OrthodoxChristianity.net
April 23, 2014, 03:53:58 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The Rules page has been updated.  Please familiarize yourself with its contents!
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Odd "Canonical" History behind the GOANSA Charter of 1922  (Read 21815 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,342


metron ariston


« Reply #45 on: August 26, 2009, 08:56:42 PM »

Rome's Ultramontanism creates no unity (just forced union) whether it be Old, New or for that matter the Third.

Nach Phanar gehen wir nicht.

They didn't like their Ultramontanism exposed either.

To the moderators & board members:

I submit that this thread should be locked, even though I had plans to respond to the good faith questions of some seeking an opportunity for dialogue (as opposed to a platform to continue a trollish series of provocations). The OP has publicly slandered Orthodox Christian hierarchs on this thread multiple times -- actions unbecoming of an Orthodox Christian and, I believe, against the policies of this board.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,182



« Reply #46 on: August 26, 2009, 09:15:32 PM »

^
I for one am interested in continuing this thread. I do not believe that criticism is slander; that is, unless pensateomnia can prove it. In fact, it may be slander to accuse someone else of slander without any effort to prove the allegation. It is obvious that some folks are not happy with the criticism, as strong as it is. What I do not know is whether the discomfort is caused by excess on the part of ialmisry or an excessively thin skin on the part of the discomforted. After all, this topic is in the Free-for-All section. Finally, I see "bad mouthing" of hierarchs all over the place. Doing so against a particular individual is not indicative of disrespect for the office.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2009, 09:18:44 PM by Second Chance » Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 9,910


ΠΑΝΑΓΙΑ ΣΟΥΜΕΛΑ


« Reply #47 on: August 26, 2009, 10:14:02 PM »

Fr Michael Andreades:
Quote
Spiritually, however, the parish received the assignment of Fr. Dimitry Kamnev (1897-98) and Fr. Vladimir Alexandrov (1898-1905), missionaries who not only ministered to our congregation, but, using it as a base, tirelessly served Orthodox communities in Cle Elum, Wilkeson, Portland and in various parts of Canada, often serving the Liturgy for several thousand people at a time. It is a matter of record that the first Orthodox services in Canada were celebrated by Fr. Kamnev, then rector of St. Spiridon's.

Since a large proportion of the congregation spoke Greek as their native language, the Russian mission saw to it that most of the early rectors were proficient in that language as well as Russian and English. One of the resources open to the Russian Church was the number of priests who came from Greek-Russian families in the Crimea. Fr. Michael Andreades was one of those and ministered to St. Spiridon's from 1905 to 1916. Trilingual and comfortable in both Russian and Greek cultures, Fr. Michael was an ideal pastor for our community at the time. His talents were nearly irreplaceable, however, and it is not surprising that when this much-loved priest left in 1916, the rapidly-growing Greek community of St. Spiridon's set about making plans to form their own parish. Indeed, the number Greek-Americans in Seattle had swollen during Fr. Michael's tenure, to number around 2,000 by 1915 and were mostly young men under the age of 25. In 1918 they got the use of an Episcopal church at the corner of Yale Avenue N. and John Street, and in 1921 St. Demetrios' Church was completed on the corner of Yale and Thomas at the then enormous cost of $50,000. Old timers remember that the parting of the two congregations was an occasion for rejoicing, not sorrow, because "now there were enough Orthodox in Seattle for two churches." *

*From the website of St Spiridon http://www.saintspiridon.org/history.html

One must wonder at what rejoicing our Isa would be making had he been there.  Wink
« Last Edit: August 26, 2009, 10:14:29 PM by Αριστοκλής » Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,235


WWW
« Reply #48 on: August 26, 2009, 11:47:52 PM »

The first Orthodox Church (I take it you mean in the lower 48, correct me if I am wrong) was founded around 1825.
You have just made our point.

What point?
Logged
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,235


WWW
« Reply #49 on: August 27, 2009, 12:14:59 AM »

The following is a serious question as I also have struggled with the question of how much we should emphasize the past. I am usually a glass half full type of person but you know the saying about repeating past mistakes..

Why do you think that the early history of the GOA is moot? Are you saying that the GOA of today is nothing like the GOA of the 1920s?

The King of Greece no longer governs.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1922 to 1975 is moot.

Archbishop Iakovos has reposed.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1975 to 1996 is moot.

Archbishop Spyridon is watching the waves in Portugal.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1996 to 1999 is moot.

The only significant item which has occurred during Archbishop Demetrios' tenure is the elevation of the 8 Dioceses to Metropolises in 2002.

I could care less who founded the first Orthodox Church in what is now the United States.  What is more important is that we have an Orthodox faith to worship and preach to others and not who Patriarch Meletios had lunch with in San Francisco.   Roll Eyes
Logged
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,869



« Reply #50 on: August 27, 2009, 01:04:41 AM »

SolEX01,

Your post should bring us to looking at the holiness of of our Faith, rather than arguing about what happened historically, though it is of some interest to me.  Your last line really made me laugh.  You don't care who Patriarch Meletios had lunch with in SF?
Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,235


WWW
« Reply #51 on: August 27, 2009, 01:25:09 AM »

SolEX01,

Your post should bring us to looking at the holiness of of our Faith, rather than arguing about what happened historically, though it is of some interest to me.  Your last line really made me laugh.  You don't care who Patriarch Meletios had lunch with in SF?

Who Pat. Meletios had lunch with in SF in 1921 has no meaning.   Smiley
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #52 on: August 27, 2009, 01:51:21 AM »

Fr Michael Andreades:
Quote
Spiritually, however, the parish received the assignment of Fr. Dimitry Kamnev (1897-98) and Fr. Vladimir Alexandrov (1898-1905), missionaries who not only ministered to our congregation, but, using it as a base, tirelessly served Orthodox communities in Cle Elum, Wilkeson, Portland and in various parts of Canada, often serving the Liturgy for several thousand people at a time. It is a matter of record that the first Orthodox services in Canada were celebrated by Fr. Kamnev, then rector of St. Spiridon's.

Since a large proportion of the congregation spoke Greek as their native language, the Russian mission saw to it that most of the early rectors were proficient in that language as well as Russian and English. One of the resources open to the Russian Church was the number of priests who came from Greek-Russian families in the Crimea. Fr. Michael Andreades was one of those and ministered to St. Spiridon's from 1905 to 1916. Trilingual and comfortable in both Russian and Greek cultures, Fr. Michael was an ideal pastor for our community at the time. His talents were nearly irreplaceable, however, and it is not surprising that when this much-loved priest left in 1916, the rapidly-growing Greek community of St. Spiridon's set about making plans to form their own parish. Indeed, the number Greek-Americans in Seattle had swollen during Fr. Michael's tenure, to number around 2,000 by 1915 and were mostly young men under the age of 25. In 1918 they got the use of an Episcopal church at the corner of Yale Avenue N. and John Street, and in 1921 St. Demetrios' Church was completed on the corner of Yale and Thomas at the then enormous cost of $50,000. Old timers remember that the parting of the two congregations was an occasion for rejoicing, not sorrow, because "now there were enough Orthodox in Seattle for two churches." *

*From the website of St Spiridon http://www.saintspiridon.org/history.html

One must wonder at what rejoicing our Isa would be making had he been there.  Wink


If Fr. Andreas had successed in obtaining a Greek bishop, I would have thrown rose petals in his holiness' path as he walked off the ship
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
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 9,910


ΠΑΝΑΓΙΑ ΣΟΥΜΕΛΑ


« Reply #53 on: August 27, 2009, 03:21:34 AM »

If Fr. Andreas had successed in obtaining a Greek bishop, I would have thrown rose petals in his holiness' path as he walked off the ship

So, Fr. Michael Andreades left St. Spiridon for St Demetrios and had...no bishop, or are you just obsessed with where his bishop was seated?
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #54 on: August 27, 2009, 04:11:52 AM »

If Fr. Andreas had successed in obtaining a Greek bishop, I would have thrown rose petals in his holiness' path as he walked off the ship

So, Fr. Michael Andreades left St. Spiridon for St Demetrios and had...no bishop, or are you just obsessed with where his bishop was seated?

...on his canonical cathedra. Then canons have a dim view of him sitting anywhere  else.

Priests without a canonical and valid bishop do not exist.  Not in Orthodoxy at least. No bishop, no antimens, no priest, no DL, no parish.

Btw, Fr. Andreades did not leave St. Spiridon for St. Demetrios: all accounts I've seen state that he left the RM for the GOANSA only after the Bolshevik Revolution.  If you know otherwise, please post.

I tried a google search for GOA and Fr. Andreades, but it yielded nothing.  Nothing. Here a pioneer of Greek Orthodox clergy on this continent, and GOA has nothing to say.

I do:SHAME!
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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #55 on: August 27, 2009, 04:17:10 AM »

The following is a serious question as I also have struggled with the question of how much we should emphasize the past. I am usually a glass half full type of person but you know the saying about repeating past mistakes..

Why do you think that the early history of the GOA is moot? Are you saying that the GOA of today is nothing like the GOA of the 1920s?

The King of Greece no longer governs.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1922 to 1975 is moot.

Archbishop Iakovos has reposed.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1975 to 1996 is moot.

Archbishop Spyridon is watching the waves in Portugal.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1996 to 1999 is moot.

The only significant item which has occurred during Archbishop Demetrios' tenure is the elevation of the 8 Dioceses to Metropolises in 2002.

I could care less who founded the first Orthodox Church in what is now the United States.  What is more important is that we have an Orthodox faith to worship and preach to others and not who Patriarch Meletios had lunch with in San Francisco.   Roll Eyes

Constantinople fell and 1453 and got its named changed to Istanbul in 1930.  Are you going to say New Rome is moot?

Preach what to others? Multiple phelytist, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Churches?
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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #56 on: August 27, 2009, 04:20:50 AM »

The first Orthodox Church (I take it you mean in the lower 48, correct me if I am wrong) was founded around 1825.
You have just made our point.

What point?

You can go on the GOA site and look in vain to see any reference to non-Greek Orthodox.  As I posted up above, the full fledged mission of St. Herman to the full fledged hiearchy across the length and bredth of the continent is totally ignored, but much is made of a colony of Greeks who submitted to the Vatican and disappeared without a trace.
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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #57 on: August 27, 2009, 04:22:52 AM »

Rome's Ultramontanism creates no unity (just forced union) whether it be Old, New or for that matter the Third.

Nach Phanar gehen wir nicht.

They didn't like their Ultramontanism exposed either.

To the moderators & board members:

I submit that this thread should be locked, even though I had plans to respond to the good faith questions of some seeking an opportunity for dialogue (as opposed to a platform to continue a trollish series of provocations). The OP has publicly slandered Orthodox Christian hierarchs on this thread multiple times -- actions unbecoming of an Orthodox Christian and, I believe, against the policies of this board.

Which Orthodox Christian hiearchs have I slandered?
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
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,182



« Reply #58 on: August 27, 2009, 08:07:30 AM »

The following is a serious question as I also have struggled with the question of how much we should emphasize the past. I am usually a glass half full type of person but you know the saying about repeating past mistakes..

Why do you think that the early history of the GOA is moot? Are you saying that the GOA of today is nothing like the GOA of the 1920s?

The King of Greece no longer governs.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1922 to 1975 is moot.

Archbishop Iakovos has reposed.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1975 to 1996 is moot.

Archbishop Spyridon is watching the waves in Portugal.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1996 to 1999 is moot.

The only significant item which has occurred during Archbishop Demetrios' tenure is the elevation of the 8 Dioceses to Metropolises in 2002.

I could care less who founded the first Orthodox Church in what is now the United States.  What is more important is that we have an Orthodox faith to worship and preach to others and not who Patriarch Meletios had lunch with in San Francisco.   Roll Eyes

So, are you intimating that the overall attitudes and policies of the GOA and the EP have changed so dramatically that it is futile to look back? I will give one example. Except for one prominent hierarch (+ Patriarch Athenagoras), the hierarch's of the EP (therefore the GOA) had continued the pattern of disdain toward Bulgarians, whether in the Exarchate in Istanbul, or in Macedonia (Northern Aegean and Pirin parts). I will not give examples on this forum but please PM me if you wish further details. This carried over to the United States, where it was common during public events (such as Clergy Association meetings) for the GOA priest to make a point of snubbing the Bulgarian priest who pastored the local Macedono-Bulgarian Church. Now, except the matter of the Macedonia (Republic and Church), the relations with Bulgarians are better, but Greece still refuses to acknowledge that Bulgarians are still living in its province of Macedonia--she calls them Slavophone Greeks. The theme here is the emphasis on Greekness or Hellenism, both religious and secular, at times approaching hubris. Has this changed so dramatically over the course of the past 80+ years?
« Last Edit: August 27, 2009, 08:08:35 AM by Second Chance » Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,411


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #59 on: August 27, 2009, 10:28:03 AM »

Rome's Ultramontanism creates no unity (just forced union) whether it be Old, New or for that matter the Third.

