OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 23, 2014, 04:20:26 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Abkhaz Diocese separates from Georgian Church  (Read 7872 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« on: September 16, 2009, 09:45:34 AM »

Quote
The Abkhaz Diocese has proclaimed the official separating from the Georgian Orthodox Church, Priest Vissarion Aplia, head of the Diocese, told the press in Sukhumi.

An assembly of the local Orthodox clergy at the Sukhumi Cathedral on Tuesday "approved this decision," he said.

"The Abkhaz Church has officially separated from Georgian, restoring historical justice. Since the end of the Georgian-Abkhaz war, Abkhazia's Orthodox clergy have made their aspirations felt on many occasions, appealing to all supreme Orthodox bodies. But all of them have been silent fearing rifts with the Georgian Diocese," he said.

"The Sukhumi-Abkhaz Diocese has remained subordinated to the Georgian Catholicos-Patriarch since 1943," Father Vissarion said, adding that Abkhazia was joined to the Georgian Church by force.

The restored Abkhaz Orthodox Church will have the Dioceses of Pitsunda and Sukhumi. The main Cathedral was previously located in Pitsunda, he said.

The Abkhaz Diocese will turn to the Moscow Patriarchate and to the Russian Patriarch for support, Fr. Vissarion added.

And MP won't accept it:

Quote
The Russian Orthodox Church yet again states its respect for the canonic borders of the Georgian Patriarchate.

"We respect the canonic borders of the Georgian Orthodox Church," acting Secretary of the Moscow Patriarchate Department for External Church Relations, Inter-Orthodox Relations, Priest Igor Yakimchuk told Interfax-Religion on Wednesday.

This is how he commented the statement of the head of the Sukhumi and Abkhazia Diocese Priest Vissarion Aplia about the formal separation from the Georgian Church and the intent to establish the Abkhaz Local Church and ask the Moscow Patriarchate for assistance on this matter.

Father Igor noted that representatives of Abkhazian clergy had expressed such view on the church issues before. Meanwhile, the position of the Moscow Patriarchate on the matter "remains unchanged", the priest highlighted.

"There are different standpoints which we are considering in our work, but nevertheless, we stick to the principle of integrity of the canonic borders of local Churches," Fr. Igor said.

source
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #1 on: September 16, 2009, 02:42:47 PM »

http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=6446

16 September 2009, 16:17

Catholicos of Georgia does not take seriously the statement of Abkhazian Diocese independence

Tbilisi, September 16, Interfax - The statements of Abkhazia's clergy about the withdrawal from the Georgian Orthodox Church are not serious, Catholicos-Patriarch Ilia II of All Georgia told journalists on Wednesday.

"We should not take this statement seriously, as nobody has the authority to declare independence from the native Church," Catholicos said.

Head of the Sukhumi and Abkhazia Diocese Priest Vissarion Aplia reported the formal separation of his Diocese from the Georgian Church to journalists in Sukhumi late Tuesday.

Logged
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek by desire; Antiochian by necessity
Posts: 5,797



« Reply #2 on: September 16, 2009, 02:52:04 PM »

I wonder if this diocese may try to align themselves with the EP to help.  I hope not.
Logged

I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 16, 2009, 03:11:54 PM »

I wonder if this diocese may try to align themselves with the EP to help.  I hope not.

It's not funny. It's terrifying.

Deacon Kuraiev as usually has to put in:

Quote
Professor of the Moscow Theological Academy Archdeacon Andrey Kurayev believes the best way to settle the Abkhaz church problem for today is to temporally transfer the local diocese to locum tenancy of the Russian Church.

“If Catholicos-Patriarch of All Georgia asked the Moscow Patriarch to become a locum tenants temporally administering the Abkhaz and South Ossetian Dioceses, then all Orthodox canons would be observed as one Church cannot interfere in canonical borders of the other one. It would also save the Georgian Church honor and integrity of its canonical borders,” Fr. Andrey said in his interview to Interfax-Religion on Wednesday.

He also reminded that Byzantium had such practice when the Middle East was under Arab and later under Turk rule.

