanbul that led to the Patriarch of Antioch to submit to the Vatican, resulting in the Melkites.

Oh, and Antioch is the Mother of ALL Churches, except Jerusalem.  Constantinople is the daughter, if not the granddauther.

2.   The Ecumenical Patriarchate neither had nor has territorial claims against the sister Orthodox Churches. That truth is testified by the fact that, although the Patriarchates of the East were virtually destroyed during the difficult times of the 17th and 18th centuries, nevertheless, the Patriarchate of Constantinople was taking the care to have a Patriarch elected for those Patriarchates, supporting their primates in every possible way.[/quote]

Point of fact here: the EP and the Phanriots fought tooth and nail to prevent the election of an Arab (i.e. the ethnicity of 99% of his flock) Patriarch.  What is going on now in Jerusalem was the same in Antioch before the turn of the previous century.

Quote
3.   The submission of the diaspora to the Ecumenical Patriarchate does not mean either Hellenization or violation of the canonical order, because it is only in this way that both the letter and the spirit of the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils is respected. The Mother Church knows, however, that such a submission is difficult to be accomplished under the present historical conditions. For this reason, and by employing the principle of economy, it was suggested and it has now become accepted in Pan-Orthodox level, that there will be local Pan-Orthodox Episcopal Assemblies in the diaspora (like SCOBA in the US). The principle of presidency is followed, namely the representative of the Ecumenical Patriarchate presides over these Episcopal Assemblies in order to preserve the necessary element of canonicity

As you surely know, last October the Ecumenical Patriarchate summoned in Constantinople a Synaxis of the Primates of the Orthodox Churches. The Primates accepted the proposal of Patriarch Bartholomew to move ahead with the Pan-Orthodox preparatory meetings, within 2009, so that the Holy and Great Synod of the Orthodox Church take place as soon as possible. For the record, please note that this decision was reached thanks to the concession on behalf of the Ecumenical Patriarchate which accepted that the Autonomous Churches will no longer be invited as to avoid the thorny problem of the Church of Estonia in the relations between Constantinople and Moscow

4.   With regards to the United States, the submission to the First Throne of the Church, that is, to the Ecumenical Patriarchate is not only fitting with the American society and mentality but also it opens up the horizons of possibilities for this much-promising region, which is capable of becoming an example of Pan-Orthodox unity and witness.

The Mother Church of Constantinople safeguards for the Orthodox Church in America those provisions that are needed for further  progress and maturity in Christ.

Please allow me to conclude with the phrase of His Beatitude Ignatios Patriarch of Antioch during last October’s Synaxis of the Primates at the Phanar: “In the Orthodox Church we have one primus and he is the Patriarch of Constantinople.”

Thank you for your attention.
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline Anastasios

  • Webdespota
  • Administrator
  • Merarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,521
  • St. Chrysostomos the New
    • AnastasiosHudson.com
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #523 on: March 22, 2009, 05:37:51 PM »


I recommend that a copy of the Constitution be allowed to remain here  - unless of course Fr Anastasios or Fr Chris have been instructed by their bishops to remove it.  In which case it will have to circulate, as in the days of the Soviet Union, in underground samizdat forms.



What possesses you to say such strange things?

Fr Anastasios

Life experience.

Although I am not quite sure which of the three things you are refering to?

1. It's good to have the Constitution on OC.net

2. Bishops may issue instructions to their presbyters.

3. Samizdat circulation.

What is the point of suggesting that my bishop or Fr Chris's bishop would order us to take down Antiochian documents? Where is the basis? Unless you see it disappear, what is the point of making "preemptive" speculations?  It just seems odd to say such a thing before there is any evidence that it even could or would happen.
Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism and may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #524 on: March 22, 2009, 09:47:00 PM »


I recommend that a copy of the Constitution be allowed to remain here  - unless of course Fr Anastasios or Fr Chris have been instructed by their bishops to remove it.  In which case it will have to circulate, as in the days of the Soviet Union, in underground samizdat forms.



What possesses you to say such strange things?

Fr Anastasios

Life experience.

Although I am not quite sure which of the three things you are refering to?

1. It's good to have the Constitution on OC.net

2. Bishops may issue instructions to their presbyters.

3. Samizdat circulation.

What is the point of suggesting that my bishop or Fr Chris's bishop would order us to take down Antiochian documents? Where is the basis?

Life experience, Father Anastasios, that is the basis.  It's not as if I am paranoid and in fact we have evidence of what I say - as we see right now, the people who run other Internet sites have been ordered to remove the Constitutition.    It's all rather 1984-ish.   :)

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #525 on: March 22, 2009, 10:06:16 PM »
in fact we have evidence of what I say - as we see right now, the people who run other Internet sites have been ordered to remove the Constitutition.   