Nach Phanar gehen wir nicht.

They didn't like their Ultramontanism exposed either.

To the moderators & board members:

I submit that this thread should be locked, even though I had plans to respond to the good faith questions of some seeking an opportunity for dialogue (as opposed to a platform to continue a trollish series of provocations). The OP has publicly slandered Orthodox Christian hierarchs on this thread multiple times -- actions unbecoming of an Orthodox Christian and, I believe, against the policies of this board.


In the future, per forum rules, please address all moderation requests via the "Report to moderator" button or via PM to any of the mods.   

In response to your request, this thread will not be locked at this time.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2009, 10:30:42 AM by Schultz » Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #60 on: August 27, 2009, 10:28:42 AM »

If Fr. Andreas had successed in obtaining a Greek bishop, I would have thrown rose petals in his holiness' path as he walked off the ship

So, Fr. Michael Andreades left St. Spiridon for St Demetrios and had...no bishop, or are you just obsessed with where his bishop was seated?

Quote
From the Cathedral property manager,
Hegoumen Sebastian
A Most Humble Report
It is my duty to report to your Grace that the Greek Community in San Francisco has begun building a
new church in San Francisco on a plot of land purchased south of Market Street. They ordered a priest
by mail for themselves who arrived and was present today at Divine Liturgy at the Cathedral church (he
was standing in the altar). This priest (married) in the rank of sakellarios, Father Constantine . .
.[Tsapralis, or Chaprales] has his credentials from his Bishop, Ambrose of the Diocese of Salaris
[probably, Fr. Sebastian is mistaken, it could be "Salamis"] (in the Kingdom of Greece), in the
jurisdiction of the Holy Synod in Athens. He has a Holy Antimension that was given to him (he says) to
celebrate Liturgy in the United States of North America. He was here with two Orthodox Greeks
known to me.
The lowest servant of your Grace,
Hegoumen Sebastian
San Francisco, November 16, 1903.


May God grant them all success.
Dec. 12, 1903,
Bp. Tikhon18
http://www.transfigcathedral.org/faith/corner/Dabovich.pdf

Quote
Holy Trinity is the oldest Greek Orthodox church west of Chicago, the oldest church within the San Francisco Metropolis, and the eighth oldest church within the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese. Our history spans over 100 years and is linked to the history of our sister parish Annunciation Cathedral and the history of San Francisco. Divine Liturgy was first celebrated on Christmas Day, 1903. We were chartered in the state of California, March, 1904.
http://holytrinitysf.org/history_intro.html

But of course not the oldest Orthodox Church in San Francisco, although it predates the Greek Cathedral there. That Cathedral's origins are here:

Quote
Let us tell you a little bit about the history of the Annunciation Cathedral community. St. Sophia, precursor to the Annunciation Cathedral, came into being June 1921, when the parishioners of the Holy Trinity Church, sympathetic to Greek Prime Minister Eleftherios Venizelos, established a second Greek Orthodox community in San Francisco. Land was acquired at Hayes and Pierce streets, all of the lots facing Pierce street from Hayes to Fell streets, for the purpose of building a Cathedral and an adjoining school and orphanage. Ground was broken June 1921, with a ceremony where His Eminence Metropolitan Meletios Metaxakis, Archbishop of Athens, laid the cornerstone of the cathedral.
http://www.annunciation.org/history.html

They left out the "deposed" part of Arb. Meletios' title.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2009, 10:30:14 AM by ialmisry » 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
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #61 on: August 27, 2009, 10:47:53 AM »

^
I for one am interested in continuing this thread. I do not believe that criticism is slander; that is, unless pensateomnia can prove it. In fact, it may be slander to accuse someone else of slander without any effort to prove the allegation. It is obvious that some folks are not happy with the criticism, as strong as it is. What I do not know is whether the discomfort is caused by excess on the part of ialmisry or an excessively thin skin on the part of the discomforted. After all, this topic is in the Free-for-All section. Finally, I see "bad mouthing" of hierarchs all over the place. Doing so against a particular individual is not indicative of disrespect for the office.


I second that.

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #62 on: August 27, 2009, 11:04:09 AM »

They left out the "deposed" part of Arb. Meletios' title.

I just came across this.  It seems that Met. Meletios wasn't validly EP yet either in 1921:
ANGORA REJECTS MELETIOS.; Turkish Nationalist Government Declares Patriarch's Election Void.
December 24, 1921
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=980DE1D71539E133A25757C2A9649D946095D6CF

In other words, whether you accept Tome 1908 or the present day interpretation of canon 28 by the EP, Met. Meletios had no authority whatsoever to do anything here, being outside of his see in Cyprus (odd, given the circumstances of the promulgation of canon 8 of Ephesus).
« Last Edit: August 27, 2009, 11:06:55 AM by ialmisry » 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
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 9,910


ΠΑΝΑΓΙΑ ΣΟΥΜΕΛΑ


« Reply #63 on: August 27, 2009, 11:23:34 AM »

Quote
They left out the "deposed" part of Arb. Meletios' title.
You know, Isa, I am beginning to change my thinking on Patriarch Melotios. I, as most others here, have long conjured up images of Darth Vader at his mention in any topic. He's always a sure-fire epithet and end-of-argument reference. But for me - no more. About 5 years ago I had an email exchange with Fr John Behr of SVOTS on another point of Church history and this EP came up somehow. Upshot was, we agreed that it was time to re-examine this bishop in the light of his time period with the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire and its effect on the Church. He basically challenged me to do that study. However, I do not aspire to pseudo-history and thus far have avoided the task.
Early this morning in researching Fr. Michael Andreades I was surprised to read of St. Tikhon's heavy involvement in the Anglican-Orthodox Union. Point: One never reads a PEEP about this or any negatives concerning this venerated saint. But just bring up Pat. Meletios and a guaranteed Internet anathema has been made.

Despite garnering some EP-bashing fans here (none a surprise), I think you have a really serious problem with a jihad that has reached personally a destructive level. I am very fond of you (you know that). Not only are you a fellow Orthodox, but we both share the distasteful experience of spending some time in the pokey for contempt of court and I feel somewhat sympathetic to your anger in general as a consequence. But you take 'contempt' to another level. You need professional help. We've two priests here as administrators or ozgeorge if you prefer a clinical approach.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,235


WWW
« Reply #64 on: August 27, 2009, 01:47:53 PM »

Constantinople fell and 1453 and got its named changed to Istanbul in 1930.  Are you going to say New Rome is moot?

New Rome remains in the EP's title which His All Holiness has had for about 15+ Centuries.  The title is there; the imperial city is moot.  Turkish Postal Law only made the name change a formality - Istanbul is derived from the Greek for "in the city."

Preach what to others? Multiple phelytist, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Churches?

Is that for you to decide?  You can take it, ignore it or leave it.

Logged
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,235


WWW
« Reply #65 on: August 27, 2009, 02:05:40 PM »

The first Orthodox Church (I take it you mean in the lower 48, correct me if I am wrong) was founded around 1825.
You have just made our point.

What point?

You can go on the GOA site and look in vain to see any reference to non-Greek Orthodox. 

Here's an analogy.  If you put blinders on a horse, will the horse see anything else besides what is in front of him?  Same for these Hierarchs who came from Ottoman realms.  Don't think for one moment that these Hierarchs were ignorant of the presence of other ethnic Orthodox for your own historical sources confirm what I've said.

Since your own historical research established that Greek Catholics settled in Florida at the height of Ottoman rule over "the roman lands" for lack of a better term, what Patriarch Meletios did was rectify the errors of the past, now enshrined in the St. Photios Museum which is dedicated ... to Hellenism, and bring Byzantine/Hellenistic Greek Orthodoxy to the Americas.  Dropping the first three bolded terms, the GOA is still an Orthodox Christian faith which has been "stuck" in between USA, Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, EU, UN, Old Calendarist Churches from Greece, et al. from the day one of Her Establishment.  Despite these obstacles, which can be overlooked including moot histories and the like, like any other Orthodox Church, the GOA calls all Orthodox home.

As I posted up above, the full fledged mission of St. Herman to the full fledged hiearchy across the length and bredth of the continent is totally ignored, but much is made of a colony of Greeks who submitted to the Vatican and disappeared without a trace.

The lessons of the past were learned. Undecided
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #66 on: August 27, 2009, 02:09:55 PM »

Quote
They left out the "deposed" part of Arb. Meletios' title.
You know, Isa, I am beginning to change my thinking on Patriarch Melotios. I, as most others here, have long conjured up images of Darth Vader at his mention in any topic. He's always a sure-fire epithet and end-of-argument reference. But for me - no more. About 5 years ago I had an email exchange with Fr John Behr of SVOTS on another point of Church history and this EP came up somehow. Upshot was, we agreed that it was time to re-examine this bishop in the light of his time period with the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire and its effect on the Church. He basically challenged me to do that study. However, I do not aspire to pseudo-history and thus far have avoided the task.
Early this morning in researching Fr. Michael Andreades I was surprised to read of St. Tikhon's heavy involvement in the Anglican-Orthodox Union. Point: One never reads a PEEP about this or any negatives concerning this venerated saint. But just bring up Pat. Meletios and a guaranteed Internet anathema has been made.

Oh, its more than an internet anathema: When Venizelos fell from power in the general election, on Nov. 17, 1920 Meletios was informed that the deposition of his predecessor was unconstitutional and invalid. Meletios resigned amid letters of protest. On Dec. 3, 1920 the hierarchy of the CoG, for the first time in its history, convened and condemned the deposition of Meletios’ predecessor and other acts as “anticanonical, invalid and nonexistent.” Archb. Theocletus was restored.
http://books.google.com/books?id=KQEH4vvG0KwC&pg=PA360&dq=meletios+metaxakis#v=onepage&q=meletios%20metaxakis&f=false
(Eleftherios Venizelos: The Trials of Statesmanship By Paschalis Kitromilides)

Meletios' exarch, Bp. Alexander, was recalled to Greece by they Holy Synod of Greece. When he refused to return he was defrocked, and the Synod's Exarch, Met. Germanos arrived in America in June 1921 (Met. Meletios fled to SF). When Met. Meletios was elected EP, the Turkish government in concert with the Greek Government refused to reconize him, and induced the other Greek controlled Churches (Alexandria, Jeruasalem, Cyprus)  (see the above work) to refuse recognition. Only the disaster in Asia Minor, and the resulting return of the Venizelists to power in the Plastiras Revolution of Sept. 11, 1922 induced the Greek world to recognize Meletios as EP.  By that time, however, Turkey was regaining control of its sovereignty over Constantinople, and were again in a position to enforce holding of his election as void.
Quote
ANGORA REJECTS MELETIOS.; Turkish Nationalist Government Declares Patriarch's Election Void.
December 24, 1921
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=980DE1D71539E133A25757C2A9649D946095D6CF

The CoG in 1921 convened a synod to try Met. Meletios for usurping the throne of Athens, formenting schism in America and vacated his election as AoA as "illegal, null and void" and condemned him to confinement to a monastery in Zanta. In addition, it found, "on the basis of a message from a bishop in America...declared that the said Meletios had been guilty of schism and unlawful communion with heretics (meaning by this the American Episcopal Church)."
http://books.google.com/books?id=oslEAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA121&lpg=PA121&dq=Meletios+void&source=bl&ots=jVSBMgG0Nx&sig=Sj3fpctroev4D5RO_AmwOkMMKCc&hl=en&ei=daGWSpvuBpKEtgfkrsm-Dg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7#v=onepage&q=Meletios%20void&f=false
The Greeks in America By J. P. Xenides
http://books.google.com/books?id=VPwaAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA39&lpg=PA39&dq=Meletios+void&source=bl&ots=yrzKI1kG7u&sig=nxCU7Gzg5SOQsrtm7zjNW43pMpk&hl=en&ei=TsWWSpDnKZXwMdCusIkD&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#v=onepage&q=Meletios%20void&f=false
Our world, Volume 2 edited by Herbert Sherman Houston (1922)

(btw, the last remarks "his enlightened and progressive leadership will mean every great gain for the church, if he is allowed to continue to grace the Patriarchal Throne."  Take it for what it's worth).