According to the theologian, if such model is realized, “all unanimous wishes of Abkhaz and South Ossetian people will be taken into account.” Besides, it will be possible “for canonical priests to celebrate the Liturgy for Abkhazians and South Ossetians.”

source
« Last Edit: September 16, 2009, 03:19:38 PM by mike » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2009, 04:15:56 PM »

Priest Vissarion Aplia, head of the Diocese,

source

Priest don't head dioceses. A major lacuna in the reports so far is that there has been no mention of the actual head of the diocese, the bishop. Is Priest Vissarion in actual fact leading a schism *within* the diocese with some portion remaining loyal to the current bishop? Is the diocese currently without a bishop (and thus without an actual head)?
« Last Edit: September 16, 2009, 04:17:04 PM by witega » Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 19,907


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #5 on: September 16, 2009, 06:26:22 PM »

Priest Vissarion Aplia, head of the Diocese,

source

Priest don't head dioceses. A major lacuna in the reports so far is that there has been no mention of the actual head of the diocese, the bishop. Is Priest Vissarion in actual fact leading a schism *within* the diocese with some portion remaining loyal to the current bishop? Is the diocese currently without a bishop (and thus without an actual head)?

Or is the priest listed the chancellor, vicar, or locum tenens, administering the diocese while waiting for a bishop to be elected?
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.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #6 on: September 17, 2009, 03:09:45 AM »

Or is the priest listed the chancellor, vicar, or locum tenens, administering the diocese while waiting for a bishop to be elected?

I think that that's true.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2009, 03:09:56 AM by mike » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #7 on: September 17, 2009, 03:17:50 AM »

What good is separating from a body without even having a bishop? Sheesh.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 17, 2009, 03:24:23 AM »

What good is separating from a body without even having a bishop? Sheesh.

They hoped that MP will accept them but MP has let them down.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #9 on: September 17, 2009, 05:39:07 AM »

What good is separating from a body without even having a bishop? Sheesh.

They hoped that MP will accept them but MP has let them down.

The Church of Russia has made it clear, many many times afer the Georgian war, that it will not intrude on the canonical territory of the Church of Georgia.  I do not think that Russia has let anybody down.
Logged
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,976


WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 17, 2009, 11:48:43 AM »

Or is the priest listed the chancellor, vicar, or locum tenens, administering the diocese while waiting for a bishop to be elected?

I think that that's true.

Can a Priest administer a Diocese as locum tenens? 
Logged
observer
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 546

Vivre die Raznitsa!


« Reply #11 on: September 17, 2009, 02:26:24 PM »


fr Georgi Jweinat headed the diocese for the JP here in US.  Then a bishop was appointed - Archbishop Damaskinos of Jaffa etc..  Now Fr Georgi is head of the Palestinian/Jordanian Vicariate under a take over by EP - the Canonical Church in  USA.
Logged

Thou shalt not prefer one thing to another (Law of Liberalism)
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #12 on: September 17, 2009, 02:55:17 PM »

I the Czech Republic there was (is?) also a diocese ruled by a Presbyter.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
witega
Is it enough now, to tell you you matter?
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #13 on: September 17, 2009, 03:32:23 PM »

Some of you are making the same mistake as the newspaper report. In the Orthodox Church, a priest cannot head a diocese. He might, as cleveland suggested, be a chancellor and be in charge of handling administrative duties in the absence of the bishop. But 'the guy handling the administration' does not equal 'the head of a diocese' in Orthodox ecclesiology--Fr. Georgi, for example was never head of a JP diocese, he was the administrator/deputy for the Patriarch of Jerusalem himself who was the 'head' of those parishes until another bishop was appointed.

Without the authorization of an actual, overseeing bishop--either the ruling bishop for the diocese or a locum tenens during the period before a new bishop can be elected--a priest like Fr. Vissarion isn't even allowed to serve liturgy.
Logged

Ariel Starling - New album

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

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 17, 2009, 05:27:29 PM »

What good is separating from a body without even having a bishop? Sheesh.

They hoped that MP will accept them but MP has let them down.

So now they're just Acephalist?
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
kijabeboy03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 774

"The glory of God is in man fully alive."


« Reply #15 on: January 12, 2011, 12:06:03 PM »

It's all in process still. In South Ossetia the Orthodox there went to the Synod in Resistance of the Greek Orthodox Old Calendrist Church (the 'Cyprianites') to establish an independent eparchy. If the Georgians can't get over the fact that Abkhazia is an independent state that wants its own Local Orthodox Church and the Russians continue to stay out of things, then maybe the Abkhaz Orthodox will do the same as the South Ossetians?
Logged

"This is the Apostolic Faith, the Orthodox Faith, and the Faith of the Fathers. Having this wonderful treasure, let us preserve it, let us keep it, and let us also use it in such a way that this treasure becomes the victory of Christ in us and in His Church." ~ St. Severus of Antioch ~
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: 37,124



« Reply #16 on: January 22, 2011, 01:41:51 AM »

A bit of history:
Quote
The Catholicate of Abkhazia (Georgian: აფხაზეთის საკათალიკოსო, Greek: Καθολικος Αμπχαζία) was a subdivision of the Georgian Orthodox Church that existed as an independent entity in western Georgia from the 1470s to 1814. It was headed by the Catholicos (later, Catholicos Patriarch) of Abkhazia, officially styled as the Catholicos Patriarch of Imereti, Odishi, Ponto-Abkhaz-Guria, Racha-Lechkhum-Svaneti, Ossetians, Dvals, and all of the North. The residence of the Catholicoi was at Bichvinta (now Pitsunda) in Abkhazia (hence, the name of the Catholicate), but was moved to the Gelati Monastery in the late 16th century. In 1814, the last Catholicos of Abkhazia was removed from his office by Imperial Russia which would take control of Georgian church until 1917.

