Who Makes Up SCOBA?

[ialmisry]

Looking into the list
http://www.scoba.us/jurisdictions.html
I was wondering who and why would vote on the Episcopal Assemblies.  I don't get why the Albanian bishop in GOARCH, for instance, who has but 2 parishes is a voting member, but the Albanian bishop of Boston (the real Mother See of the Autocephalous Albanian Church) does not.  Ditto the Carpatho-Russian and Ukrainian bishops for GOARCH.  How is it that ROCOR brought Moscow back in, but the representative is from the Patriarchal parishes: ROCOR is not represented.  What is the prerequisites to be a voting member?

And btw, when is the next SCOBA meeting?

[SolEX01]

You know there was no official Autocephalous Church of Albania until 1991.   

The Hierarchs representing the EP have 4 of the 7 votes needed for a majority decision in SCOBA.  Article II, Section (a), Item 1 of SCOBA's Constitution reads....

All authority in the Conference resides in the member hierarchs and is derived from them. All decisions of the Conference shall require two-thirds approval of the member hierarchs present at a regular or special meeting to become binding on the Conference.

Six Hierarchs are required for a quorum.  If the 4 EP Hierarchs show up, there's your majority decision.   

Every one of the 10 Hierarchs on SCOBA is a voting member hierarch.  Only representatives of member Hierarchs are not allowed to vote unless by proxy.

[Fr. George]

I don't get why the Albanian bishop in GOARCH, for instance, who has but 2 parishes is a voting member, but the Albanian bishop of Boston (the real Mother See of the Autocephalous Albanian Church) does not.  Ditto the Carpatho-Russian and Ukrainian bishops for GOARCH.  How is it that ROCOR brought Moscow back in, but the representative is from the Patriarchal parishes: ROCOR is not represented.  What is the prerequisites to be a voting member?

The Albanian, Carpatho-Russian and Ukranian bishops may be EP, but they're not GOARCH (they don't have to follow the directives of the GOARCH Eparchial Synod, they don't have to follow the directives of the Archdiocesan Council, and they have no say in the C-L Assemblies - their only tie to GOARCH is through the Archbishop, and only because he is an exarch of the EP).  If ROCOR wants to be a member, I'm sure the olive branch will be extended (if it already hasn't been).

And btw, when is the next SCOBA meeting?

I thought they meet twice per year.

[pensateomnia]

How is it that ROCOR brought Moscow back in, but the representative is from the Patriarchal parishes: ROCOR is not represented.

That is still being discussed. It's not like the Moscow-ROCOR-OCA relationship -- and internal politics -- are fully ironed out.

I don't get why the Albanian bishop in GOARCH...

Bishop Ilia is not part of the GOA.

And btw, when is the next SCOBA meeting?

It typically takes place in the Fall (usually in late September or October, sometimes later).

[Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)]

Looking into the list
http://www.scoba.us/jurisdictions.html
I was wondering who and why would vote on the Episcopal Assemblies.  I don't get why the Albanian bishop in GOARCH, for instance, who has but 2 parishes is a voting member, but the Albanian bishop of Boston (the real Mother See of the Autocephalous Albanian Church) does not.  Ditto the Carpatho-Russian and Ukrainian bishops for GOARCH.  How is it that ROCOR brought Moscow back in, but the representative is from the Patriarchal parishes: ROCOR is not represented.  What is the prerequisites to be a voting member?

And btw, when is the next SCOBA meeting?

As I understand it, each jurisdiction has one vote in SCOBA but each Bishop will have a vote in the Regional Assembly.

[Orthodoc]

The question still hasn't been answered on why a bishop (Albanian) with only two churches under his authority have the same voting power and authority as a bishop representing hundreds of churches.

Orthodoc

[ialmisry]

Just in brief: although the Ukainians, Carpartho-Russians and Albanians are not technically part of GOARCH, they are not under the Patriarch of Moscow, the Metropolitan of Prague nor the Archbishop of Tirana but the EP, and hence are part of the same package and name brand in North America. They do not represent a jurisdiction like the Romanian and Moscow representatives, any more than the OCA's "ethnic" bishops.  So, again, why are they accepted as peers on SCOBA?