The CoG was and is an autocephalous Church, and had and has the power to discipline its members. I do not know of an action by the CoG to reverse the invalidity of his tenure as Archbishop.  Do you?

Quote
Despite garnering some EP-bashing fans here (none a surprise), I think you have a really serious problem with a jihad that has reached personally a destructive level. I am very fond of you (you know that).

Yes, I do. And it is returned, despite a chasm in opinion.


Quote
Not only are you a fellow Orthodox, but we both share the distasteful experience of spending some time in the pokey for contempt of court and I feel somewhat sympathetic to your anger in general as a consequence.

No, my temperment hasn't changed.  Impassioned? Yes: better to end in a pile of ashes rather than a pile of dust.


Quote
But you take 'contempt' to another level. You need professional help. We've two priests here as administrators

No, thanks for your concern and nothing against Fr. Anastasios and Fr. Cleaveland (real name?) and other fine members of the clergy here (that includes you Fr. Ambrose), Fr. Patrick Reardon (not known for being a shrinking violet) my priest can handle me.



Quote
or ozgeorge if you prefer a clinical approach.

LOL.  Check the unmoderated posts on that idea.

Bp. John of Albania (his see escapes me) converted from a Muslim family during communism.  He got religious articles etc. from his job: he worked in a psych ward, where the Communist State sentenced dissedents (like those who continued to believe in God).

I've seen several psychiatrists and psychologists, just to make sure. The diagnosis has always been the same:under a lot of pressure, but fine.  Taking a strong position, especially on an vital issue, and defending it vigorously is not a disease under the DVM-IV (so I guess I'm with ozgeorge's friends the homosexual "normals").
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
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,235


WWW
« Reply #67 on: August 27, 2009, 02:28:40 PM »

The following is a serious question as I also have struggled with the question of how much we should emphasize the past. I am usually a glass half full type of person but you know the saying about repeating past mistakes..

Why do you think that the early history of the GOA is moot? Are you saying that the GOA of today is nothing like the GOA of the 1920s?

The King of Greece no longer governs.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1922 to 1975 is moot.

Archbishop Iakovos has reposed.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1975 to 1996 is moot.

Archbishop Spyridon is watching the waves in Portugal.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1996 to 1999 is moot.

The only significant item which has occurred during Archbishop Demetrios' tenure is the elevation of the 8 Dioceses to Metropolises in 2002.

I could care less who founded the first Orthodox Church in what is now the United States.  What is more important is that we have an Orthodox faith to worship and preach to others and not who Patriarch Meletios had lunch with in San Francisco.   Roll Eyes

So, are you intimating that the overall attitudes and policies of the GOA and the EP have changed so dramatically that it is futile to look back?

Hmmm, where have I mentioned futility?  Moot means, "a matter has been deprived of practical significance or rendered purely academic."  The history of the GOA from 1922 to 1999 has no practical significance and has become purely academic.

The attitudes and policies of the GOA and EP have no bearing on the praxis of the Orthodox Faith especially when they are opposed to each other.

I will give one example. Except for one prominent hierarch (+ Patriarch Athenagoras), the hierarch's of the EP (therefore the GOA) had continued the pattern of disdain toward Bulgarians, whether in the Exarchate in Istanbul, or in Macedonia (Northern Aegean and Pirin parts). I will not give examples on this forum but please PM me if you wish further details. This carried over to the United States, where it was common during public events (such as Clergy Association meetings) for the GOA priest to make a point of snubbing the Bulgarian priest who pastored the local Macedono-Bulgarian Church.


There is one of many examples of what I said before the quoted block.   Smiley

Now, except the matter of the Macedonia (Republic and Church), the relations with Bulgarians are better, but Greece still refuses to acknowledge that Bulgarians are still living in its province of Macedonia--she calls them Slavophone Greeks. The theme here is the emphasis on Greekness or Hellenism, both religious and secular, at times approaching hubris. Has this changed so dramatically over the course of the past 80+ years?

I have expounded on the bolded text in the quote below.

Hellenism paved the way for the spread of Orthodox Christianity throughout the Roman world via the Greek language.  That's the only credit Hellenism deserves.

Unless the USA is an extension of the Roman World, Hellenism should have ended in 1922.
Logged
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,182



« Reply #68 on: August 27, 2009, 04:07:44 PM »

The following is a serious question as I also have struggled with the question of how much we should emphasize the past. I am usually a glass half full type of person but you know the saying about repeating past mistakes..

Why do you think that the early history of the GOA is moot? Are you saying that the GOA of today is nothing like the GOA of the 1920s?

The King of Greece no longer governs.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1922 to 1975 is moot.

Archbishop Iakovos has reposed.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1975 to 1996 is moot.

Archbishop Spyridon is watching the waves in Portugal.  Therefore, the GOA history from 1996 to 1999 is moot.

The only significant item which has occurred during Archbishop Demetrios' tenure is the elevation of the 8 Dioceses to Metropolises in 2002.

I could care less who founded the first Orthodox Church in what is now the United States.  What is more important is that we have an Orthodox faith to worship and preach to others and not who Patriarch Meletios had lunch with in San Francisco.   Roll Eyes

So, are you intimating that the overall attitudes and policies of the GOA and the EP have changed so dramatically that it is futile to look back?

Hmmm, where have I mentioned futility?  Moot means, "a matter has been deprived of practical significance or rendered purely academic."  The history of the GOA from 1922 to 1999 has no practical significance and has become purely academic.

The attitudes and policies of the GOA and EP have no bearing on the praxis of the Orthodox Faith especially when they are opposed to each other.

I will give one example. Except for one prominent hierarch (+ Patriarch Athenagoras), the hierarch's of the EP (therefore the GOA) had continued the pattern of disdain toward Bulgarians, whether in the Exarchate in Istanbul, or in Macedonia (Northern Aegean and Pirin parts). I will not give examples on this forum but please PM me if you wish further details. This carried over to the United States, where it was common during public events (such as Clergy Association meetings) for the GOA priest to make a point of snubbing the Bulgarian priest who pastored the local Macedono-Bulgarian Church.


There is one of many examples of what I said before the quoted block.   Smiley

Now, except the matter of the Macedonia (Republic and Church), the relations with Bulgarians are better, but Greece still refuses to acknowledge that Bulgarians are still living in its province of Macedonia--she calls them Slavophone Greeks. The theme here is the emphasis on Greekness or Hellenism, both religious and secular, at times approaching hubris. Has this changed so dramatically over the course of the past 80+ years?

I have expounded on the bolded text in the quote below.

Hellenism paved the way for the spread of Orthodox Christianity throughout the Roman world via the Greek language.  That's the only credit Hellenism deserves.

Unless the USA is an extension of the Roman World, Hellenism should have ended in 1922.

Well, this is very encouraging: You and I seem to agree on the need to overcome the old Greek claims of superiority and dominance. Two final questions:

1. How prevalent do you think this view is in the EP and GOA and when do you think the vestiges of the old attitudes will disappear?

2. Given the historical fact that the see (EP) that led the condemnation of phyletism was also the most guilty of it (in the past), are you saying that Constantinople, and by extension the GOA, believe in their interpretation of Canon 28 solely because it is untainted with what I distilled to "Greek claims of superiority and dominance"?

Forgive me for sounding so skeptical. I hope that you will give allowances to somebody from a people and church has been so wronged in the past by Greeks in general, and the Greek Orthodox clergy in particular.
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #69 on: August 27, 2009, 04:55:50 PM »

Quote
They left out the "deposed" part of Arb. Meletios' title.
You know, Isa, I am beginning to change my thinking on Patriarch Melotios. I, as most others here, have long conjured up images of Darth Vader at his mention in any topic. He's always a sure-fire epithet and end-of-argument reference. But for me - no more. About 5 years ago I had an email exchange with Fr John Behr of SVOTS on another point of Church history and this EP came up somehow. Upshot was, we agreed that it was time to re-examine this bishop in the light of his time period with the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire and its effect on the Church. He basically challenged me to do that study. However, I do not aspire to pseudo-history and thus far have avoided the task.
Early this morning in researching Fr. Michael Andreades I was surprised to read of St. Tikhon's heavy involvement in the Anglican-Orthodox Union. Point: One never reads a PEEP about this or any negatives concerning this venerated saint. But just bring up Pat. Meletios and a guaranteed Internet anathema has been made.

Was St. Tikhon this involved?:
Quote
The Episcopal and Greek Churches

Report of an Unofficial Conference on Unity
Between Members of the Episcopal Church in America and
His Grace, Meletios Metaxakis, Metropolitan of Athens,
And His Advisers.

October 26, 1918.

New York: Department of Missions, 1920

Evdokim, the last Archbishop sent to America by the Holy Governing Synod of Russia in the year 1915, brought with him instructions that he should work for a closer understanding with the Episcopal Church in America. As a result, a series of conferences were held in the Spring of 1916. At these conferences the question of Anglican Orders, the Apostolical Canons and the Seventh Oecumenical Council were discussed. The Russians were willing to accept the conclusions of Professor Sokoloff, as set forth in his thesis for the degree of Doctor of Divinity, approved by the Holy Governing Synod of Russia. In this thesis he proved the historical continuity of Anglican Orders, and the intention to conform to the practice of the ancient Church. He expressed some suspicion concerning the belief of part of the Anglican Church in the nature of the sacraments, but maintained that this could not be of sufficient magnitude to prevent the free operation of the Holy Spirit. The Russian members of the conference, while accepting this conclusion, pointed out that further steps toward inter-communion could only be made by an oecumenical council. The following is quoted from the above-mentioned publication...

THE CONFERENCE

BY common agreement, representatives of the Greek Orthodox Church and delegates from the American Branch of the Anglican and Eastern Association and of the Christian Unity Foundation of the Episcopal Church, met in the Bible Room of the Library of the General Theological Seminary, Saturday, October 26, 1918, at ten o'clock. There were present as representing the Greek Orthodox Church: His Grace, the Most Reverend Meletios Metaxakis, Metropolitan of Greece; the Very Reverend Chrysostomos Papadopoulos, D.D., Professor of the University of Athens and Director of the Theological Seminary "Rizarios"; Hamilcar Alivisatos, D.D., Director of the Ecclesiastical Department of the Ministry of Religion and Education, Athens, and Mr. Tsolainos, who acted as interpreter....

"Will His Grace kindly state what is his view concerning the Validity of Anglican Orders?"

The Metropolitan: "I am greatly moved indeed, and it is with feelings of great emotion that I come to this conference around the table with such learned theologians of the Episcopal Church. Because it is the first time I have been given the opportunity to express, not only my personal desire, but the desire of my Church, that we may all be one. I understand that this conference is unofficial. Neither our Episcopal brethren, nor the Orthodox, officially represent their Churches. The fact, however, that we have come together in the spirit of prayer and love to discuss these questions, is a clear and eloquent proof that we are on the desired road to unity. I would wish, that in discussing these questions of ecclesiastical importance in the presence of such theological experts, that I were as well equipped for the undertaking as you are. Unfortunately, however, from the day that I graduated from the Theological Seminary at Jerusalem, I have been absorbed in the great question of the day, which has been the salvation of Christians from the sword of the invader of the Orient....

Metropolitan: "I consider this as of first importance. Do the canonically consecrated bishops of the Church represent an official body whose decision would be infallible if expressed in a general council? I understand that you accept this point."

Bishop Kinsman: "If a general council were called, who would be the official representatives? Would they be of the East only, without the West?"

Metropolitan: "Not without the West."

Further: "Would the members of the Episcopal Church accept the decisions of such council? They would be accepted by our Church."

Bishop Kinsman: "There is no question of our acceptance."
http://anglicanhistory.org/orthodoxy/newyork1918.html

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
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,235


WWW
« Reply #70 on: August 27, 2009, 07:43:58 PM »

Well, this is very encouraging: You and I seem to agree on the need to overcome the old Greek claims of superiority and dominance. Two final questions:

When I was in the 6th grade, I used to tell my teacher that I knew everything.  For a day or two, he permitted me to be smug.  On the third day, he asked me a question I didn't know the answer to.  There was my humility.  In the 7th Grade, I tried the same exact stunt with the same exact results.  Since then, I've worked hard to be humble....

1. How prevalent do you think this view is in the EP and GOA and when do you think the vestiges of the old attitudes will disappear?

Given the given vignette above, the EP and GOA would have to be severely humbled. 

2. Given the historical fact that the see (EP) that led the condemnation of phyletism was also the most guilty of it (in the past), are you saying that Constantinople, and by extension the GOA, believe in their interpretation of Canon 28 solely because it is untainted with what I distilled to "Greek claims of superiority and dominance"?