The date when the Catholicate of Abkhazia was established is not completely clear, but most scholars put it between the ninth and eleventh centuries. The titular Catholicoi of Abkhazia were only occasionally mentioned in the contemporary sources and did not enjoy independence at that time, but were subordinated to the Georgian Orthodox Patriarchal see at Mtskheta. The first written account on the Catholicate of Abkhazia dates to 1290. By that time, the Mongol rule had divided Georgia into its eastern and western parts, with the latter being de facto independent from the Mongol Ilkhanid dynasty, to which Georgia was a subject. The political independence of the western Georgian rulers, Kings of Imereti, might have also resulted in the revival of the Catholicate of Abkhazia, but it was not until the late 15th century, when it emerged as an independent religious entity. With the final disintegration of the unified monarchy of Georgia, a breakaway Bagratid branch in western Georgia with their capital at Kutaisi energetically promoted ecclesiastic freedom of their kingdom from the Patriarchate of Georgia. The Imeretian king Bagrat VI (1463-1478) managed to secure the support of Michael IV, Patriarch of Antioch who, at the king’s request, consecrated Archbishop Joachime of Tsaish and Bedia, as Catholicos of Abkhazia. To justify the break with the Mtskheta see, Michael issued a special document, The Law of Faith, in which he stated that western and eastern Georgia had different histories of conversion and, therefore, they should be independent from each other.

Thus, the Catholicoi of Abkhazia became independent and later assumed the title of Patriarch. Their spiritual jurisdiction extended over the Kingdom of Imereti and its vassal principalities – Guria, Mingrelia, Svaneti, and Abkhazia. They considered themselves as vicars of St. Andrew, who, according to a medieval Georgian tradition, preached Christianity in western Georgia, then known to the Classical authors as Colchis. At various periods of its existence, the Catholicate of Abkhazia was subdivided into several dioceses (eparchies), including those of Bichvinta, Kutaisi, Gelati, Tsageri, Tsaishi, Tsalenjikha, Chkondidi, Khoni, Ninotsminda, Nikortsminda, Shemokmedi, Jumati, Dranda, Bedia and Mokvi, centered on the respective cathedrals.

In the latter part of the 16th century, Catholicos Patriarch Eudemos I (Chkheidze) had to move his residence from Bichvinta to the Gelati Monastery at Kutaisi, fleeing the Ottoman expansion into Abkhazia. Eudemos launched a series of important reforms and restored a communion with the Patriarchate of Georgia, retaining his status of an independent prelate, however. The Catholicoi of Abkhazia mostly came from the leading Georgian noble houses, and were able to support the church financially and secure its continuous involvement in the political and cultural life of western Georgia. However, the Islamization of Abkhazia, Adjara, and Lower Guria under the Ottoman rule delivered a hard blow to the Catholicate. The close cooperation between the royal dynasty and the church in the late 18th century resulted in the revival of Christianity in Guria, and a portion of Abkhazia. After the conquest of Imereti by Imperial Russia in 1810, the Catholicate of Abkhazia was also abolished, in 1814, by the Russian authorities and annexed to the Exarchate of Georgia, a subdivision of the Russian Orthodox Church, whose part it was until the restoration of the unified and autocephalous Georgian Orthodox Church in 1917.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholicate_of_Abkhazia
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
Orest
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #17 on: January 22, 2011, 02:25:27 PM »

What good is separating from a body without even having a bishop? Sheesh.

They hoped that MP will accept them but MP has let them down.

The Church of Russia has made it clear, many many times afer the Georgian war, that it will not intrude on the canonical territory of the Church of Georgia.  I do not think that Russia has let anybody down.




Yes, the MP has done the right thing here.

Unlike what the Russian Orthodox Church did in tsarist times.
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #18 on: January 24, 2011, 04:25:03 PM »

If the Georgians can't get over the fact that Abkhazia is an independent state that wants its own Local Orthodox Church

Please don't act as if that excuses schismatic behavior.

