OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 02, 2014, 05:16:14 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: whats up with some jurisdictions not recognizing others?  (Read 1570 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
mersch
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: converting to orthodoxy, seems to be on hold
Posts: 248



« on: April 27, 2009, 09:01:00 PM »

hello.  Why don't all orthodox jurisdictions recognize some of the other jurisdictions?  I believe the OCA would be an example of this, if I'm not mistaken. Aren't they either orthodox or not?  I also am curious about having different jurisdictions in other countries in todays world.  For example could you find a Greek orthodox church in Russia or Italy? I understand why there are different ones here in the USA, but was wondering about other countries. Remember I'm new to this so be gentle (LOL) and try to keep it as simple as possible.  Thank You
Logged
shep4569
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 58



WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2009, 09:33:26 PM »

hello.  Why don't all orthodox jurisdictions recognize some of the other jurisdictions?  I believe the OCA would be an example of this, if I'm not mistaken. Aren't they either orthodox or not?  I also am curious about having different jurisdictions in other countries in todays world.  For example could you find a Greek orthodox church in Russia or Italy? I understand why there are different ones here in the USA, but was wondering about other countries. Remember I'm new to this so be gentle (LOL) and try to keep it as simple as possible.  Thank You

Simplicity could be a difficult request for this question, but here's a brief explanation:  Smiley

All of the Orthodox "churches" are not really separate, since we are all in communion with one another. I could go to church anywhere in the world and be accepted as an Orthodox Christian, and receive the sacraments.

As to the jurisdictions, in America at least, the issue arose from the vast number of immigrants we have. Once the Russians, and Greeks, and Serbians, and etc. started forming churches here, they appealed to their mother churches to provide support and administration. Hence, we have a plurality of ethnic Orthodox jurisdictions in America.
Logged

In Christ,
Logan

"The Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord." - Job 1:21
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Diocese of the South
Posts: 1,614


« Reply #2 on: April 27, 2009, 09:36:29 PM »

As you've no doubt seen on recent threads, this is a contentious issue with multiple viewpoints. However, one clarification I can make to your question that I think most sides would agree with:

There is a difference between 'recognizing group X as Orthodox' and 'recognizing group X as autocephalous (or a number of other administrative distinctions'. The first refers to whether or not the group is part of the Church, and there is actually generally very broad agreement on that in almost all cases. The second refers attitudes towards certain administrative issues--on the one hand there are a lot more controversies in this field, on the other hand, they are a lot less important than the first idea, which is part of why they linger so long.

To use the OCA as an example--The Patriarch of Constantinople, the Patriarch of Antioch, the Patriarch of Moscow and every bishop and layman in communion with those all recognize the OCA as Orthodox. Where they differ is on the administrative status of the OCA.
 - The Patriarch of Moscow says that the OCA is a self-ruled Church, meaning it elects its own Metropolitan and has no higher authority other than a General Council; Moscow also says that the OCA is the 'canonical' church for North America meaning that all non OCA-clergy should get the OCA's permission before being active here.
 - The Patriarch of Constantinople says that the OCA is a portion of the Patriarchate of Moscow. That whether the Russion Synod chooses to exercise it or not, it has authority over the OCA's choice of bishops, etc. And that neither Moscow nor the OCA are the canonical authority for North America.
 - Other autocephalous churches take positions ranging between the two extremes of Moscow and Constantinople.
This is an intentional simplification, there is lots of history and more complications, but it gets at the basic disagreement. But everybody does recognize the OCA as Orthodox, meaning they will give communion to OCA members, will receive communion from OCA clergy, and will concelebrate with them.

Now, in addition to the administrative disagreements above, there are two major divisions where the issue of 'is the Church' actually comes into being:
1) There are a group of churches, generally known as 'Old Calendrist', who have separated themselves from what they sometimes refer to as 'World Orthodoxy' (meaning all the Patriarchates and the Orthodox in communion with them). I won't try to speak for them--there are multiple members of this group on this board who can address as they see fit--but generally the main body of Orthodoxy consider them to be in schism, and they consider the main body of Orthodoxy to no longer be Orthodox.
2) There are several groups, such as the Macedonian Orthodox Church, one of the Ukrainian Churches, etc which have split without authorization from their traditional synod (generally for nationalist reasons). These are out-of-communion with the rest of Orthodoxy and are considered in schism, although they seek recognition as new autocephalous entities.