[pensateomnia]

Just in brief: although the Ukainians, Carpartho-Russians and Albanians are not technically part of GOARCH, they are not under the Patriarch of Moscow, the Metropolitan of Prague nor the Archbishop of Tirana but the EP, and hence are part of the same package and name brand in North America.

Not according to His All Holiness. Or according to the bishops, priests and laity I have spoken with in those Churches. I imagine our posters on this forum who are members of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA do not think they are the "same package and name brand" as the GOA.

So, again, why are they accepted as peers on SCOBA?

Every canonical Orthodox Church with a presence here has one SCOBA representative, regardless of how many Bishops happen to sit on the Synod from which that SCOBA representative comes (after recent events, ROCOR may as well, depending on what it agrees with the MP). Since, in several cases, the diocesan bishop is the only hierarch, he obviously must represent his Church, e.g. His Eminence Metropolitan Joseph of the Bulgarian Eastern Orthodox Diocese of the USA, Canada, and Australia.

Every single Orthodox Bishop, from auxiliary to Primate, is invited to special gatherings, just not to the bi-annual meetings.

They do not represent a jurisdiction like the Romanian and Moscow representatives...

According to that kind of logic, neither did the Metropolia when SCOBA was founded. 

[ialmisry]

Just in brief: although the Ukainians, Carpartho-Russians and Albanians are not technically part of GOARCH, they are not under the Patriarch of Moscow, the Metropolitan of Prague nor the Archbishop of Tirana but the EP, and hence are part of the same package and name brand in North America.

Not according to His All Holiness.

Au contraire, he thinks canon 28 of Chalcedon gives him jurisdiction over any Ukrainian, Carpatho-Russian or Albania who ventures to these shores.  His Chief Secretary was just here entertaining us with this novelty.

Or according to the bishops, priests and laity I have spoken with in those Churches. I imagine our posters on this forum who are members of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA do not think they are the "same package and name brand" as the GOA.

I imagine that in Ukraine they do not think they are the "same package and name brand" as the PoM either.  In a way, they are not in either case.  But in the question at hand (as the question of canonicity in Ukraine), they are.  At Chambesy, who spoke for them?

So, again, why are they accepted as peers on SCOBA?

Every canonical Orthodox Church with a presence here has one SCOBA representative, regardless of how many Bishops happen to sit on the Synod from which that SCOBA representative comes (after recent events, ROCOR may as well, depending on what it agrees with the MP). Since, in several cases, the diocesan bishop is the only hierarch, he obviously must represent his Church, e.g. His Eminence Metropolitan Joseph of the Bulgarian Eastern Orthodox Diocese of the USA, Canada, and Australia.

His eminence represents his Beatitude, Patriarch Maxim of Bulgaria. The Ukrainian, Carpatho-Russian and Albanian bishops do not represent Pat. Kyril, or Met. Christopher nor Arb. Anastasios. They are not autocephalous: who do they comemorate in their dytichs?  And hence, whom do they represent?

And hence, for the subject at hand, it is a distinction without a difference.

They do not represent a jurisdiction like the Romanian and Moscow representatives...

According to that kind of logic, neither did the Metropolia when SCOBA was founded. 

Indeed, it didn't. That is the OCA's official position.

[pensateomnia]

The Ukrainian, Carpatho-Russian and Albanian bishops do not represent Pat. Kyril, or Met. Christopher nor Arb. Anastasios.

SCOBA does not exist to represent foreign primates. It is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, whose mission is to strengthen the unity and common witness of canonical Orthodox Christian Churches in this land.

They are not autocephalous

Again, neither was the Metropolia, one of SCOBA's founding signatories. The Metropolia didn't "represent" any autocephelous Church or foreign Primate. Because that is not the purpose of the Standing Conference, nor a requirement for membership.

And hence, whom do they represent?

They represent their Church, just as the Metropolia did.

  At Chambesy, who spoke for them?

Ahhhh....so your questions aren't really about SCOBA.

[ialmisry]

The Ukrainian, Carpatho-Russian and Albanian bishops do not represent Pat. Kyril, or Met. Christopher nor Arb. Anastasios.