Heck, they didn't even bother to appeal to the inter-provincial Church first!

And even if they had it still wouldn't have excused it. So they are really two rungs away from proper behavior in this situation.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,964


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #19 on: January 24, 2011, 04:54:33 PM »

Let them be as the Macedonians of FYROM if they love politics more than Christ.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
kijabeboy03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 774

"The glory of God is in man fully alive."


« Reply #20 on: January 24, 2011, 06:41:00 PM »

The "inter-provincial church"? What church would that be? :-)

It's a difficult situation - the Abkhazian government won't allow Georgian clergy to serve in the country and Georgian clergy come with their own national agendas, so what is to be done? Is it right for their to be no divine services for the Abkhaz Orthodox because of the political situation between Sukhumi and Tbilisi?
Logged

"This is the Apostolic Faith, the Orthodox Faith, and the Faith of the Fathers. Having this wonderful treasure, let us preserve it, let us keep it, and let us also use it in such a way that this treasure becomes the victory of Christ in us and in His Church." ~ St. Severus of Antioch ~
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #21 on: January 24, 2011, 11:20:53 PM »

The "inter-provincial church"? What church would that be? :-)

The Universal Church is made up of numerous provincial/particular churches. What I was saying is that they should petition to authorities greater than their own particular church. If you all have some understanding of Antioch being the mother church of Georgia, then that would be the first step. Beyond that, the Church Universal ought to be consulted, and from what I have heard/seen, Constantinople is the church to which those sorts of petitions are directed.

It's a difficult situation - the Abkhazian government won't allow Georgian clergy to serve in the country and Georgian clergy come with their own national agendas, so what is to be done? Is it right for their to be no divine services for the Abkhaz Orthodox because of the political situation between Sukhumi and Tbilisi?

No, it's not right. But simple schism is not the proper way to treat it. The church, in the context of the interference of the Abkhazian government, has certain options within the range of what is acceptable:

-Take up a stance of resistance to the Abkhazian government (as, IMO, on a certain level it has set up itself as an enemy of the church) and attempt to send in Priests to serve the Abkhazian people regardless of the government.
-Grant the Abkhazian church autocephaly (or if not this, then autonomy with an Abkhazian primate) to prevent the interference of the government.
-IF the Georgian church is not willing to pursue either of these options then obviously it has come to a point of abusing the faithful through deprivation and neglect and the inter-provincial church should be petitioned for intervention.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
kijabeboy03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 774

"The glory of God is in man fully alive."


« Reply #22 on: January 24, 2011, 11:24:25 PM »

I understand now. We don't have "inter-provincial" churches, but considering the stand of the Georgian Orthodox Church the Abkhazian Orthodox should certainly appeal to Constantinople in its role as our court of last appeal. Whether Constantinople itself has the best interests of the Church as a whole at heart, however, is another matter entirely :-/.
Logged

"This is the Apostolic Faith, the Orthodox Faith, and the Faith of the Fathers. Having this wonderful treasure, let us preserve it, let us keep it, and let us also use it in such a way that this treasure becomes the victory of Christ in us and in His Church." ~ St. Severus of Antioch ~
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #23 on: January 24, 2011, 11:31:32 PM »

I understand now. We don't have "inter-provincial" churches, but considering the stand of the Georgian Orthodox Church the Abkhazian Orthodox should certainly appeal to Constantinople in its role as our court of last appeal. Whether Constantinople itself has the best interests of the Church as a whole at heart, however, is another matter entirely :-/.

Uh....

If you think that you don't have "inter-provincial churches", then you are not understanding what I mean by it.

I mean the communion as a whole made of various particular churches, most of which are provincial.

The communion is thus the inter-provincial.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
kijabeboy03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 774

"The glory of God is in man fully alive."


« Reply #24 on: January 24, 2011, 11:36:15 PM »

A very Anglican way to look at it :-). If you follow the role of ecclesiastical provinces in the West more strictly they'd actually correspond to self-governing archdioceses or metropolias within autocephalous churches - the Churches of the Ukraine and Japan being examples. A Local Orthodox Church can be comprised of one 'province' (as most are in our times) or several (as was generally the case in the past and is still the case with the Churches of Constantinople, Rus', Armenia, and, if I'm not mistaken, Serbia and Romania).
Logged

"This is the Apostolic Faith, the Orthodox Faith, and the Faith of the Fathers. Having this wonderful treasure, let us preserve it, let us keep it, and let us also use it in such a way that this treasure becomes the victory of Christ in us and in His Church." ~ St. Severus of Antioch ~
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #25 on: January 24, 2011, 11:46:35 PM »

A very Anglican way to look at it :-). If you follow the role of ecclesiastical provinces in the West more strictly they'd actually correspond to self-governing archdioceses or metropolias within autocephalous churches - the Churches of the Ukraine and Japan being examples. A Local Orthodox Church can be comprised of one 'province' (as most are in our times) or several (as was generally the case in the past and is still the case with the Churches of Constantinople, Rus', Armenia, and, if I'm not mistaken, Serbia and Romania).