Canon 28 applies only if the Americas were unilaterally declared "barbarian lands."  The Byzantines were in decline for 4 Centuries before 1453 and they had nothing but the city walls of Constantinople at the end.

Forgive me for sounding so skeptical. I hope that you will give allowances to somebody from a people and church has been so wronged in the past by Greeks in general, and the Greek Orthodox clergy in particular.

Education is very precious.  Lack of education can be a severe detriment. 

God Bless You!
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,844


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #71 on: August 27, 2009, 11:20:18 PM »

No, thanks for your concern and nothing against Fr. Anastasios and Fr. Cleaveland (real name?) and other fine members of the clergy here (that includes you Fr. Ambrose), Fr. Patrick Reardon (not known for being a shrinking violet) my priest can handle me.

Thank you for your kind elevation, but I must point out that I'm only a dad, not a Father yet. Smiley  Methinks he was referring to Fr. Chris.

I am impressed that you spelled Cleveland the way Moses (its namesake) did, not the way that it is legally incorporated.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2009, 11:21:07 PM by cleveland » Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 9,910


ΠΑΝΑΓΙΑ ΣΟΥΜΕΛΑ


« Reply #72 on: August 27, 2009, 11:46:19 PM »

Quote
Was St. Tikhon this involved?:......

Probably not. That reads more like St. Raphael's involvement. But, you know Isa, it doesn't matter. The Anglicans of 80 years ago were a different church then and not the easy target for derision it is today.  This doesn't matter moreover except as further indication that your obsession is getting worse and a squandering of your God-given talents. A shame, or worse.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #73 on: August 28, 2009, 12:40:43 AM »

Quote
Was St. Tikhon this involved?:......

Probably not. That reads more like St. Raphael's involvement. But, you know Isa, it doesn't matter. The Anglicans of 80 years ago were a different church then and not the easy target for derision it is today.  This doesn't matter moreover except as further indication that your obsession is getting worse and a squandering of your God-given talents. A shame, or worse.


The Synod of the CoG 80 years ago were the same Church.  I've posted their verdict on the matter.

Btw, the Episcopal report (1913) I've posted above shows that St. Raphael has started to stop economia and applying strictness.
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
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 9,910


ΠΑΝΑΓΙΑ ΣΟΥΜΕΛΑ


« Reply #74 on: August 28, 2009, 09:38:55 AM »

Quote
Was St. Tikhon this involved?:......

Probably not. That reads more like St. Raphael's involvement. But, you know Isa, it doesn't matter. The Anglicans of 80 years ago were a different church then and not the easy target for derision it is today.  This doesn't matter moreover except as further indication that your obsession is getting worse and a squandering of your God-given talents. A shame, or worse.


The Synod of the CoG 80 years ago were the same Church.  I've posted their verdict on the matter.
Of course, I know this and...so what?
Quote
Btw, the Episcopal report (1913) I've posted above shows that St. Raphael has started to stop economia and applying strictness.

as Vice-president of the Anglican-Orthodox Union.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #75 on: August 28, 2009, 11:01:02 AM »

Quote
Was St. Tikhon this involved?:......

Probably not. That reads more like St. Raphael's involvement. But, you know Isa, it doesn't matter. The Anglicans of 80 years ago were a different church then and not the easy target for derision it is today.  This doesn't matter moreover except as further indication that your obsession is getting worse and a squandering of your God-given talents. A shame, or worse.


The Synod of the CoG 80 years ago were the same Church.  I've posted their verdict on the matter.
Of course, I know this and...so what?
Quote
Btw, the Episcopal report (1913) I've posted above shows that St. Raphael has started to stop economia and applying strictness.

as Vice-president of the Anglican-Orthodox Union.

Quote
As was their usual custom with all prelates and clergy of other bodies, the Episcopalian bishops urged Bishop Raphael to recognize the validity of their Orders and to permit his people to receive sacramental ministrations from the Episcopal Church. It was pointed out to Raphael that many of the isolated and widely scattered Orthodox Christians in North America had no easy access to Orthodox priests (and hence no easy access to the sacraments), but could be easily reached and ministered to by Episcopalian clergymen. They tried to persuade Raphael that they were true priests - Orthodox in their doctrine and belief, though separated in organization. Unconvinced by their arguments, Raphael cautioned the Orthodox Syrians not to be taken in by such arguments, and that no unity of faith or practice existed between the Orthodox Church and the Protestant Episcopal Churches.

On October 14, 1909, during the annual meeting of the American Branch of "The Anglican and Eastern Churches Union" held at Grace Episcopal Church in Newark, New Jersey, the Episcopalian bishops pressed Bishop Raphael to translate The Book of Common Prayer into Arabic and to encourage the Orthodox Syrian faithful who were without the ministrations of a local Orthodox priest to attend Episcopal churches. Bishop Raphael refused, for many theological reasons, saying: "The spiritual communion between the Orthodox Church and the Episcopal Church does not exist yet; all we have accomplished is friendly relations." He suggested that if the Episcopalians were truly interested in being of help to his flock, that they should keep Orthodox service books in their churches which could be used by the Orthodox Syrians when they might visit an Episcopalian church.

Raphael continued to be greatly concerned by the dilemma which faced members of his flock who lived in areas at great distances from Orthodox parishes. Their dying went to their graves without confession and communion and with no priest to conduct a funeral. Young couples needed their marriages blessed in a church and their children baptized. Therefore in June of 1910 Bishop Raphael took a bold pastoral step and granted permission for his people in these circumstances of emergency and urgency to receive ministrations from an Episcopalian clergyman, when no Orthodox priest was available, and only from an Episcopalian clergyman. He believed that the Episcopal Church considered the Orthodox Church to be the oldest Church and that only the Orthodox Church preserved the truth of the Christian Faith without changes. He also had great love for them and his personal desire to be tolerant toward them in issues and matters that did not contradict the canons of the Orthodox Church and its apostolic teaching and doctrine, hoping by this he would help to realize the unity between the two Churches.

Writing to the Episcopalian bishops, Raphael listed the pastoral rules which he stipulated were to be observed by any Episcopalian clergyman who might be called to minister to his people in such extreme circumstances, concerning marriages, divorces, baptisms (and not chrismation), confessions and communions for the dying, recommending that if an Orthodox Service Book can be produced, that the sacrament and rites be performed as set forth in that book.

Bishop Raphael's letter reached the mother Church of England. The secretary of "The Anglican and Eastern Churches Union," the Reverend Fynes Clinton, wrote to Raphael on August 6, 1910, commending his step and stating that "the House of Bishops, in their last meeting in Lambeth, England, decided that there is no canonical preventive which prevents the Anglican clergy from baptizing and chrismating the Orthodox children," and that such a step is "of greatest importance in the interest of approaching the day when we, the Anglicans, will be given the same right when we travel in the Orthodox countries, ... your step, which may be today difficult for some Orthodox bishops to undertake and for some to accept will positively effect the future of the relations between the two Churches. Therefore, I have sent your letter to be published in our Anglican newsletters, and to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and to other bishops of the Anglican Church."

Being uncomfortable with the response of the Anglicans, Bishop Raphael wrote Clinton, in August 19, 1910, an explanatory letter stating that "I trust that no doubtful interpretation has been given to that letter. I tried to be both very Christian and frank. In no way must it be interpreted as admitting anything which the Orthodox Church does not admit or in contradicting what it does not deny." And "I, as head of the Syrian Mission in North America, find my people scattered far and near. Of all Christian bodies they and I find the Protestant Episcopal Church most respectful and kind toward me, as their Bishop, and to them. That Church has extended a Christian hand. I have gone as far as I can conscientiously toward that Church as part of the great and beloved Anglican Communion. Whereinsoever my people have need of ministrations of necessity, there being no Orthodox priests, I have preferred the Priesthood of the Anglican Church to minister to them, rather than that of any other. No farther I can go. All other matters I must leave in the hands of God and the rightful authorities of the Holy Orthodox Church throughout the world. I will stand with them in their final decision".

Being a vice-president on the Eastern Orthodox Catholic side of the Anglican and Eastern Orthodox Churches Union and having issued on Protestant Episcopal solicitation such a permission to his people, Bishop Raphael set himself to observe most closely the resulting acts, following upon his permissory letter and to study most carefully the Protestant Episcopal Church and the Anglican teaching in the hope that the Anglicans might really be capable of actually becoming Orthodox. But the more closely he observed their general practices and more deeply he studied the teaching and the faith of the Protestant Episcopal Church the more painfully shocked, disappointed, and disillusioned Bishop Raphael became; furthermore, the very fact of his own position in the Anglican and Orthodox Union made the confusion and deception of Orthodox people the more certain and serious. The Episcopal Clergy informed the Orthodox people that Bishop Raphael recognized the Anglican Communion (Protestant Episcopal Church) as being united with the Holy Orthodox Church and their ministry, that is, Holy Orders, as valid; they offered their ministrations even when Orthodox clergy were residing in the same towns and parishes, as pastors, saying that there was no need of the Orthodox people seeking the ministrations of their own Orthodox priests, for their ministrations were all that were necessary. Bishop Raphael found that his association with Episcopalians was made a basis for most insidious, injurious, and unwarranted propaganda in favor of the Protestant Episcopal Church among his parishes and faithful.

Finally, after more than a year of constant and careful study and observation, Bishop Raphael felt that it was his duty to resign from the association of which he was a vice-president. In doing this he hoped that the end of his connection with the Union would end also the Protestant Episcopal interferences and uncalled for intrusions in the affairs and religious harmony of his people.

Therefore, while the American Branch of the "Union" was preparing for its fourth annual meeting to be held on November 10, 1911, Bishop Raphael decided to resign from the association. He wrote his letter of resignation on September 26, 1911, but he did not send it to the members of the Branch until the day before the meeting, on November 9, 1911. The letter was read at the meeting and the members of the Branch accepted the resignation of Bishop Raphael, assigning a special committee to prepare a letter responding to Bishop Raphael's letter of resignation. The committee wrote the response on December 21, 1911.

Bishop Raphael's letter of resignation from the American Branch was well-received by all Orthodox Christians in North America and in Russia, and he was commended by all who understood Anglicanism and the reason for its desire for dialogue with the Orthodox Church. These included such people as Archbishop Platon, Bishop Alexander and the Orthodox clergy in North America. Nicholas Uspensky, secretary of the Kiev Theological School, wrote Raphael on March 18, 1912, saying, "I read your letter of resignation in the Russian-American Orthodox Messenger. I admire your literary courage which every Orthodox bishop should follow." Sir Campbell, a doctor of Canon Law in England and a convert to Orthodoxy, wrote to Bishop Raphael on October 17, 1911, saying that he had read the letter of resignation in two Catholic magazines in England, adding that the Anglican/Orthodox movement was founded only because the Anglican Church needed to have its Orders recognized as valid by the Orthodox Church.