SCOBA does not exist to represent foreign primates. It is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization, whose mission is to strengthen the unity and common witness of canonical Orthodox Christian Churches in this land.

They are not autocephalous

Again, neither was the Metropolia, one of SCOBA's founding signatories. The Metropolia didn't "represent" any autocephelous Church or foreign Primate. Because that is not the purpose of the Standing Conference, nor a requirement for membership.

And hence, whom do they represent?

They represent their Church, just as the Metropolia did.

  At Chambesy, who spoke for them?

Ahhhh....so your questions aren't really about SCOBA.

Supposedly Chambesy has been touted (or rather, I have seen it so touted) as based on SCOBA (and the one in France). Such is the claim...

I don't have the time right now to go through your points now (I have something else to post, sure to be a crowd pleasing).  But for now, why then doesn't the Albanian, Romanian, and Bulgarian bishops of the OCA have their own representation (the Romanian I know has its own suffragan bishop)?  Could the WRO vicarate of Antioch get its own representation?

[Michał Kalina]

as based on SCOBA (and the one in France)

And the one in Germany and Australia

[ialmisry]

as based on SCOBA (and the one in France)

And the one in Germany and Australia

Acutally, I've never seen such a claim, just on SCOBA and the French one.

[Michał Kalina]

There are also Komission der Orthodoxen Kirche in Deutschland (KOKiD) and Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Churches in Australia (SCOCCA) respectively.

[ialmisry]

There are also Komission der Orthodoxen Kirche in Deutschland (KOKiD) and Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Churches in Australia (SCOCCA) respectively.

I am aware of them, but the accolades for the Episcopal Assembly scheme have only referenced SCOBA and the French one as the model.

Back to the OP, I just came across this:
http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/images/6/61/UOC_of_USA_%283%29.jpg

Bishops: Abp. Antony of Hierapolis; Metr. Constantine of Irinoupolis; Abp. Vsevolod of Scopelos

Those places didn't sound Ukrainian (or "American"), so I took a looksy, and lo and behold, I found this:

Hierachy of the Throne

http://www.ec-patr.org/hierarchs/index.php?lang=en
The "Throne" is that of the Ecumenical Patriarch.

III. Titular Metropolitans - Archbishops of the Throne
Constantine of Irinoupolis 07.05.1972

http://www.ec-patr.org/hierarchs/show.php?lang=en&id=100
I knew I had seen that picture elsewhere:
http://www.scoba.us/jurisdictions.html

Intrigued, I looked, and sure enough I found the Albanian hiearch on SCOBA's site listed as "Assistant bishop" on the EP's site, the Carpatho-Russian hiearch is listed with the Ukrainian as "Titular Metropolitian-Archbishops of the Throne."

So I ask:why does the EP get 4 votes on SCOBA? I say that as a native born Chicagoan  , we know all about multiple voting.  Why doesn't the OCA's Albanian, Romanian and Bulgarian get a vote?  Why doesn't the Mexican exarchate get a vote?

[Fr. George]

The question still hasn't been answered on why a bishop (Albanian) with only two churches under his authority have the same voting power and authority as a bishop representing hundreds of churches.

Orthodoc 

I don't know; why does a bishop with merely 76 parishes (ACROD) have the same voting power as a bishop representing nearly 7 times as many parishes (OCA)? 

If the size of the jurisdiction (by parishes) were that important, then the GOA and OCA would have their votes multiplied by 260 or 270, the AOA by 115, Serbian by 65, Ukranian by 53, Romanian by 12, Bulgarian by 9, to be over the Albanian single vote.

[Michał Kalina]

So I ask:why does the EP get 4 votes on SCOBA? I say that as a native born Chicagoan  , we know all about multiple voting.  Why doesn't the OCA's Albanian, Romanian and Bulgarian get a vote?  Why doesn't the Mexican exarchate get a vote?

Whe there aren't: Greek Metropolis of Canada, Ukrainian Church of Canada, Antiochian Archdiocese (Diocese ?) of Mexico, Greek Metropolis of South America listed also?