I don't think "Anglican" is a fair way of describing it. For the first few centuries all the churches were essentially regional. There was the South Italian church, the North Italian church, the Pontian church, the Asian church, the Egyptian church, the Armenian church (which though not according to Roman administrative divisions, was nonetheless the church of the Kingdom of Armenia), etc. Churches being regional by nature was the norm of the Church. Anything otherwise is an innovation.

But anyway, I think you are focusing too much on my use of the term "provincial". I was simply trying to say that when one's particular autocephalous church is not acting properly, one should petition to the authority of the conglomeration of all the autocephalous churches.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
kijabeboy03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 774

"The glory of God is in man fully alive."


« Reply #26 on: January 24, 2011, 11:57:08 PM »

I've only encountered such a strong attachment to the term amongst Anglicans :-). Terminology aside, your point's understood! God help Abkhazia...
Logged

"This is the Apostolic Faith, the Orthodox Faith, and the Faith of the Fathers. Having this wonderful treasure, let us preserve it, let us keep it, and let us also use it in such a way that this treasure becomes the victory of Christ in us and in His Church." ~ St. Severus of Antioch ~
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #27 on: January 25, 2011, 12:04:37 AM »

I've only encountered such a strong attachment to the term amongst Anglicans :-).

I must say, I do not look down on Anglicans to anywhere near the degree I often see on this forum. I have a fair amount more respect for their tradition. And I have a fair amount of Anglican friends. I only shy away from the association because of the common highly negative connotation that seems to come with it here. Nonetheless, I actually got this emphasis from studying the ecclesiology of the early Church.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
kijabeboy03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 774

"The glory of God is in man fully alive."


« Reply #28 on: January 25, 2011, 12:12:40 AM »

I have a great many Anglican friends as well. Their terminology is their own though - I would not refer to an autocephalous church as a province anymore than I would an hieromonk as "dom." (Though referring to a Western Rites hieromonk as "dom" is an entirely different matter as that is a customary use of their rites.)
Logged

"This is the Apostolic Faith, the Orthodox Faith, and the Faith of the Fathers. Having this wonderful treasure, let us preserve it, let us keep it, and let us also use it in such a way that this treasure becomes the victory of Christ in us and in His Church." ~ St. Severus of Antioch ~
bogdan
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,615



« Reply #29 on: January 25, 2011, 12:22:37 AM »

I don't know all the complexities of the conflict between Georgia and Russia aside from snippets in the news, but it all makes me sad. This should not be. Lord, have mercy. Sad
Logged
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #30 on: January 25, 2011, 12:46:33 AM »

I have a great many Anglican friends as well. Their terminology is their own though - I would not refer to an autocephalous church as a province

Well, now it doesn't entirely reflect the reality. However, the terminology really comes from the early Church when the autocephalous churches were precisely provincial churches. And, IMO, the way they have developed beyond that is an anomaly and sometimes even a perversion. So I continue to prefer the usage of the early Church, as indicating what once was and what ought to be.
Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com
kijabeboy03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 774

"The glory of God is in man fully alive."


« Reply #31 on: January 25, 2011, 02:30:20 PM »

Agreed Bogdan!
Logged

"This is the Apostolic Faith, the Orthodox Faith, and the Faith of the Fathers. Having this wonderful treasure, let us preserve it, let us keep it, and let us also use it in such a way that this treasure becomes the victory of Christ in us and in His Church." ~ St. Severus of Antioch ~
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,500



« Reply #32 on: January 25, 2011, 03:19:55 PM »

Quote
The Abkhaz Diocese has proclaimed the official separating from the Georgian Orthodox Church...The Abkhaz Diocese will turn to the Moscow Patriarchate and to the Russian Patriarch for support, Fr. Vissarion added.
And MP won't accept it:
Quote
The Russian Orthodox Church yet again states its respect for the canonic borders of the Georgian Patriarchate."We respect the canonic borders of the Georgian Orthodox Church," acting Secretary of the Moscow Patriarchate Department for External Church Relations, Inter-Orthodox Relations, Priest Igor Yakimchuk told Interfax-Religion on Wednesday.This is how he commented the statement of the head of the Sukhumi and Abkhazia Diocese Priest Vissarion Aplia about the formal separation from the Georgian Church and the intent to establish the Abkhaz Local Church and ask the Moscow Patriarchate for assistance on this matter.Father Igor noted that representatives of Abkhazian clergy had expressed such view on the church issues before. Meanwhile, the position of the Moscow Patriarchate on the matter "remains unchanged", the priest highlighted.  "There are different standpoints which we are considering in our work, but nevertheless, we stick to the principle of integrity of the canonic borders of local Churches," Fr. Igor said.
source
The situation is distressing, but on the bright side MP is doing the right thing. 
Logged
Orest
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #33 on: February 12, 2011, 12:02:16 PM »

