OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 21, 2014, 12:35:04 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Bishops Consecrations in Antioch  (Read 6224 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Chtets Ioann
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: ROCOR - Diocese of Canada
Posts: 125



« on: April 23, 2010, 09:24:06 PM »

I came across this the other day http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrLBGKwrt5o&feature=related, what exactly is going on here?  Huh

I've always thought only one deacon, one priest, and one bishop can be ordained at one Litrugy, around one altar table, one antimens etc, and that if more than one was to be ordained (the canons say) that the ordinations are invalid, and the Hierarch who is doing them is automatically defrocked.

I guess my question is, how is this justified? According to the Canons, are the Antiocheans still in the Church? 

« Last Edit: April 23, 2010, 09:32:05 PM by Chtets Ioann » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #1 on: April 24, 2010, 12:01:18 AM »

I came across this the other day http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrLBGKwrt5o&feature=related, what exactly is going on here?  Huh

Looks like episcopal consecration. Very nice, hadn't seen it before.

Quote
I've always thought only one deacon, one priest, and one bishop can be ordained at one Litrugy, around one altar table, one antimens etc, and that if more than one was to be ordained (the canons say) that the ordinations are invalid, and the Hierarch who is doing them is automatically defrocked.

Citations, please.

Quote
I guess my question is, how is this justified? According to the Canons, are the Antiocheans still in the Church? 
LOL.  Yes, since around 35 AD or so.
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
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #2 on: April 24, 2010, 12:24:05 AM »

Christ is Risen!

Does anybody recall that when the Church of Jerusalem came to the rescue of the Antiochian clergy who had been wounded by the Ben Lomond eruption, Jerusalem treated them as laymen if they had been previously ordained in multiple ordinations and they were ordained to the Priesthood anew..
Logged
serb1389
Lord, remember me when you come into your Kingdom!
Global Moderator
Merarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 8,400


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 24, 2010, 12:34:33 AM »

I came across this the other day http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrLBGKwrt5o&feature=related, what exactly is going on here?  Huh

I've always thought only one deacon, one priest, and one bishop can be ordained at one Litrugy, around one altar table, one antimens etc, and that if more than one was to be ordained (the canons say) that the ordinations are invalid, and the Hierarch who is doing them is automatically defrocked.

I guess my question is, how is this justified? According to the Canons, are the Antiocheans still in the Church? 



I have several articles pertaining to cluster ordinations that are actually very interesting.  If you're interested PM me with your email or just feel free to email me! 
Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,925



« Reply #4 on: April 24, 2010, 12:52:06 AM »

I would also like to note that the Church has something called "economia", which has many meanings when it comes to Orthodoxy, but as it relates to canons, economia is basically making an exception to the canons. The canons are not set in stone and are not an absolute yes/no, true/false, good/bad, black/white dividing line. Even if it is "wrong", I would say the Church has bigger problems to worry about than the possible breaking of such a canon.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #5 on: April 24, 2010, 01:25:51 AM »

I would also like to note that the Church has something called "economia", which has many meanings when it comes to Orthodoxy, but as it relates to canons, economia is basically making an exception to the canons. The canons are not set in stone and are not an absolute yes/no, true/false, good/bad, black/white dividing line. Even if it is "wrong", I would say the Church has bigger problems to worry about than the possible breaking of such a canon.
Christ is risen!

I'm just curious, as I've seen this topic brought up many a time, alluding to the authority of canons that I have never seen cited.
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
Chtets Ioann
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: ROCOR - Diocese of Canada
Posts: 125



« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2010, 01:33:12 AM »

No, it doesn't look like an Orthodox Episcopal Consecration. That's why I bothered starting this thread. This http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d5/Russian_Orthodox_Episcopal_Ordination.jpg looks like an Orthodox Episcopal Consecration. Note the open Gospel book over the candidates head, not the omophorion as is used in the ordinations of Deacons and Presbyteres. I should note that on the eve of this the candidate must make a full confession of faith. This includes the Nicene creed, and various other statements. In the videos linked to the one I posted on youtube, you can see the future Antiochean Bishops making the confession of faith... but in three parts.  

Quote
Citations, please.

It should not be overlooked that the Church does not treat uncritically ordinations performed within its bosom. There are any number of Orthodox ordinations which are declared to be invalid.

"Concerning Maximus the Cynic . . it is decreed that Maximus never was and is not now a Bishop . . since all which has been done concerning him or by him is declared to be invalid" [E.C. II:4],

even though he was an outstanding Orthodox and received his ordination from proper Orthodox bishops. This includes all those canons which proclaim invalid those Orthodox ordinations performed with substantial deviations from the canons such as without the approval of the Metropolitan [EC I:6], by a bishop from another diocese [AC 14:, 35] and on a strange cleric [E.C.I:16; Sard. 15, Carth. 91, and others].



Quote
I guess my question is, how is this justified? According to the Canons, are the Antiocheans still in the Church?  
LOL.  Yes, since around 35 AD or so.[/quote]

So were the Armenians, Copts, Ethiopians until the fourth Ecumenical Council.


« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 01:34:44 AM by Chtets Ioann » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #7 on: April 24, 2010, 01:52:59 AM »

No, it doesn't look like an Orthodox Episcopal Consecration.
Must be your blinders.

Quote
That's why I bothered starting this thread.

Why don't you bring it up with your bishop instead, to bring canonical proceedings?

Quote
That it does. If I am not mistaken, that is Patriarch Alexei of blessed memory, so recently your Patriarch.