In the August, 1912 issue of Al-Kalimat (THE WORD) Bishop Raphael issued an official edict to his flock rescinding his earlier permission (1910) and forbidding them to accept the ministrations of Protestant Episcopal clergymen. Later that same year Bishop Raphael reinforced the above edict by sending a "Pastoral Letter" to all of his clergy and laity explaining in depth the whole matter.
 Word Magazine
Publication of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
April 1995
pp. 5-7
http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/ecumenical/issa_bishop_raphael_part3.htm
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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #76 on: August 28, 2009, 11:03:49 AM »

And now Met./Arb./EP/Pope Meletios:
Quote
Orthodox Statements on Anglican Orders
ALEXANDRIA, 1930
After the Lambeth Conference of 1930, the Synod of the Patriarchate of
Alexandria found itself able to join in the recognition of Anglican Orders.
The decision was announced in a letter from the Patriarch to the
Archbishop of Canterbury as follows:
To the Most Reverend Dr. Cosmo Lang, Lord Archbishop of Canterbury
and Primate of All England,
Greetings in the New Born Christ
The Feast of the Nativity, according to the Flesh, of the Redeemer of our
Souls being a most suitable occasion for us, as it were, to visit your
Beatitude, our friend, by means of a letter, we come to you hereby with a
heart that is filled alike with joy, that "unto us is born a Savior, which is
Christ the Lord," and with fervent prayers both for your health and for the
peace and stability of the holy Churches of God over which you preside.
At the same time, together with our greetings for the Feast, we send you as
our gift the news, which we are sure will be good news, to you, that
having derived the greatest gratification from the accounts which it has
received, both of the marks of honor which were rendered in London,
alike by your Grace and by the general body of your Church, to the office
which is ours, and also of the happy results which by the favouring breath
of the Holy Spirit have emerged from the contact of the Orthodox
Delegation with the Lambeth Conference, our Holy Synod of the
Metropolitans of the Apostolic and Patriarchal Throne of Alexandria has
proceeded to adopt a resolution recognizing the validity, as from the
Orthodox point of view, of the Anglican Ministry.
The text of that resolution is as follows: "The Holy Synod recognizes that
the declarations of the Orthodox, quoted in the Summary, were made
according to the spirit of Orthodox teaching. Inasmuch as the Lambeth
Conference approved the declarations of the Anglican Bishops as a
genuine account [1] of the teaching and practice of the Church of England
and the Churches in communion with it, it welcomes them as a notable
step towards the Union of the two Churches. And since in these
declarations, which were endorsed by the Lambeth Conference, complete
and satisfying assurance is found as to the Apostolic Succession, as to a
real reception of the Lord’s Body and blood, as to the Eucharist being
thusia hilasterios [2] (Sacrifice), and as to Ordination being a Mystery, the
Church of Alexandria withdraws its precautionary negative to the
acceptance of the validity of Anglican Ordinations, and, adhering to the
decision of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, of July 28, 1922, pronounces that
if priests, ordained by Anglican Bishops, accede to Orthodoxy, they
should not be re-ordained, as persons baptized by Anglicans are not
rebaptized."
We rejoice to see the middle wall of partition being thrown down more
and more, and we congratulate your Beatitude that under God you have
had the felicity of taking the initiative in furthering that work. May the
Lord Who was born in Bethlehem give to you and to us the happiness of
its completion.
In Alexandria upon the Feast of Christ’s Nativity, 1930
Your Beatitude’s Beloved Brother in Christ
Meletios of Alexandria
In reporting this decision to the Oecumenical Patriarch Meletios
emphasized that his Synod was acting on the basis that the statements
made at Lambeth had removed their former hesitation "as to the teaching
of the Anglican Church upon the mysteries and Apostolic succession," and
could be held to have met the desire expressed by the Romanian Patriarch
in replying to Constantinople in 1925, when he wrote,
But in order to make a definite pronouncement, we desire especially that
the Anglican Church herself should precise her doctrine concerning the
holy mysteries and particularly concerning orders: does she hold it to be a
mystery or not?
Since that requirement had now been satisfied, wrote Meletios,
It is proper that the validity of Anglican Orders should now be recognized
by all Orthodox Churches. For that which, according to the same letter,
was "one of the most serious obstacles in the way of the Union of the two
Churches," has been "removed."
Letter published in The Christian East, vol. XII, 1931, pp. 1-6, with notes
as above; the quotation in Note 2 is from No. 11 in the Resume of the
Lambeth Discussions, reprinted below, p. 22.
FOOTNOTES
[1] The words in the Resolution of the Lambeth Conference are "sufficient account."
[2] We transliterate the term, thusia hilasterios, and do not translate it by propitiatory
sacrifice, or expiatory sacrifice, because, as generally used, these terms present
conceptions which are not attached by the Orthodox to thusia hilasterios. The words used
by the Anglican Bishops in their discussions with the Orthodox Delegation, as recorded
in the Resume, and endorsed by the Lambeth Conference are:
"… that the Anglican Church teaches the doctrine of Eucharistic Sacrifice as explained in
the Answer of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to Pope Leo XIII, on Anglican
Ordinations: and also that in the offering of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, the Anglican
Church prays that ‘by the merits and death of Thy Son Jesus Christ, and through faith in
His Blood, we and all Thy whole Church may obtain remission of our sins, and all other
benefits of His Passion,’ as including the whole company of faithful people, living and
departed."
Lambeth Conference Report, 1930, p. 139.
http://orthodoxanglican.net/downloads/alexandria.pdf

Note: NO Anglican/Episcopalian priest has been received into Orthodoxy except by re-ordination, or rather, ordination.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2009, 11:05:05 AM by ialmisry » 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
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 9,910


ΠΑΝΑΓΙΑ ΣΟΥΜΕΛΑ


« Reply #77 on: August 28, 2009, 11:47:02 AM »

Thanks for starting my research for me...I'll ignore your conclusions, however.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #78 on: August 28, 2009, 12:14:18 PM »

Thanks for starting my research for me...I'll ignore your conclusions, however.

just as long as you don't ignore the facts.
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
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 9,910


ΠΑΝΑΓΙΑ ΣΟΥΜΕΛΑ


« Reply #79 on: August 28, 2009, 03:18:57 PM »

Thanks for starting my research for me...I'll ignore your conclusions, however.

just as long as you don't ignore the facts.
But...OF COURSE! Certainly not mis-interpreting any, bending excerpts to fit any pre-conceived notions or use them in cut n' paste artistry pretending to be history.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #80 on: August 28, 2009, 04:09:47 PM »

Thanks for starting my research for me...I'll ignore your conclusions, however.

just as long as you don't ignore the facts.
But...OF COURSE! Certainly not mis-interpreting any, bending excerpts to fit any pre-conceived notions or use them in cut n' paste artistry pretending to be history.

We eargerly await the fruit of your labor that we may be enlightened.
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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #81 on: August 28, 2009, 11:43:02 PM »

This photograph was found in the archives of the Library of Congress. As yet, there have been no official documents that have surfaced detailing what this 1921 meeting must have entailed. It might have been only a courtesy call, with a photo op at the end. Whatever it may have included, it’s at least clear who is regarded as the senior cleric among them (Meletios), despite his status at the time as having been deposed from the see of Athens.


Irony of ironies.  What strange bedfellows history makes.

This wasn't the first time Met. Meletios had a run in with the Russian canonical bishops of America:
Archb. Metaxakis' of Athens speech to the Holy Synod of Greece in 1920 concerning his visit to America:
Quote
The Patriarchal Tome of 1908 directed the immediate assignment of a Greek Bishop in America.   However I learned in America that for a decade, diplomatic pressures prevented the implementation of the Patriarchal Tome.  Upon my arrival, I waited for the Russian Bishop to come to me; however, he did not.  In order to give him the opportunity, I sent Archimandrites Chrysostom and Alexander to him. He, in turn, reciprocated by sending an Archimandrite to visit me.  I then realized that he expected me to visit him, thus recognizing him as the canonical Bishop in America, under whose jurisdiction the Greek Church ought to belong.  I held a press conference with the Greek and English language newspapers, in which I quoted Orthodox teaching relative to lands outside the existing Patriarchal boundaries that canon law places them under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Thus, the Church in America is under the canonical authority of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, and only by its authority can certain actions be taken.    Our presence in America is by virtue of the permission granted by the Ecumenical Patriarchate in the Tome of 1908, rendering us the only canonical jurisdiction[emph. in the original] No other such permission has been granted.  We are aware only that the Patriarchate of Antioch requested the permission of the Patriarchate to send the Bishop of Seleucia to America for the needs of the Syrian Orthodox.  Prior to this, Efthymios, who was ordained by the Russians for the Syrians, but never recognized by the Patriarchate of Antioch, was abandoned by the Russians.  This event reinforced our position regarding canonicity in America.  Throughout our presence in America, the Russian Bishop attempted indirectly to impose this position of hegemony, yet never openly or officially
http://books.google.com/books?id=Uh4VnseTNZkC&pg=PA137&dq=Galveston+Orthodox&lr=#PPA137,M1

Change Russian to OCA, and see how little has changed.  The GOARCH was set up, not in ignorance of the Russian Archdiocese, but in defiance of it.

As to this picture, I wonder if this has something to do with it:


http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9F07EFDA113EEE3ABC4152DFB467838A639EDE
Quote
GREEK PARTIARCH HERE IS HONORED BY 4,000; The Rev. Meletios Metaxakis Presides at First Service SinceArrival 8 Months Ago.
December 19, 1921

More than 4,000 persons gathered yesterday at Holy Trinity Greek Cathedral, East Seventy-second Street, near Lexington Avenue, to greet the Most Rev. Meletios Metaxakis, who will depart for Constantinople this week to be enthroned as Economical Patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

It was the first public appearance since his election here of Meletios, although he has been in New York eight months...

Actually no, he had been in America eight months. When the canonical authority of the CoG Met. Germanos arrived in NYC in June of that year, the deposed Met. Meletios ran off to SF, where he divided the Greek community there.  The article refers to these problems:

Quote
...having been exiled as Metropolitan of Athens when King Constantine returned to the throne and Eleutherios Venizelos, friend of Meletios, resigned as premier and left Greece....

The CoG had defrocked Meletios' exarch, Bishop Alexander, when he refused the Holy Synod's recall to Greece.  But here "...With Meletios was the Right Rev. Alexander, Bishop for the Greeks in North and South America...."  The EP elect's problems were not over, though:

Quote
...Meletios preached in Greek.  He said the veto placed by the Sublime Porte upon his election was invalid.  He asserted the Treaty of Sevres specifically provided for the full religious autonomy of minorities within the Ottoman Empire, and that the former right of the Sublime Porte to overrule such an election had vanished with the signing of that treaty.