Let them be as the Macedonians of FYROM if they love politics more than Christ.
How can you be so simplistic.  I really do not understand how this is a logical statment.  Look at what happned to the Bulgarians?  They were eventually accepted as an autocephalous church with their own Patriarchate.
The Romanians declared themselves autocephalous.
History is not that simple.
Just because you disapprove of a certain ethnic group expressing their wish to have services in their own language like the Estonians for example, does not mean that they do not love Christ.
What about the Russians forcing the Georgians to have have services in Church Slavonic.
By your reasoning we would have to say that the Russian orthodox hierarchy loved Politics more than Christ.

We cannot escape our history.
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #34 on: February 12, 2011, 12:33:36 PM »

So we are allowed to follow  that pitiful examples?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ativan
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Georgian Orthodox Church
Posts: 274


Fr. Gabrieli Of Mtskheta


« Reply #35 on: February 14, 2011, 03:00:18 AM »

God bless Georgia and all her friends

I am sorry if my post is a little long but I want to say something from my heart. It is important that people know about Georgia a little bit, especially those who do not understand issues with Abkhazia and think it is pity little nationalistic arrogance of ours. This is not so though we glorify our country and love it too much.

Georgia is not just a small country somewhere. It is an important orthodox country (and probably most important for the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ). We venerate All-Holy Virgin Theotokos and there's reason for that:
Quote
When the disciples of Christ cast lots after Pentecost, the lot for evangelizing Georgia fell to the Most Holy Theotokos. But Christ revealed to His Mother that it was not His will for her to preach there. “You have been entrusted to protect the Georgian nation,” He said, “but the role of evangelizing that land belongs to My disciple Andrew the First-called. Send him with an image of your face ‘Not-Made-By- Hands’ to protect the Georgian people to the end of the ages!”
The lord said "Send him with an image of your face ‘Not-Made-By- Hands’ to protect the Georgian people to the end of the ages!" Then what happened? Did The Lord abandon us, leave us? Christ has never left us. Holy Trinity has never left us. If anybody has an idea about Georgian history then he will be amazed how on the earth this nation has survived. The enemies from all sides ever fought Georgia and her people trying to erase it from the face of the earth. But we are still here. This is a miracle. Miracles come from God only. Our presence is the witness to God's promise being fulfilled. Then why did we loose our territory in Abkhazia which was gift from God and which we were obliged to defend more than anything else? Because nothing happens for no reason. Because a small stone will not be moved if it was not God's will. Great living saints and prophets of today in Georgia say this is the price we pay for going away from God and abandoning his commandments and his will. Once the nation comes to Almighty then the nation will be one and then Abkhazia will go back to its righteous owner. By punishing people Georgians started to come to Him, to God. Spirituality is on the rise in Georgia. We needed punishment. It was for our best. I believe in our tradition and I believe in our saints of the past and today. They all pray for us and we are awakening towards God, for prayers of righteous men go up to God and they are heard.

We (unfortunately) forget that the owner off the whole creation is the One Holy Trinity. The wars are not won by just the armament this or that country possess.

If interested one can read a little more about the Holy relics that are safeguarded in Georgia, one can read some info here and here (btw this is also one of the sermons by His Holiness and Beatitude Catholicos-Patriarch of all Georgia) and here.

Again my apologies if my words are too long. Glory to God and God bless all righteous men.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2011, 03:04:09 AM by ativan » Logged
Orest
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #36 on: February 15, 2011, 12:23:14 PM »

So we are allowed to follow  that pitiful examples?
It is "pitaful" as you state because the Greeks in Constantinople could not understand that their Empire had fallen and even though they were given power over the Bulgarians, serbians and Romanian under Ottoman rule, that power was coming to an end too.
The same can be said about Russian power and the MP.  The Russian Empire of the tsars has fallen and so have the Soviet empire.
In 1991 the people of Ukraine voted way over 90% to become a free independent country.  The same with Estonia and all the Baltic countries.
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,964


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #37 on: February 15, 2011, 03:11:43 PM »