What evidence?
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #526 on: March 22, 2009, 10:09:47 PM »
in fact we have evidence of what I say - as we see right now, the people who run other Internet sites have been ordered to remove the Constitutition.   

What evidence?


Visual evidence.  In the last few days the Constitution has been removed from Antiochian websites.  This has been discussed on several Orthodox fora, including, IIRC, this one. 

-oOo-

A copy has now been placed here for safekeeping

Constitution of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of NA

Part 1

http://members5.boardhost.com/STANDREWHOUSE/msg/1237697473.html

Part 2

http://members5.boardhost.com/STANDREWHOUSE/msg/1237697556.html

« Last Edit: March 22, 2009, 10:13:51 PM by Irish Hermit »

Offline Anastasios

  • Webdespota
  • Administrator
  • Merarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,521
  • St. Chrysostomos the New
    • AnastasiosHudson.com
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #527 on: March 22, 2009, 10:15:28 PM »
Playing devil's advocate, if the constitution has now been superseded by the Synod, wouldn't it make sense to take it off the official websites, since you would not want outdated legal documents appearing on your official website?
Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism and may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #528 on: March 22, 2009, 10:23:05 PM »
Visual evidence.  In the last few days the Constitution has been removed from Antiochian websites.  This has been discussed on several Orthodox fora, including, IIRC, this one. 
No one has actually said the full Constitution was ever on the antiochian.org website.
And it doesn't appear on any google cached pages of the Archdiocese.
So again, I ask, what is your evidence that it was there in the first place?
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #529 on: March 22, 2009, 10:24:59 PM »
Playing devil's advocate, if the constitution has now been superseded by the Synod, wouldn't it make sense to take it off the official websites, since you would not want outdated legal documents appearing on your official website?

But..................    ???  can the Constutition of a legally incorporated US organisation be superseded in such a way.   The legal procedures mandated by the Constitution must be followed.  This is, IIRC, one of the major points raised in last week's letter to His Eminence Metropolitan PHILP from the clergy meeting of the Diocese of Wichita.

Offline Anastasios

  • Webdespota
  • Administrator
  • Merarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,521
  • St. Chrysostomos the New
    • AnastasiosHudson.com
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #530 on: March 22, 2009, 10:28:21 PM »
Playing devil's advocate, if the constitution has now been superseded by the Synod, wouldn't it make sense to take it off the official websites, since you would not want outdated legal documents appearing on your official website?

But..................    ???  can the Constutition of a legally incorporated US organisation be superseded in such a way.   The legal procedures mandated by the Constitution must be followed.  This is, IIRC, one of the major points raised in last week's letter to His Eminence Metropolitan PHILP from the clergy meeting of the Diocese of Wichita.

I really could care less about US corporate law.  I care about the Orthodox Church and its canons.

I am not supportive of what Metropolitan Philip and the Synod decided, but how does US corporate law overrule a Synod?
Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism and may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #531 on: March 22, 2009, 10:29:46 PM »
Visual evidence.  In the last few days the Constitution has been removed from Antiochian websites.  This has been discussed on several Orthodox fora, including, IIRC, this one. 
No one has actually said the full Constitution was ever on the antiochian.org website.
And it doesn't appear on any google cached pages of the Archdiocese.
So again, I ask, what is your evidence that it was there in the first place?

It is very simple for a webmaster to have his webpages removed from google.com's cache.  This is one of the very annoying things with the webpages of the vagante Orthodox groups.   Their pages are constantly in flux and they take care that their previous webpages are removed from both google.com and The Wayback Machine.

So I have no evidence which would satisfy you that it was there in the first place.   It makes me wonder if Isa wrote all that stuff himself?!   ;D

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #532 on: March 22, 2009, 10:31:36 PM »
It makes me wonder if Isa wrote all that stuff himself?!   ;D
All what stuff?
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #533 on: March 22, 2009, 10:36:49 PM »
Playing devil's advocate, if the constitution has now been superseded by the Synod, wouldn't it make sense to take it off the official websites, since you would not want outdated legal documents appearing on your official website?

But..................    ???  can the Constutition of a legally incorporated US organisation be superseded in such a way.   The legal procedures mandated by the Constitution must be followed.  This is, IIRC, one of the major points raised in last week's letter to His Eminence Metropolitan PHILP from the clergy meeting of the Diocese of Wichita.

I really could care less about US corporate law.  I care about the Orthodox Church and its canons.

I am not supportive of what Metropolitan Philip and the Synod decided, but how does US corporate law overrule a Synod?

Well maybe it doesn't.  I am not familiar with the ways of US law.   Does a head office overseas have the right to work in the US contrary to the legally registered  Articles of Incorporation of its US subsidiary?  It is not possible in New Zealand.  It would seem to introduce chaos and lawlessness into the US legal system.