Alas, we are all well aware how much the right of the Turk to overrule such an election, nearly a century later, has not "vanished."  The problem was the Treaty of Sevres was void ab initio as the Turks were concerned, as no one impowered to sign its terms did so: The Ottomans were not a signatory to Versailles.  Their Constitution stated:
Quote
Art. 1. The Ottoman Empire comprises present territory and possessions, and semi-dependent provinces. It forms an indivisible whole, from which no portion can be detached under any pretext whatever.
Art. 2. Istanbul is the capital of the Ottoman Empire. This city possesses no provilege or immunity peculiar to itself over the other towns of the empire.
Art 3: "The Imperial Ottoman sovereignty, which carries with it the Supreme Caliphate of Islam, falls to the eldest Prince of the House of Osman, according to the rule established ab antiquo. On his accession the Sultan shall swear before Parliament, or if Parliament is not sitting, at its first meeting, to respect the visions of the Şeriat (canon law) and the Constitution, and to be loyal to the country and the nation. [according to the 1909 revision, so too the following article].
Art. 7: Among the sacred prerogatives of the Sultan are the following:...the granting of high public offices and titles, according to the law ad hoc; the conferring of orders; the selection and appointment of the Grand Vizier and the Şeyhülislam; the confirmation in their offices of the members of the Cabinet formed and proposed by the Grand Vizier, and, if need arise, the dismissal and replacement of Ministers according to established practice; the approval of putting into force of general laws; the drawing up of regulations concerning the workings of Government departments and the method of administering the laws; the initiative in all kinds of legislation; the maintenance and execution of the canon and civil laws; the appointment of persons to the privileged provinces according to the terms of their privileges; the command of the military and naval forces; the declaration of war and the making of peace;...and the conclusion of  Treaties in general. Only, the consent of Parliament is required for the conclusion of Treaties which concern peace, commerce, the abandonment or annexation of territory, or the fundamental or personal rights of Ottoman subjects, or which involve expenditure on the part of the State. In case of a change of Cabinet while Parliament is not sitting, the responsibility arising out of the change rests upon the new Cabinet.
Art. 8. All subjects of the empire are called Ottomans, without distinction whatever faith they profess; the status of an Ottoman is acquired and lost according to conditions specified by law.
Art. 9. Every Ottoman enjoys personal liberty on condition of non interfering with the liberty of others.
Art. 11. Islam is the state religion. But, while maintainig this principle, the state will protect the free exercise of faiths professed in the Empire, and uphold the religious privileges granted to various bodies, on condition of public order and morality not being interfered with.
Art. 18. Eligibility to public office is conditional on a knowledge of Turkish, which is the official language of the State.
Art. 27. His Majesty may appoint as Grand Vizier and Şeyhü’l-İslam whomsoever he confides in, and thinks right to nominate to those posts.
The other ministers are appointed by Imperial Decree (İrade)
Art. 28. The Council of Ministers meets under the presidency of the Grand Vizier.
All weighty state affairs, whether domestic or foreign, come within the competency of the Council of Ministers. Those of their measures, which must be submitted for the approval of His Majesty, are made law by Imperial Decree
Art. 29. Each head of department, within the limits of his powers, carries out the measures, which appertain to his Department. In matters without this limit he must have recourse to the Grand Vizier.
The Grand Vizier takes action on the measures presented to him by the heads of departments, either by referring them, if need be, to the Cabinet, and then presenting them for the Imperial sanction; or, on the other hand, by deciding on them himself, and referring them to the decision of His Majesty the Sultan.
Art. 30. Ministers shall be responsible to the Chamber of Deputies collectively for the general policy of the Government and personally for the affairs of their respective departments. Decisions which need the Imperial sanction shall only become valid if signed by the Grand Vizier and the Minister concerned, who thus accept responsibility, and countersigned by the Sultan. Decisions arrived at by the Council of Ministers shall bear the signatures of all the Ministers, and in cases where the Imperial assent is necessary, these signatures shall be headed by that of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan.
Art. 36. In case of urgent necessity, if the General Assembly be not in session, the Minister may adopt measures to protect the State against danger or to preserve the public safety.
These measures, sanctioned by an Imperial Irade, have provisionally the force of law if they be not contrary to the Constitution. They must be submitted to the General Assembly immediately upon its meeting.
Art. 39. All appointments to various public functions shall be made in conformity with the regulations which shall determine the conditions of merit and capacity required for admission to employment under the state. No functionary appointed under these conditions can be dismissed or transferred; unless it can be proved that his conduct legally justified such removal; unless he shall have resigned, or unless his retirement is considered indispensable by the government.
Art. 41. Both houses of Parliament shall meet without being summoned on the 1st (14th) November of every year.
Art 46. All the members of the General Assembly shall take an oath of fidelity to His Majesty the Sultan and to the country, shall bind themselves to observe the Constitution, to perform the duties entrusted to them, and to abstain from all acts opposed to those duties.
Art. 47. Members of the General Assembly are free to express their opinions and to vote as they like.
They cannot be bound by conditions or promises, nor influenced by threats. They cannot be prosecuted for opinions or votes delivered in the course of debate, unless they have contravened the Standing Orders of the Chamber, when they are amenable to the provisions of the regulations in force.
Art. 48. Any member of the General Assembly who, by an absolute majority of two-thirds of the Chamber of which he is a member, is accused of treason, or attempting to violate the Constitution, or of peculation (“concussion”), or has been condemned to imprisonment or exile, loses his status as Senator or Deputy.
He will be tried and sentence passed by the competent tribunal.
Art. 56. With the exception of the Ministers, of their deputies, and the functionaries summoned by a special call, no one can be introduced in either Chamber, nor allowed to make any communication whatever, whether he present himself in his own name or as the representative of a body.
Art. 58. The votes are given at the call of the House (“par appel nominal”), by show of hands or by ballot. The vote by ballot is subject to the decision of a majority of the members present.
Art. 59. The maintenance of order in each Chamber is entrusted to its President.
Art. 60. The President and members of the Senate are nominated directly by His Majesty the Sultan. The number of senators cannot exceed a third of the members of the Chamber of Deputies.
Art. 61. To be nominated a senator it is necessary to have shown by one’s acts that one is worthy of public confidence, or to have rendered signal services to the State, and to be, at least, forty years of age.
Art. 62. The senators are nominated for life.
The rank of senator may be conferred on persons “en disponibilité,” having exercised the functions of Minister, Governor-General (vali), Commandant of Corps d’Armée, Judge, Ambassador or Minister Plenipotentiary, Patriarch, Grand Rabbi, General of Division of armies by land or sea (“terre et de mer”), an generally on persons combining the requisite conditions.
Members of the Senate, called at their request to other functions, lose the position as senator.
Art. 64. The Senate examines the Bills or Budget transmitted to it by the Chamber of Deputies. If in the course of the examination of a Bill the Senate finds a provision contrary to the sovereign rights of the Sultan, to liberty, the Constitution, the territorial integrity of the Empire, the internal security of the country, to the interests of the defence of the country, or to morality, it rejects it definitely by a vote, assigning its reasons; or it sends it back, accompanied by its observations, to the Chamber of Deputies, demanding that it should be amended or modified in the sense of those observations.
Bills adopted by the Senate are invested with its approval, and are transmitted to the Grand Vizier.
The Senate examines the petitions presented to it; transmits to the Grand Vizier such as it thinks deserving of reference, accompanying them with its observations.
Art. 65. The number of deputies is fixed at one deputy for every 50.000 males belonging to the Ottoman nationality.
Art. 66. The election is held by secret ballot. The mode of election will be determined by a special law.
Art. 67. The mission of deputy is incompatible with public functions, except those of ministers. Any other public functionary elected deputy is free to accept or refuse; but, in case of acceptance, he must resign his functions.
Art. 68. The following are ineligible as deputies:
1. Those who do not belong to the Ottoman nationality; 2. Those who, by virtue of the special regulation in force, enjoy immunities attached to the foreign service to which they belong; 3. Those not understanding Turkish...7. Those notoriously in disrepute for their conduct; 8. Persons visited with judicial interdiction, as long as that interdiction is not raised; 9. Those not enjoying their civil rights; 10. Those who lay claim to a foreign nationality. After the expiration of the first period of four years, one of the conditions of eligibility will be ability to read Turkish and, as far as possible, to write in that language.
Art. 69. General elections of deputies are held every four years. The commission of every deputy lasts only four years, but he is re-eligible.
Art. 70. The general elections commence at the latest four months before the 1st of November, which is the date fixed for the meeting of the Chamber.
Art. 71. Every member of the Chamber of deputies represents the whole body of Ottomans, and not exclusively the circumscription which has elected him.
Art. 72. The electors are bound to choose their deputies from among the inhabitants of the province to which they belong.
Art. 73. In case of the dissolution of the Chamber by Imperial İrade, the general elections are to commence in such times as that the Chamber may meet again at the latest within six months of the date of the dissolution.
Art. 74. In the case of death, judicial interdiction, prolonged absence, loss of the office of  Deputy resulting from a condemnation or from the acceptance of public functions, a substitute shall be elected in conformity with the prescriptions of the electoral law, and in such time as that the new deputy will be able to exercise his mandate at the latest in the following session.
Art. 75. The mandate of deputies elected to vacant places only lasts till the following election.
Art. 78. The sittings of the Chamber of deputies are public.
At the same time the Chamber may form itself into secret committee if the proposition is made by the ministers, or by the president, or by fifteen members, and that proposition is voted in secret committee.
Art. 79. No deputy can, during the session, be arrested or prosecuted, except in case of flagrant delinquency, unless a majority of the Chamber grant an authorization to prosecute.
Art. 80. The Chamber of deputies discusses the Bills submitted to it.
It adopts, amends, or rejects the provisions affecting finance or the Constitution.
Art. 87. Affairs touching the Şeriat are tried by the tribunals of the Şeriat. The judgment of civil affairs appertains to the civil tribunals.
Art. 88. The various categories of tribunals, their competency, functions, and the emoluments of the judges are settled by law.
Art. 92. The High Court is formed of thirty members, of whom ten are Senators, ten Councilors of State, and ten chosen among the presidents and members of the Court of Cassation and Court of Appeal.
All the members are nominated by lot.
The High Court is convoked, when necessary, by Imperial İrade, and assembles in the Senate building.
Its functions consist in trying the ministers, the president, and the members of the Court of Cassation, and all other persons accused of treason or attempts against the safety of the State.
Art. 93. The High Court is composed of two chambers; the Chamber of Accusation and the Chamber of Judgment.
The former is formed of nine members, nominated by lot among the members of the High Court, three of them being senators, three councilors of State, and three members of the Court of Cassation or Court of Appeal.
Art. 94. The decision of sending before the Chamber of Judgement is pronounced by the Chamber of Accusation by a majority of two-thirds of its members. The members belonging of the Chamber of Accusation cannot take part in the deliberations of the Chamber of Judgment.
Art. 95. The Chamber of Judgement is formed of twenty-one members, seven of whom are senators, seven members state councilors, and seven members of the Court of Cassation or Court of Appeal. It judges the cases that are sent to it by the Chamber of accusation by a majority of two-thirds of its members, and conformably to the laws in operation.
Its decisions are not susceptible either of appeal or of recourse to Cassation.
Art. 111. There shall be in every canton a Council appertaining to each of the different confessions. This Council will be charged with controlling:
1.    The administration of the revenues of the real property of pious foundations (vakıf), the special destination of which is fixed by the express provisions of the founders or by custom.
2.    The employment of funds or properties assigned by testamentary provision to acts or charity or beneficence.
3.    The administration of funds for orphans, in conformity with the special regulation governing the matter.
Each Council shall be composed of members elected by the community it represents, conformably to special rules to be established. These Councils will be subordinated to the local authorities and the Councils General of provinces.
Art. 112. Municipal business will be administered in Istanbul and in the provinces by elected municipal councils.
The organization of the municipal councils, their functions, and the mode of election of their members, will be determined by a special law.
Art. 113. In the case of the perpetration of acts, or the appearance of indications of a nature to presage disturbance at any point on the territory of the Empire, the Imperial Government has the right to proclaim a state of siege there.
The state of siege consists in the temporary suspension of the civil laws.
The mode of administration of localities under a state of siege will be regulated by a special law.
His Majesty the Sultan has the exclusive right of expelling from the territory of the Empire those who, in consequence of trustworthy information obtained by the police, are recognized as dangerous to the safety of the State.
Art. 115. No provision of the constitution can, under any pretext whatsoever, be suspended or neglected.

Art. 116. In case of duly proved necessity, the Constitution may be modified in some of its provisions. This modification is subordinated to the following conditions:
Every proposal of modification, whether presented by the Minister or by either of the two Chambers, must be, in the first instance, submitted to the deliberations of the Chamber of Deputies.
If the proposition is approved by two-thirds of the members of the Chamber it shall be forwarded to the Senate.
In case the Senate also adopts the proposed modification by a two-thirds majority, it shall be submitted for the sanction of His majesty the Sultan.
If it is sanctioned by Imperial İrade, it shall have force of law.
Articles of the Constitution, which it is proposed to modify, remain in force, until the modification, after having been voted by the Chambers, shall have been sanctioned by Imperial Irade.
Art. 117. The Court of Cassation will interpret the civil and penal laws; the Council of State administrative laws; and the Senate the articles of the Constitution.
Art. 118. All the provisions of the laws, regulations, usages, and customs now in force shall continue to be applied, so long as they shall not have been modified or abrogated by other laws and regulations
Art. 120. Ottomans enjoy the right of assembly, on the condition that they obey the law on the subject.  The societies are forbidden which aim at injuring the territorial integrity of the Ottoman Empire, changing the form of the institution or of the government, acting contrary to the provisions of the Constitution, or bringing about a separation between the various Ottoman elements, or which are contrary to public morals.  The formation of secret societies in general is also forbidden.
http://www.anayasa.gen.tr/1876constitution.htm

I won't go into here (unless necessary) how in view of the above, the Treaty of Sevres could not be signed by a competent legal authority on the Ottoman side: its terms would make any Ottoman who signed it guilty of treason etc, and the Ottoman government was not legally capable to fulfill its terms. The British abolished the Ottoman parliament, literally at gun point (rule of law, enlightment popular sovereignty, etc.), and the allies arrested members, exiled members to Malta that they didn't kill, and forced the Sultan to abolish it, although under the Ottoman constitution neither he nor they had any authority to do any of the above.  So no parliament to give consent, as legally required.  Instead over a hundred deputies fled to Ankara, (the articles as to numbers etc. so impowered them legally), where they constituted themselves into the new Grand National Assembly, which functioned as parliament and constitutional convention.  They refused to acknowledge the Treaty of Sevres (which was never ratified by the Ottomans), arguing that the Sultan (whose office they abolished) had no constitutional nor sovereign authority, and, by accepting the Treaty of Lausanne, France and Great Britain conceded the argument.

The site with the text of the Treaty of Sevres says it all:
Quote
The Peace Treaty of Sèvres
10 August, 1920
(never adopted, superseded by the Treaty of Lausanne).