There are national Churches, there are diaspora Churches, and there are Churches which exist in territories of other national Churches (Japan and Ukraine, for example). I fail to see how every small breakaway territory should get its own church just because it has political independence. Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, all are under Antioch. No one is fomenting for separate Churches there. All Africa is under the Patriarchate of Alexandria. There are countries in Africa with more Orthodox Christians than Abkhazia, but they are not clamoring to be autocephalous. Accusing Orthodox Churches of cultural genocide just because they say "no" to dismemberment is over the top. If you want to quote history, you had better do some in depth research instead of trotting out tired examples. Why do you want the Orthodox Church to bow to political pressure from politicians who show little or no concern for the Church? In FYROM, the Macedonian Orthodox Church has been a pawn of the state since communism, and continues to be so, even though the Archdioces of Ochrid is autonomous and His Eminence Jovan is not on a program of calling Macedonians Serbs. In Ukraine, the Russian Metropolia is also Autonomous, and has the majority of Orthodox Ukrainians in its fold--Ukrainians who identify as Ukrainians, not Russians, even if many do not speak Ukrainian. Yes, it's complicated all around the world, but to side with one group automatically because it wants independence is blind.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Orest
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #38 on: February 15, 2011, 04:22:26 PM »

There are national Churches, there are diaspora Churches, and there are Churches which exist in territories of other national Churches (Japan and Ukraine, for example). I fail to see how every small breakaway territory should get its own church just because it has political independence. Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, all are under Antioch. ... In Ukraine, the Russian Metropolia is also Autonomous, and has the majority of Orthodox Ukrainians in its fold--Ukrainians who identify as Ukrainians, not Russians, even if many do not speak Ukrainian. Yes, it's complicated all around the world, but to side with one group automatically because it wants independence is blind.
Actually, the UOC-KP has the largest number of members in Ukraine, not the Moscow Patriarchate.  Historically, the Ukrainian Metropolitan of Kyiv was under the EP when Moscow created it own patriarchate.
Historically, when countries have become independent like Serbia, Bulgaria, and Romania, they became national churches and got their own patriarchates.
Logged
kijabeboy03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 774

"The glory of God is in man fully alive."


« Reply #39 on: February 15, 2011, 05:34:03 PM »

I agree that ethnicity should not be a prime factor in creating independent churches, but at the same time when the politics of the situation are so complicated as to completely cut a regional church off from its mother church (possibly permanently), then it might be time to consider ways of providing valid mysteries to the faithful in those regions, whether on a temporary basis or through a new, permanent arrangement. Added to this the fact that there was a patriarchate responsible for Circassia/Abkhazia/Ossetia/Western Georgia (Imereti) in the past and I don't see why Abkhazia doesn't merit its own church (at the very least autonomous if the Georgians can't live with autocephaly).
Logged

"This is the Apostolic Faith, the Orthodox Faith, and the Faith of the Fathers. Having this wonderful treasure, let us preserve it, let us keep it, and let us also use it in such a way that this treasure becomes the victory of Christ in us and in His Church." ~ St. Severus of Antioch ~
Orest
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #40 on: February 16, 2011, 10:13:12 AM »

I agree that ethnicity should not be a prime factor in creating independent churches, but at the same time when the politics of the situation are so complicated as to completely cut a regional church off from its mother church (possibly permanently), then it might be time to consider ways of providing valid mysteries to the faithful in those regions, whether on a temporary basis or through a new, permanent arrangement. Added to this the fact that there was a patriarchate responsible for Circassia/Abkhazia/Ossetia/Western Georgia (Imereti) in the past and I don't see why Abkhazia doesn't merit its own church (at the very least autonomous if the Georgians can't live with autocephaly).
Some wise words
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: 37,124



« Reply #41 on: February 16, 2011, 12:03:21 PM »

There are national Churches, there are diaspora Churches, and there are Churches which exist in territories of other national Churches (Japan and Ukraine, for example). I fail to see how every small breakaway territory should get its own church just because it has political independence. Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, all are under Antioch. ... In Ukraine, the Russian Metropolia is also Autonomous, and has the majority of Orthodox Ukrainians in its fold--Ukrainians who identify as Ukrainians, not Russians, even if many do not speak Ukrainian. Yes, it's complicated all around the world, but to side with one group automatically because it wants independence is blind.
Actually, the UOC-KP has the largest number of members in Ukraine, not the Moscow Patriarchate.
 