    
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,861



« Reply #3 on: April 27, 2009, 11:50:22 PM »

I am interested to know how Russians in Greece are ministered to, as well as Greeks in Russia.  Do they have representatives come from their respective churches to serve under the authority of the established bishop, or do they bring in "ethnic bishops"?
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #4 on: April 28, 2009, 01:11:49 AM »

I am interested to know how Russians in Greece are ministered to,

I never spent much time in Athens but the Russians have one church there (photo below) called after Saint Nikodemos and the Holy Trinity.   They commemorate the local Greek Church authority.  The church is about 900 years old and it was purchased by the Tsar for Russian use.

Does anyone know who maintained this church during the time of atheistic communism?  I don't think it was the Russian Church Abroad?  Maybe the Russian Exarchate in Paris under the Ecumenical Patriarchate?

I don't know if there is a Russian church in Thessaloniki.



Logged
Thomas
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,790



« Reply #5 on: April 28, 2009, 12:16:34 PM »

As you've no doubt seen on recent threads, this is a contentious issue with multiple viewpoints. However, one clarification I can make to your question that I think most sides would agree with:

There is a difference between 'recognizing group X as Orthodox' and 'recognizing group X as autocephalous (or a number of other administrative distinctions'. The first refers to whether or not the group is part of the Church, and there is actually generally very broad agreement on that in almost all cases. The second refers attitudes towards certain administrative issues--on the one hand there are a lot more controversies in this field, on the other hand, they are a lot less important than the first idea, which is part of why they linger so long.

To use the OCA as an example--The Patriarch of Constantinople, the Patriarch of Antioch, the Patriarch of Moscow and every bishop and layman in communion with those all recognize the OCA as Orthodox. Where they differ is on the administrative status of the OCA.
 - The Patriarch of Moscow says that the OCA is a self-ruled Church, meaning it elects its own Metropolitan and has no higher authority other than a General Council; Moscow also says that the OCA is the 'canonical' church for North America meaning that all non OCA-clergy should get the OCA's permission before being active here.
 - The Patriarch of Constantinople says that the OCA is a portion of the Patriarchate of Moscow. That whether the Russion Synod chooses to exercise it or not, it has authority over the OCA's choice of bishops, etc. And that neither Moscow nor the OCA are the canonical authority for North America.
 - Other autocephalous churches take positions ranging between the two extremes of Moscow and Constantinople.
This is an intentional simplification, there is lots of history and more complications, but it gets at the basic disagreement. But everybody does recognize the OCA as Orthodox, meaning they will give communion to OCA members, will receive communion from OCA clergy, and will concelebrate with them.

Now, in addition to the administrative disagreements above, there are two major divisions where the issue of 'is the Church' actually comes into being:
1) There are a group of churches, generally known as 'Old Calendrist', who have separated themselves from what they sometimes refer to as 'World Orthodoxy' (meaning all the Patriarchates and the Orthodox in communion with them). I won't try to speak for them--there are multiple members of this group on this board who can address as they see fit--but generally the main body of Orthodoxy consider them to be in schism, and they consider the main body of Orthodoxy to no longer be Orthodox.
2) There are several groups, such as the Macedonian Orthodox Church, one of the Ukrainian Churches, etc which have split without authorization from their traditional synod (generally for nationalist reasons). These are out-of-communion with the rest of Orthodoxy and are considered in schism, although they seek recognition as new autocephalous entities.
   

witega,
Thanks for this concise explanation. While a little long, it appears to have answered the question asked.
Thomas
Convert Issues Forum Moderator.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2009, 12:16:54 PM by Thomas » Logged

Your brother in Christ ,
Thomas
Thomas
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,790



« Reply #6 on: April 28, 2009, 12:22:09 PM »

I am interested to know how Russians in Greece are ministered to, as well as Greeks in Russia.  Do they have representatives come from their respective churches to serve under the authority of the established bishop, or do they bring in "ethnic bishops"?

Alveis Lacuna,
Orthodox Christians are ministered to as Orthodox Christians where ever they go provided they bring proof that they are Orthodox in good standing (usually in the form of a letter from their parish priest or local bishop). In many Orthodox Countries "representational" Churches  are provided that form a home parish for Orthodox Christians of certain nationalities, for example American's are represented in Russia at St Catherine's (I believe that is the right name) the OCA Representational Church, likewise there is such a Russian Church here in the US. As Father Ambrose (Irish Hermit) noted there is a Russian Representational Church in Athens. I believe both  Greece and  Antioch have representational Churches in Russia or have had one in the past. These Representational Churches  are often viewed as Church  Diplomatic Missions representing their countries in the foriegn land.