[Fr. George]

So I ask:why does the EP get 4 votes on SCOBA? I say that as a native born Chicagoan  , we know all about multiple voting.  Why doesn't the OCA's Albanian, Romanian and Bulgarian get a vote?  Why doesn't the Mexican exarchate get a vote?

Whe there aren't: Greek Metropolis of Canada, Ukrainian Church of Canada, Antiochian Archdiocese (Diocese ?) of Mexico, Greek Metropolis of South America listed also?

The Greek diocese south of the US (Buenos Aires, Panama) are not included in SCOBA.

[ialmisry]

So I ask:why does the EP get 4 votes on SCOBA? I say that as a native born Chicagoan  , we know all about multiple voting.  Why doesn't the OCA's Albanian, Romanian and Bulgarian get a vote?  Why doesn't the Mexican exarchate get a vote?

Whe there aren't: Greek Metropolis of Canada, Ukrainian Church of Canada, Antiochian Archdiocese (Diocese ?) of Mexico, Greek Metropolis of South America listed also?

The Greek diocese south of the US (Buenos Aires, Panama) are not included in SCOBA.

Come to think of it, is the Greek Archdiocese of Canada in?

Btw, the Greeks North and South of the US border evidently lost their place in SCOBA when the EP broke up its own jurisdiction.

[SolEX01]

Come to think of it, is the Greek Archdiocese of Canada in?

No, the Greek Orthodox Metropolitan of Canada is not part of SCOBA.

[Fr. George]

So I ask:why does the EP get 4 votes on SCOBA? I say that as a native born Chicagoan  , we know all about multiple voting.  Why doesn't the OCA's Albanian, Romanian and Bulgarian get a vote?  Why doesn't the Mexican exarchate get a vote?

Whe there aren't: Greek Metropolis of Canada, Ukrainian Church of Canada, Antiochian Archdiocese (Diocese ?) of Mexico, Greek Metropolis of South America listed also?

The Greek diocese south of the US (Buenos Aires, Panama) are not included in SCOBA.

Come to think of it, is the Greek Archdiocese of Canada in?

Btw, the Greeks North and South of the US border evidently lost their place in SCOBA when the EP broke up its own jurisdiction.

If the EP were "stacking the deck," it would be much easier if he had included an additional 3-4 hierarchs (unless one will claim that this would actually "help" Antioch, since they have an additional 3-4 American diocese).  Either way, I don't subscribe to the "urinating contest" theory of how American Orthodox ecclesiology has formed/operated.

[ialmisry]

Come to think of it, is the Greek Archdiocese of Canada in?

No, the Greek Orthodox Metropolitan of Canada is not part of SCOBA.

Why not?

[BoredMeeting]

Now if we could just get SCOBA out of the National Council of Churches.

[ialmisry]

So I ask:why does the EP get 4 votes on SCOBA? I say that as a native born Chicagoan  , we know all about multiple voting.  Why doesn't the OCA's Albanian, Romanian and Bulgarian get a vote?  Why doesn't the Mexican exarchate get a vote?

Whe there aren't: Greek Metropolis of Canada, Ukrainian Church of Canada, Antiochian Archdiocese (Diocese ?) of Mexico, Greek Metropolis of South America listed also?

The Greek diocese south of the US (Buenos Aires, Panama) are not included in SCOBA.

Come to think of it, is the Greek Archdiocese of Canada in?

Btw, the Greeks North and South of the US border evidently lost their place in SCOBA when the EP broke up its own jurisdiction.

If the EP were "stacking the deck," it would be much easier if he had included an additional 3-4 hierarchs

like he already has?

(unless one will claim that this would actually "help" Antioch, since they have an additional 3-4 American diocese).

We only have two hierarchs eligible under SCOBA (apparent) rules.

  Either way, I don't subscribe to the "urinating contest" theory of how American Orthodox ecclesiology has formed/operated.

Neither do I.

[ialmisry]

Now if we could just get SCOBA out of the National Council of Churches.

AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!

[SolEX01]

Come to think of it, is the Greek Archdiocese of Canada in?

No, the Greek Orthodox Metropolitan of Canada is not part of SCOBA.

Why not?

Your guess is as good as mine.   

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > General Forums > Christian News (Moderator: serb1389) > Topic: Who Makes Up SCOBA?