Not to get into the numbers game, but the numbers are close enough that they do not matter either was de facto. De jure, of course, they don't matter: a majority of schismatics cannot elect a canonically deposed bishop as their "Patriarch" ex officio in the diptychs of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
Historically, the Ukrainian Metropolitan of Kyiv was under the EP when Moscow created it own patriarchate.
Historically, the Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus', resident at Moscow for over a century, was elevated to Patriarch of Moscow and All the Rus' and Northern Lands.  The Metropolitinate of Kiev and All Rus' (yes, you can say a contradiction) was taken from Moscow and made into an exarchate of the EP in 1593 with the ratification of Moscow's Patriarchate, on the basis that the Tsardom of Russia did not control Ukraine at the time, which was occupied by the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.  It became a moot point when PL outlawed the Orthodox Church in its domains in 1596.  Patriarch Theophanes III of Jerusalem consecrated a new Metropolitan of Kiev in 1620, Yov Beretsky, who was succeeded by Isaia Kopynsky in 1631, who favored reunion with Moscow.  The PL King legalized the Orthodox Church in 1632, on the condition that Met. Isaia be replaced (along with the other bishops consecrated by the Pat. of Jerusalem), which was done with the assension of Met. St. Peter Movila in 1633(-1646). The Metropolitinate was reunited to the Patriarchate in 1686.

Historically, when countries have become independent like Serbia, Bulgaria, and Romania, they became national churches and got their own patriarchates.
Not quite.  But I think I will make a thread on that.
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
Orest
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 923


« Reply #42 on: February 16, 2011, 01:34:53 PM »

Quote
Historically, the Ukrainian Metropolitan of Kyiv was under the EP when Moscow created it own patriarchate.
Historically, the Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus', resident at Moscow for over a century, was elevated to Patriarch of Moscow and All the Rus' and Northern Lands.  The Metropolitinate of Kiev and All Rus' (yes, you can say a contradiction) was taken from Moscow and made into an exarchate of the EP in 1593 with the ratification of Moscow's Patriarchate, on the basis that the Tsardom of Russia did not control Ukraine at the time, which was occupied by the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.  It became a moot point when PL outlawed the Orthodox Church in its domains in 1596.  Patriarch Theophanes III of Jerusalem consecrated a new Metropolitan of Kiev in 1620, Yov Beretsky, who was succeeded by Isaia Kopynsky in 1631, who favored reunion with Moscow.  The PL King legalized the Orthodox Church in 1632, on the condition that Met. Isaia be replaced (along with the other bishops consecrated by the Pat. of Jerusalem), which was done with the assension of Met. St. Peter Movila in 1633(-1646). The Metropolitinate was reunited to the Patriarchate in 1686.

The Metropolitanate of Kyiv was always united with the EP, but the throne was vacant.  The people remained Orthodox and priests continued to celebrate the name of EP in their liturgies.
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: 37,124



« Reply #43 on: February 16, 2011, 01:41:39 PM »

Quote
Historically, the Ukrainian Metropolitan of Kyiv was under the EP when Moscow created it own patriarchate.
Historically, the Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus', resident at Moscow for over a century, was elevated to Patriarch of Moscow and All the Rus' and Northern Lands.  The Metropolitinate of Kiev and All Rus' (yes, you can say a contradiction) was taken from Moscow and made into an exarchate of the EP in 1593 with the ratification of Moscow's Patriarchate, on the basis that the Tsardom of Russia did not control Ukraine at the time, which was occupied by the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.  It became a moot point when PL outlawed the Orthodox Church in its domains in 1596.  Patriarch Theophanes III of Jerusalem consecrated a new Metropolitan of Kiev in 1620, Yov Beretsky, who was succeeded by Isaia Kopynsky in 1631, who favored reunion with Moscow.  The PL King legalized the Orthodox Church in 1632, on the condition that Met. Isaia be replaced (along with the other bishops consecrated by the Pat. of Jerusalem), which was done with the assension of Met. St. Peter Movila in 1633(-1646). The Metropolitinate was reunited to the Patriarchate in 1686.

The Metropolitanate of Kyiv was always united with the EP, but the throne was vacant.
 
Vacant when?

The people remained Orthodox and priests continued to celebrate the name of EP in their liturgies.
when are you speaking of?
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
Jake
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern orthodox
Posts: 130


« Reply #44 on: February 17, 2011, 03:06:41 PM »

Quote
The Metropolitanate of Kyiv was always united with the EP, but the throne was vacant.
 
Vacant when?

Do you mean from the time when the former Metr. of Kyiv left the Orthodox Church and joined the Catholic Church to when a new Metropolitan of Kyiv was consecrated?
The vast majority of the people and married clergy rejected any thought of union with the Catholics and continued to be Orthodox Christinas.
Logged
Tags: Georgian Church 
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 0.16 seconds with 71 queries.