Offline Anastasios

  • Webdespota
  • Administrator
  • Merarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,521
  • St. Chrysostomos the New
    • AnastasiosHudson.com
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #534 on: March 22, 2009, 10:39:54 PM »
Playing devil's advocate, if the constitution has now been superseded by the Synod, wouldn't it make sense to take it off the official websites, since you would not want outdated legal documents appearing on your official website?

But..................    ???  can the Constutition of a legally incorporated US organisation be superseded in such a way.   The legal procedures mandated by the Constitution must be followed.  This is, IIRC, one of the major points raised in last week's letter to His Eminence Metropolitan PHILP from the clergy meeting of the Diocese of Wichita.

I really could care less about US corporate law.  I care about the Orthodox Church and its canons.

I am not supportive of what Metropolitan Philip and the Synod decided, but how does US corporate law overrule a Synod?

Well maybe it doesn't.  I am not familiar with the ways of US law.   Does a head office overseas have the right to work in the US contrary to the legally registered  Articles of Incorporation of its US subsidiary?  It is not possible in New Zealand.  It would seem to introduce chaos and lawlessness into the US legal system.

That is not my point. My point is this is the Orthodox CHURCH, which is why I am confused at the constant comparisons to corporations.  Synods are the highest authority. If the Synod tells them to rewrite their constitution, which only exists for well ordering in a temporal sense, what grounds do they have to not be obedient? An appeal to corporate law?

I think one could make a good argument for why the Antiochian Synod's move to unseat ruling bishops was uncanonical, but I think appeals to US corporate law are pretty weak.
Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism and may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #535 on: March 22, 2009, 10:41:00 PM »
It makes me wonder if Isa wrote all that stuff himself?!   ;D
All what stuff?

Well, he posted some very long messages which, he claimed, was the Constitution of the Antiochian Archdiocese.

But, when you stop to think about it, did he provide evidence that it was in fact the Constitution? 

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #536 on: March 22, 2009, 10:50:08 PM »
[
But..................    ???  can the Constutition of a legally incorporated US organisation be superseded in such a way.   The legal procedures mandated by the Constitution must be followed.  This is, IIRC, one of the major points raised in last week's letter to His Eminence Metropolitan PHILP from the clergy meeting of the Diocese of Wichita.

I really could care less about US corporate law.  I care about the Orthodox Church and its canons.

I am not supportive of what Metropolitan Philip and the Synod decided, but how does US corporate law overrule a Synod?

When can the Articles of Incorporation of a legally registered US organisation be overridden?

Is this a point where the rule of law breaks down in the USA?

Father, the clergy of the Wichita diocese clearly share my doubts because this is one of the questions they have sent to Metropolitan PHILIP pursuant to their clergy meeting last week.

Quote
That is not my point. My point is this is the Orthodox CHURCH, which is why I am confused at the constant comparisons to corporations.
Whether we in the Church like it or not, all organisations except such as the local knitting group are legally incorporated.  Without incorporation property ownership would be a nightmare.  Is your diocese in the States not incorporated under law?  What about your parish?


Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #537 on: March 22, 2009, 10:54:56 PM »
That is not my point. My point is this is the Orthodox CHURCH,

Father, I am exceedingly pleased to hear you say that.  Many of the Greek Old Calendarist Churches deny that any of the Churches of "world Orthodoxy" are the Church.  They believe that Antioch and the rest of us are graceless entities.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,727
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #538 on: March 22, 2009, 10:56:01 PM »
It makes me wonder if Isa wrote all that stuff himself?!   ;D
All what stuff?

Well, he posted some very long messages which, he claimed, was the Constitution of the Antiochian Archdiocese.

But, when you stop to think about it, did he provide evidence that it was in fact the Constitution? 
LOL.  I took the Patriarch's (or his web site's) word on it.

Of course, if either the Patriarch or the SRACANA had a copy on its web site (still), we could compare.  I posted the links, but of coure that doesn't mean anything once they are cut.

Believe me, if I wrote the constitution, it would be worded differently. :police:
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Re: Decision of the Holy Synod of Antioch
« Reply #539 on: March 22, 2009, 10:56:37 PM »
It makes me wonder if Isa wrote all that stuff himself?!   ;D
All what stuff?

Well, he posted some very long messages which, he claimed, was the Constitution of the Antiochian Archdiocese.
Yes he did. But where did he say it definitely came from the website of the Archdiocese?

But, when you stop to think about it, did he provide evidence that it was in fact the Constitution? 
He doesn't have to. http://www.antiochian.org/News/Release20031020SelfRule.htm
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.