Met. Meletios seemed to have depended on these clauses:
Quote
ARTICLE 36.
Subject to the provisions of the present Treaty, the High Contracting Parties agree that the rights and title of the Turkish Government over Constantinople shall not be affected, and that the said Government and His Majesty the Sultan shall be entitled to reside there and to maintain there the capital of the Turkish State.
Nevertheless, in the event of Turkey failing to observe faithfully the provisions of the present Treaty, or of any treaties or conventions supplementary thereto, particularly as regards the protection of the rights of racial, religious or linguistic minorities, the Allied Powers expressly reserve the right to modify the above provisions, and Turkey hereby agrees to accept any dispositions which may be taken in this connection.
ARTICLE 49.
In the portion of the zone of the Straits, including the islands of the Sea of Marmora, which remains Turkish, and pending the coming into force of the reform of the Turkish judicial system provided for in Article I36, all infringements of the regulations and by-laws made by the Commission, committed by nationals of capitulatory Powers, shall be dealt with by the Consular Courts of the said Powers. The Allied Powers agree to make such infringements justiciable before their Consular Courts or authorities. Infringements committed by Turkish nationals or nationals of non-capitulatory Powers shall be dealt with by the competent Turkish judicial authorities.
In the portion of the said zone placed under Greek sovereignty such infringements will be dealt with by the competent Greek judicial authorities.
ARTICLE 140.
Turkey undertakes that the stipulations contained in Articles 141, I45 and I47 shall be recognised as fundamental laws, and that no civil or military law or regulation, no Imperial Iradeh nor official action shall conflict or interfere with these stipulations, nor shall any law, regulation, Imperial Iradeh nor official action prevail over them.
ARTICLE 141.
Turkey undertakes to assure full and complete protection of life and liberty to all inhabitants of Turkey without distinction of birth, nationality, language, race or religion.
All inhabitants of Turkey shall be entitled to the free exercise, whether public or private, of any creed, religion or belief.
The penalties for any interference with the free exercise of the right referred to in the preceding paragraph shall be the same whatever may be the creed concerned.
ARTICLE 145.
All Turkish nationals shall be equal before the law and shall enjoy the same civil and political rights without distinction as to race, language or religion.
Difference of religion, creed or confession shall not prejudice any Turkish national in matters relating to the enjoyment of civil or political rights, as for instance admission to public employments, functions and honours, or the exercise of professions and industries.
Within a period of two years from the coming into force of the present Treaty the Turkish Government will submit to the Allied Powers a scheme for the organisation of an electoral system based on the principle of proportional representation of racial minorities.
No restriction shall be imposed on the free use by any Turkish national of any language in private intercourse, in commerce, religion, in the press or in publications of any kind, or at public meetings. Adequate facilities shall be given to Turkish nationals of non-Turkish speech for the use of their language, either orally or in writing, before the courts.
ARTICLE 147.
Turkish nationals who belong to racial, religious or linguistic minorities shall enjoy the ame treatment and security in law and in fact as other Turkish nationals. In particular they shall have an equal right to establish, manage and control at their own expense, and independently of and without interference by the Turkish authorities, any charitable, religious and social institutions, schools for primary, secondary and higher instruction and other educational establishments, with the right to use their own language and to exercise their own religion freely therein.
ARTICLE 149.
The Turkish Government undertakes to recognise and respect the ecclesiastical and scholastic autonomy of all racial minorities in Turkey. For this purpose, and subject to any provisions to the contrary in the present Treaty, the Turkish Government confirms and will uphold in their entirety the prerogatives and immunities of an ecclesiastical, scholastic or judicial nature granted by the Sultans to non-Moslem races in virtue of special orders or imperial decrees (firmans, hattis, berats, etc.) as well as by ministerial orders or orders of the Grand Vizier.
All laws, decrees, regulations and circulars issued by the Turkish Government and containing abrogations, restrictions or amendments of such prerogatives and immunities shall be considered to such extent null and void.
Any modification of the Turkish judical system which may be introduced in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty shall be held to override this Article, in so far as such modification may affect individuals belonging to racial minorities.
ARTICLE 150.
In towns and districts where there is resident a considerable proportion of Turkish nationals of the Christian or Jewish religions the Turkish Government undertakes that such Turkish nationals shall not be compelled to perform any act which constitutes a violation of their faith or religious observances, and shall not be placed under any disability by reason of their refusal to attend courts of law or to perform any legal business on their weekly day of rest. This provision, however, shall not exempt such Turkish nationals (Christians or Jews) from such obligations as shall be imposed upon all other Turkish nationals for the preservation of public order.
ARTICLE 151.
The Principal Allied Powers, in consultation with the Council of the League of Nations, will decide what measures are necessary to guarantee the execution of the provisions of this Part. The Turkish Government hereby accepts all decisions which may be taken on this subject.
http://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/Peace_Treaty_of_S%C3%A8vres

His problem was that he was not a Turkish national, so its guarentees did not apply to him, Turkey's sovereignty over Constantinople and to issue irade and berat (the credentialing that the EP needed to take office) undisturbed.  As we saw, this wasn't his only problem:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,22981.msg351897/topicseen.html#msg351897
as the NY Times article continues:
Quote
Meletios expressed regret at the opposition of the Greek Government, along with the Turkish power, to his election.  The prelate said he hoped the Greek Government would not insist upon interferring in this matter, in which the Greek clergy had full autonomy.

But insist they did, and the Greek controlled Churches-Alexandria, Jerusalem, Cyprus and the CoG-i.e. all the Churches that oppose OCA autocephaly, refused to recognize Meletios as EP.

Quote
HOLY SYNOD ASKS MELETIOS TO RESIGN; Cables Him Recent Election as Constantinople Patriarch Is Illegal. HE DISCREDITS THE REPORT Says He Has Raceived No Such Cable and Will Go to Constantinople to Investigate.
December 19, 1921
ATHENS, Dec. 18.--The Holy Synod in Constantinople, according to a dispatch received here, has telegraphed Archbishop Meletios Metaxakis, who is now in New York and who recently was elected Patriarch of the Greek Orthodox Church in Constantinople, as follows: Your recent election to the Patriarchate was held contrary to the canons of the Church, and therefore is illegal.  A majority of the Synod felt compelled to absent themselves from the electoral assembly and entrusted the question to the superior body administering the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which agreed to meet again to consider what future action was necessary.  "We fell confident that the greatness of your love for the Church and nation will guide your attitude in this matter."
A dispatch from Constantinople last Wednesday said the Sublime Porte had notified the Allies that Archbishop Metaxakis was ineligible for the office of Patriarch according to the Ottoman Constitution, and that the Turkish Government therefore refused to recognize the legality of his election....
Meletios explained that two bodies had to act in the election of an Ecumenical Patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox Church.  Both hold their meetings at Constantinople.  The first is known as the General Assembly and consists of 100 laymen and the all the Archbishops at the time in Constantinople.  The second is the Holy Synod, which consists of twelve Archbishops. The first body made three nominations, and Meletios was one.  Then the Holy Synod met and considered the three, electing Meletios.
At the election of a patriarch all the Archbishops present in Constantinople have the right to vote in the Holy Synod.  Twenty-five Archbishops were present.  Seven have resigned, eighteen cast a ballot.  Of these eighteen, sixteen voted for Meletios. This is information came to him through private dispatches.
The cable message which Meletios received under date of Dec. 16 from Constantinople was addressed to "His Holiness, Meletios," and was as follows: "By unanimous vote of clergymen and laymen you are elected to the apostolic ecumenical throne....This was signed "The Holy Synod and the Mixed Council...."
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9E07EFDA113EEE3ABC4152DFB467838A639EDE
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9E07EFDA113EEE3ABC4152DFB467838A639EDE
(since he admitted himself that 2 did not vote for him, how was it unanimous? Roll Eyes)

Ah, but ironies of ironies, someone did recognize Meletios as EP:
Quote
The Patriarch elect, who has been recognized by both the Russian and Episcopal Churches here, will sail for Constantinople by way of Liverpool.  This morning at 10 o'clock there will be a service for him in St. Nicholas Russian Cathedral, Ninety-Seventh Street, near Fifth Avenue, which will be attended by two Russian archbishops, three Episcopal bishops and a Russian, Serbian and Syrian bishop.  Wednesday afternoon at 4 o'clock there will be a service in the Cathedral of St. John the Divine, on invitation of Bishop Manning.

So Meletios was recognized as EP by those who he claimed had no jurisdiction.




« Last Edit: August 29, 2009, 12:12:38 AM by ialmisry » 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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #82 on: August 29, 2009, 06:13:15 PM »

Quote
ELECTION OF MELETIOS CONTESTED IN GREECE; Congress of Ecumenic Patriarchates Declares It to Have Been Illegal.
January 1, 1922,

WASHINGTON, Dec. 31.-The Greek Legation today received an official telegram from Athens stating that the Congress of High Clergy of the Ecumenical Patriarchates which met at Saloniki yesterday declared that the election of Meletios Metaxakis as Patriarch of the Greek Church was anti-canonical, imposed by force, and that it should not have taken place.

Meletios Metaxakis was received last week at the White House by President Harding.  The cablegram received at the Greek Legation today, dated yesterday, follows:

"The Congress of High Clergy of the Ecumenical Patriarchates convoked at Saloniki was opened today.  Metropolitan Cyzique, one of the principal members of the Ecumenical Patriarchate Synod, was elected President.  The Assembled prelates set forth first, and with unanimit, the legality of the reunion.  The congress is to declare that the election of Meletios Metaxakis is anti-canonical, imposed by force, and should be considered as not having taken place.

"The disturbances of Metaxakis in America, who says he is Patriarch, leading into error American opinion, have caused astonishment here, especially as the majority of the Holy Synod of Constantinople has already informed him by telegraph of the illegality of his election.

"The orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria, with his clergy, sent to the legitimate majority of the Synod fo Constantinople the following telegram disavowing Metaxakis' election:

"We were grieved to learn by your telegram the circumstances of the Patriarchal election at Constantinople, and the violations of the canons, imploring divine assistance in view of reestablishing peace in the Patriarchal Church in Alexandria and assuring peace in the Apostolic Church at Constantinople, which is in conformity with the holy canons mentioned in your telegram.  The Church of Alexandria will consecrate all its efforts for the triumph of the right.'

"According to information received up to the present, the orthodox Patriarchs of Antioch and Jerusalem will not recognize Metaxakis' election.

Met./Arb./EP/Pope Meletios was trained in Jerusalem, ordained in Antioch, elevated in Greece.  Here, none of those who knew him best would have him. police

Quote
"Greek public opinion is badly impressed in learning of the honors paid to Metaxakis in America, and which he himself provokes by fooling the clery and taking advantage of the respect and sympathy toward the orthodox Church.  The lawsuit against Metaxakis by the Holy Synod of the Greek Church for illegally occupying the seat of Athens and anti-canonical disturbances in America is fixed for Jan. 31.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9E03E6DF1239E133A25752C0A9679C946395D6CF
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9E03E6DF1239E133A25752C0A9679C946395D6CF

Ah the ironies, those who rejected him would be embracing him later:

Quote
METAXAKIS ELECTED GREEK PATRIARCH; Will Reassume at Alexandria Title Stripped From Him by the Turks.
June 13, 1926

Mgr. Meletios Metaxakis, formerly known as Meletios IV, Patriarch of Constantinople, who was, illegally, it is alleged, dethroned by King Constantine of Greece and expelled by the Turks in 1922, and is well known in the United States and England as an advocate of unity among the Apostolic Communions, has been elected Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria, the tourist port of Cairo.
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20A15FE35591B7A93C1A8178DD85F428285F9&scp=4&sq=Meletios%20Alexandria&st=cse
Quote
EASTERN CHURCH TO FILL PALESTINE SEE; Patriarch Meletios IV Seen as Most Likely Successor of the Late Damianos. LATTER A STRONG FIGURE Inclined to be Anti-Ally During War but Had Confidence of Jews and Arabs Alike. An Old-School Patriarch. Difficulties With British. Meletios Has Political Mind.
August 23, 1931

Patriarch Meletios IV of Alexandria, former Patriarch of Constantinople, appears to be the most probable successor to the title of Archbishop of the Holy City of Jerusalem and All the Land of Palestine, according to A.T. Polyzoides, editor of the Greek daily Atlantis, who ...
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0E13F63C591B728DDDAA0A94D0405B818FF1D3&scp=3&sq=Meletios%20Alexandria&st=cse

But he had his supporters here already, including those Russian bishosp whom he denounced as without canonical standing.

Quote
MELETIOS HONORED AT SERVICES HERE; Prelate Is Welcomed by Bishop Manning at St. John the Divine Unity Ceremonies.SPECIAL PRAYERS CHANTEDMany Dignitaries of the Church Are Present--Eastern Patriarch Elect Salls Soon.
December 22, 1921

At a service such as has never before been held to propagate church unity, the Most Rev. Meletios was welcomed by the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Cathedral of St. John the Divine, yesterday afternoon, St. Thomas's day.  The final words of congratulation were spoken by the Right Rev. Thomas F. Gallor, Chairman of the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church and President of the Council of the Episcopal Church.  The prelate will a few days after Christmas for Constantinople to be enthroned as Ecumenical Patriarch of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

Bishop William T. Manning made an address of welcome.  The Most Rev. Alexander, Bishop for the Russian Church of the Aleutian Islands and North America delivered a short speech.  Two other prelates of the Eastern Orhodox Church-the Right Rev. Alexander, Bishop of the Greeks of North and South America, and the Right Rev. Aftinious of Brooklyn, Bishop for the Syrians-were present.