Thomas
« Last Edit: April 29, 2009, 03:17:12 PM by Thomas » Logged

Your brother in Christ ,
Thomas
mersch
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: converting to orthodoxy, seems to be on hold
Posts: 248



« Reply #7 on: April 28, 2009, 12:31:58 PM »

Thank You for the replies. I understand now. Smiley
« Last Edit: April 28, 2009, 12:32:48 PM by mersch » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,483



« Reply #8 on: April 28, 2009, 03:02:39 PM »

I am interested to know how Russians in Greece are ministered to, as well as Greeks in Russia.  Do they have representatives come from their respective churches to serve under the authority of the established bishop, or do they bring in "ethnic bishops"?

Alveis Lacuna,
Orthodox Christians are minsitered to as Orthodox Christians where ever they go provided they bring proof that they are Orthodox in good standing (usually in the form of a letter from their parish priest or local bishop). In many Orthodox Countries "represntational" Churches  are provided that form a home parish for Orthodox Christians of certain nationalities, for example American's are represented in Russia at St Catherine's (I believe that is the right name) the OCA Representational Church, likewise there is such a Russian Church here in the US. As Father Ambrose (Irish Hermit) noted there is a Russian Representational Church in Athens. I believe both  Greece and  Antioch have representational Churches in Russia or have had one in the past. These Representational Churches  are often viewed as Church  Diplomatic Missions representing their countries in the foriegn land.

Thomas

Btw, the technical term is metochion (pl. metochia), also called embassador Churches.  The Vatican calls them titular Churches: St. Peter's is supposed to be Constantinople's titular/metochion Church.
Logged

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
serb1389
Lord, remember me when you come into your Kingdom!
Global Moderator
Merarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 8,348


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 29, 2009, 08:54:35 AM »

I am interested to know how Russians in Greece are ministered to,

I never spent much time in Athens but the Russians have one church there (photo below) called after Saint Nikodemos and the Holy Trinity.   They commemorate the local Greek Church authority.  The church is about 900 years old and it was purchased by the Tsar for Russian use.

Does anyone know who maintained this church during the time of atheistic communism?  I don't think it was the Russian Church Abroad?  Maybe the Russian Exarchate in Paris under the Ecumenical Patriarchate?

I don't know if there is a Russian church in Thessaloniki.





I am fairly certain that there is a russian priest there from russia.  He would commemorate the local authority though. 

I know that there is a serbian priest in Athens who serves at a local greek parish, but does services in Serbian.  He commemorates the local bishops though, and does petitions for "all clergy, monastics, patriarch, etc." of serbia, without a commemoration, but more of a prayer for the serbian people and etc.  When I was in Athens I had heard that this is the same system all of the other "ethnic" groups use. 
Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
AMM
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 2,076


« Reply #10 on: April 29, 2009, 09:59:10 AM »

Quote
There are several groups, such as the Macedonian Orthodox Church, one of the Ukrainian Churches, etc which have split without authorization from their traditional synod (generally for nationalist reasons). These are out-of-communion with the rest of Orthodoxy and are considered in schism, although they seek recognition as new autocephalous entities.

That is presented as the "normal" way to become autocephalous as I understand things.
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #11 on: April 29, 2009, 01:20:00 PM »

I am interested to know how Russians in Greece are ministered to,

I never spent much time in Athens but the Russians have one church there (photo below) called after Saint Nikodemos and the Holy Trinity.   They commemorate the local Greek Church authority.  The church is about 900 years old and it was purchased by the Tsar for Russian use.

Does anyone know who maintained this church during the time of atheistic communism?  I don't think it was the Russian Church Abroad?  Maybe the Russian Exarchate in Paris under the Ecumenical Patriarchate?

I don't know if there is a Russian church in Thessaloniki.





Also in Cyprus and the Holy Land, they are under the jurisdiction of the church of cyprus and Jerusalem, respectively, and commemorate the local hierarch.  I know that in Cyprus, the slavic churches are serviced by a slav and also are even permitted to serve on the old calendar, even though Church of Cyprus is predominantly new calendar.
Logged
Didymus
Peace and grace.
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: HG Coptic Bishop Anba Daniel of Sydney
Posts: 563


St. Thomas Didymus the Apostle of India


« Reply #12 on: April 29, 2009, 02:19:25 PM »

Here in Australia the Greek Archbishop doesn't recognise ANY Churches other than the Greek Orthodox Church.
As the Greek Archbishop was appointed by the EO Patriarch of Constantinople it is claimed that this "heathen land" of Australia should only have this one bishop.

All other EO jurisdictions are considered to be intruding. All OOs and RCs are considered heretics.

Oddly enough, the Greeks in Singapore let our priests use their Church when they go over there - different Greek bishop but same Coptic bishop Wink
Logged

...because I was not with you when the Lord came aforetime.
...because I am blind and yet I see.
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.073 seconds with 39 queries.