As a special honor to the visitors, Bishop Manning wore the pallium presented to him by the Russian Archbishop and clergy at the time he was consecrated.

"It gives me great joy to welcome your Holiness to this service in the cathedral church of the diocese," said Bishop Manning.

"We feel it a great blessing to have with us in this cathedral and at this altar the head and chief shepherd of the Mother Church of Christendom.

"We honor you for the true and Christ-like spirit which you have shown in the exercise of your office and work in the Church of which you have given further proof in your recent experiences of trial, or difficulty and of persecusion.

"We honor you also because, through many years, you have been an apostle of Christian unity.  We rejoice that through your recent trials, and their present happy outcome, the principle of seperation between Church and State, which we believe to be so important to the well-being of the Church of Christ, seems to have been vindicated and strengthened.

Too bad we don't have the rolling laughing heads here.

Quote
"It is hard for me to find words to express my gratitude," said the visiting prelate.  "These manifestations of love on the par of the clergy and laity of the Episcopal Church find a most ready response in the hearts of my people.  Therefore, since our hearts beat already in such oneness, I am sure the day is not far off when we shall be one fold with one shepherd."

The gospel for the day was read by the Right Rev. James Henry Darlington of Harrisburg, Pa., who for twenty years has been Chairman of the Commission of the Episcopal Church on relations with the Eastern Orthodox and Old Catholic Churches.....There were more than a score of Eastern Church clergy in the procession.  They included Greek, Russian, Syrian, Rumanian and Arabic priests.

The serive was that of Evening Prayer....and special prayers for Meletios were chanted by Canon Robert R. Jones.  As a special honor to the Greeks the Nicene Creed was recited rather than the Apostles Creed.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9801EED9113EEE3ABC4A51DFB467838A639EDE
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9801EED9113EEE3ABC4A51DFB467838A639EDE

I wonder with or without the filioque (another NY Times article recounts the astonishment when it was said without at the consecration of one of the Russian churches I believe).

The EP elect, rejected by the Greeks, but accepted by the "uncanonical" Russians and the Episcopalians continued in his ecumenist ways (sorry, it fits too well here).

Quote
SEE REUNION STEP AT ANGLICAN PARLEY; Archbishop of Canterbury and Alexandrian Patriarch Tell of Hopes at Lambeth.
July 9, 1930
LONDON, July 8.--There was a striking manifestation at the Lambeth conference today of the growing movement for intercommunion between the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Anglican Church.
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20C1FFB3B5C157A93CBA9178CD85F448385F9&scp=5&sq=Meletios%20Alexandria&st=cse
« Last Edit: August 29, 2009, 06:16:25 PM by ialmisry » 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
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 9,910


ΠΑΝΑΓΙΑ ΣΟΥΜΕΛΑ


« Reply #83 on: August 30, 2009, 01:20:33 AM »

These selected, out-of-context, even "hit" pieces with YOUR take is history? And you give me sarcasm about eagerly awaiting my work... It won't be Internet paste-up artwork, that I will assure you.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #84 on: August 30, 2009, 01:24:10 AM »

These selected, out-of-context, even "hit" pieces with YOUR take is history? And you give me sarcasm about eagerly awaiting my work... It won't be Internet paste-up artwork, that I will assure you.
I'd rather you show me.
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
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 9,910


ΠΑΝΑΓΙΑ ΣΟΥΜΕΛΑ


« Reply #85 on: August 30, 2009, 01:56:31 AM »

These selected, out-of-context, even "hit" pieces with YOUR take is history? And you give me sarcasm about eagerly awaiting my work... It won't be Internet paste-up artwork, that I will assure you.
I'd rather you show me.

Put up or shut up, huh? Me, too...of you.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #86 on: August 30, 2009, 10:30:20 AM »

These selected, out-of-context, even "hit" pieces with YOUR take is history? And you give me sarcasm about eagerly awaiting my work... It won't be Internet paste-up artwork, that I will assure you.
I'd rather you show me.

Put up or shut up, huh? Me, too...of you.

While are you at it, pleast do explain how when
Quote
After the death of Patriarch Joachim III on June 13, 1912, Meletius was nominated as a candidate for the Patriarchal Throne in Constantinople. However, the Holy Synod decided that Meletius could not canonically be registered as a candidate.
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Meletios_IV_(Metaxakis)_of_Constantinople
http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/meletios.htm

less than a decade later he was "canonically" elected?

Btw, that's not his first abnomallity: he was elected a Met. of Cyprus (seeking the Archbishoprick) whereas he was not from Cyprus. He advised his fellow (and rumored relative) Venizelos on how to achieve Enosis with Cyprus (odd, since Crete, from which both came, was not yet united to Greece) and undermine the monarchy in the process.
http://books.google.com/books?id=KQEH4vvG0KwC&pg=PA360&dq=Meletios+Metaxakis+of+Citium+XII#v=onepage&q=Meletios%20Metaxakis%20of%20Citium%20XII&f=false

Btw, add this to the accusations against "EP" Meletios:
Quote
Encyclical on Anglican Orders
from the Oecumenical Patriarch to the Presidents of the Particular Eastern Orthodox Churches, 1922
[The Holy Synod has studied the report of the Committee and notes:]

1. That the ordination of Matthew Parker as Archbishop of Canterbury by four bishops is a fact established by history.

2. That in this and subsequent ordinations there are found in their fullness those orthodox and indispensable, visible and sensible elements of valid episcopal ordination - viz. the laying on of hands, the Epiclesis of the All-Holy Spirit and also the purpose to transmit the charisma of the Episcopal ministry.

3. That the orthodox theologians who have scientifically examined the question have almost unanimously come to the same conclusions and have declared themselves as accepting the validity of Anglican Orders.

4. That the practice in the Church affords no indication that the Orthodox Church has ever officially treated the validity of Anglican Orders as in doubt, in such a way as would point to the re-ordination of the Anglican clergy as required in the case of the union of the two Churches.
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgbmxd/patriarc.htm

since NO Episcopalian nor Anglican has been received without [re-]ordination, it would seem the EP and Resident Synod's opinion was for naught.
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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
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: 35,626



« Reply #87 on: August 30, 2009, 10:40:25 AM »

Might as well include this one too (from the same Facebook Group).

The photo there is also attatached to a post on "We speak of Tsarist Pressure."

The Bp. may actually be telling the truth here.  P. 61
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/10308327/Conversion-of-a-High-Priest-into-a-Christian-Worker

gives a contemporary (1908) Greek American viewpoint, of the Evangelika, even if colored.
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
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 9,910


ΠΑΝΑΓΙΑ ΣΟΥΜΕΛΑ


« Reply #88 on: August 30, 2009, 12:19:09 PM »

If Fr. Andreas had successed in obtaining a Greek bishop, I would have thrown rose petals in his holiness' path as he walked off the ship

So, Fr. Michael Andreades left St. Spiridon for St Demetrios and had...no bishop, or are you just obsessed with where his bishop was seated?

...on his canonical cathedra. Then canons have a dim view of him sitting anywhere  else.

Priests without a canonical and valid bishop do not exist.  Not in Orthodoxy at least. No bishop, no antimens, no priest, no DL, no parish.

Btw, Fr. Andreades did not leave St. Spiridon for St. Demetrios: all accounts I've seen state that he left the RM for the GOANSA only after the Bolshevik Revolution.  If you know otherwise, please post.

I tried a google search for GOA and Fr. Andreades, but it yielded nothing.  Nothing. Here a pioneer of Greek Orthodox clergy on this continent, and GOA has nothing to say.

I do:SHAME!

You should re-read your own post, carefully. After Russian Revolution there was NO other canonical jurisdiction here, specifically when the GOAN&SA was formed. You may not like what ArchBp. Meletios did, but his actions were for solid, relaistic reasons. Too bad for you.
As usual, you've a warped sense of historical perspective - skewed by your personal struggle, a jihad.
Another example is your reference to the colony of New Smyrna. Have you read the book yet or just referred to others' references? Those poor Greek Orthodox were left priestless by the colony's organizer, but you prefer to attack their conversion to RC. Attack, why? Because the Russians missioning 3500 miles away?
While you're charging Ultramontanism, why don't we examine your church's intercommunion with Melkite Greek Catholics AND Syriacs? Two can play this game. I prefer not.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,182



« Reply #89 on: August 30, 2009, 01:27:19 PM »

If Fr. Andreas had successed in obtaining a Greek bishop, I would have thrown rose petals in his holiness' path as he walked off the ship

So, Fr. Michael Andreades left St. Spiridon for St Demetrios and had...no bishop, or are you just obsessed with where his bishop was seated?

...on his canonical cathedra. Then canons have a dim view of him sitting anywhere  else.

Priests without a canonical and valid bishop do not exist.  Not in Orthodoxy at least. No bishop, no antimens, no priest, no DL, no parish.

Btw, Fr. Andreades did not leave St. Spiridon for St. Demetrios: all accounts I've seen state that he left the RM for the GOANSA only after the Bolshevik Revolution.  If you know otherwise, please post.

I tried a google search for GOA and Fr. Andreades, but it yielded nothing.  Nothing. Here a pioneer of Greek Orthodox clergy on this continent, and GOA has nothing to say.

I do:SHAME!

You should re-read your own post, carefully. After Russian Revolution there was NO other canonical jurisdiction here, specifically when the GOAN&SA was formed. You may not like what ArchBp. Meletios did, but his actions were for solid, relaistic reasons. Too bad for you.
As usual, you've a warped sense of historical perspective - skewed by your personal struggle, a jihad.
Another example is your reference to the colony of New Smyrna. Have you read the book yet or just referred to others' references? Those poor Greek Orthodox were left priestless by the colony's organizer, but you prefer to attack their conversion to RC. Attack, why? Because the Russians missioning 3500 miles away?
While you're charging Ultramontanism, why don't we examine your church's intercommunion with Melkite Greek Catholics AND Syriacs? Two can play this game. I prefer not.

I just want to be sure that we have a common understanding of some of the terminology that has been flung back and forth as rhetorical devices. From the Wiki (proceed at your own risk or bring forth better definitions..all highlights are mine):

"Ultramontanism is a religious philosophy within the Roman Catholic community that places strong emphasis on the prerogatives and powers of the Pope. In particular, ultramontanism may consist in asserting the superiority of Papal authority over the authority of local temporal or spiritual hierarchies (including the local bishop).

Ultramontanism is not recognised by either Eastern or Oriental Orthodox churches as not being in accordance with the Scripture or Tradition; these Churches regard the Pope as primus inter pares and do not recognise the doctrines of infallibility or Pope's alleged jurisdiction over sees other than that of Rome.

Caesaropapism's chief meaning is the authority the Byzantine emperors had over the Eastern Christian Church from the 500s through the tenth century. The Byzantine emperor would typically protect the Eastern Church and manage its administration by presiding over councils and appointing patriarchs and setting territorial boundaries for their jurisdiction. The emperor, whose control was so strong that "caesaropapism" became interchangeable with "Byzantinism", was called "Pontifex Maximus" after the fourth century, and the Patriarch of Constantinople could not hold office if he did not have the emperor's approval. Eastern men like St. John Chrysostom, Patriarch of Constantinople and St. Athanasius, Patriarch of Alexandria, strongly opposed imperial control over the Church, as did Western theologians like St. Hilary and Hosius, Bishop of Cordóba. Such emperors as Basiliscus, Zeno, Justinian I, Heraclius, and Constans II published several strictly ecclesiastical edicts either on their own without the mediation of church councils, or they exercised their own political influence on the councils to issue the edicts. Caesaropapism was most notorious in Russia when Ivan IV the Terrible assumed the title Czar in 1547 and subordinated the Russian Orthodox Church to the state. This level of caesaropapism far exceeded that of the Byzantine Empire. Caesaropapism existed in the Orthodox Church in Turkey until 1923 and in Cyprus until 1977, when Archbishop Makrios III reposed. However, in no way is caesaropapism a part of Orthodox dogma. The historical reality, as opposed to doctrinal endorsement or dogmatic definition, of caesaropapism stems from, according to Metropolitan Kallistos Ware, the confusion of the Byzantine Empire with the Kingdom of God and the zeal of the Byzantines 'to establish here on earth a living icon of God's government in heaven.' "

You may now resume the argument. The score so far, based on evidence presented, is in favor of ialmisry who is ahead not by a nose, or a horse length but is in this argument all by himself. His opponents seem largely content to take pot shots from the sidelines.


« Last Edit: August 30, 2009, 01:29:49 PM by Second Chance » Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Tags: Troll EP Bashing 
Pages: « 1 2 3 »  All   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 0.253 seconds with 72 queries.