Quote
Note the open Gospel book over the candidates head, not the omophorion as is used in the ordinations of Deacons and Presbyteres.

Doesn't seem to be the altar Gospel book, so I guess it doesn't count.

Quote
I should note that on the eve of this the candidate must make a full confession of faith. This includes the Nicene creed, and various other statements. In the videos linked to the one I posted on youtube, you can see the future Antiochean Bishops making the confession of faith... but in three parts.

Do you have doubts about the other 2/3?

Quote
Quote
Citations, please.

It should not be overlooked that the Church does not treat uncritically ordinations performed within its bosom. There are any number of Orthodox ordinations which are declared to be invalid.
That is true, but you have yet to prove the relevance to the question at hand.

Quote
"Concerning Maximus the Cynic . . it is decreed that Maximus never was and is not now a Bishop . . since all which has been done concerning him or by him is declared to be invalid" [E.C. II:4],

even though he was an outstanding Orthodox and received his ordination from proper Orthodox bishops.

That was because he was usurping the rightful bishop, Pope Peter II acting out of his jurisdiction.

Quote
This includes all those canons which proclaim invalid those Orthodox ordinations performed with substantial deviations from the canons such as without the approval of the Metropolitan [EC I:6],
The Video shows HB Patriarch Ignatius.

Quote
by a bishop from another diocese [AC 14:, 35]

The bishops are all in the Antiochian Patriarchate.

Quote
and on a strange cleric [E.C.I:16; Sard. 15, Carth. 91, and others].

No one strange there.

I must say, I find that odd coming from someone whose jurisdiction is, by definition, outside its canonical boundaries.  Btw, I meant relevant canons.

Quote
Quote
I guess my question is, how is this justified? According to the Canons, are the Antiocheans still in the Church? 
LOL.  Yes, since around 35 AD or so.

So were the Armenians, Copts, Ethiopians until the fourth Ecumenical Council.[/quote][/quote]
And where were you in 2006?
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
Chtets Ioann
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: ROCOR - Diocese of Canada
Posts: 125



« Reply #8 on: April 24, 2010, 02:52:00 AM »


Quote
Why don't you bring it up with your bishop instead, to bring canonical proceedings?

Why would I do that? It's called you people should be responsible and follow the canonical proceedings of the Eastern Orthodox Church. That includes not having Subdeacons do litanies. That would also include having the soon to be deacon wear a stiharion at his ordination, after all he's a subdeacon, not doing multiple ordinations at the same Divine Liturgy, and for sure not consecrating Hierarchs as shown in the video.

Quote
Doesn't seem to be the altar Gospel book, so I guess it doesn't count.

It's not for me to say if it counts or not, I'm just a lowly Reader now where in my what I am line on my profile did I put "8th Ecumenical Council" or something to that effect.

Quote
Do you have doubts about the other 2/3?

Nope, I should have been more clearer. The confession of faith is d i v i d e d amongst each of the candidates. Each candidate must make the full confession of faith by himself, otherwise in the future they may be challenged on if they are really Orthodox or not. Example, Bishop so and so "why, I saw you make your confession of faith, you skipped (lets say) the Nicean Creed part of it, so you don't believe in all that!" It's to make sure the candidate believes in everything correctly and is in all things Orthodox. If anything, this is for his own integrity.  

The relevance is that just because an ordination happens inside the Church, if it's done contrary to the canons it's invalid. That's the relevance.

Quote
"Concerning Maximus the Cynic . . it is decreed that Maximus never was and is not now a Bishop . . since all which has been done concerning him or by him is declared to be invalid" [E.C. II:4],

even though he was an outstanding Orthodox and received his ordination from proper Orthodox bishops.


That was because he was usurping the rightful bishop, Pope Peter II acting out of his jurisdiction.

... True. And now we are talking about a multiple ordination being done, something never before done in the Orthodox Church, and something contrary to our Canons and our Holy Tradition.

Quote
This includes all those canons which proclaim invalid those Orthodox ordinations performed with substantial deviations from the canons such as without the approval of the Metropolitan [EC I:6],

So if the Canons declare that an ordination done by a visiting hierarch without permission of the local hierarch is invalid, then how much more this.

Quote
The Video shows HB Patriarch Ignatius.

So? It could show St. John Chrysostom for all I care. As we say in Greek, epi tou thematos- to the subject! No body gets an exception from the Holy Canons, not even Saints, much less Patriarchs.

[/quote]And where were you in 2006?[/quote]

We were in the Orthodox Church! The question is, where are you now?
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 03:01:10 AM by Chtets Ioann » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #9 on: April 24, 2010, 03:02:13 AM »

Why don't you bring it up with your bishop instead, to bring canonical proceedings?

Why would I do that? It's called you people should be responsible and follow the canonical proceedings of the Eastern Orthodox Church. That includes not having Subdeacons do litanies. That would also include having the soon to be deacon wear a stiharion at his ordination, after all he's a subdeacon, not doing multiple ordinations at the same Divine Liturgy, and for sure not consecrating Hierarchs as shown in the video.

Quote
Doesn't seem to be the altar Gospel book, so I guess it doesn't count.

It's not for me to say if it counts or not, I'm just a lowly Reader now where in my what I am line on my profile did I put "8th Ecumenical Council" or something to that effect.

Quote
Do you have doubts about the other 2/3?

Nope, I should have been more clearer. The confession of faith is d i v i d e d amongst each of the candidates. Each candidate must make the full confession of faith by himself, otherwise in the future they may be challenged on if they are really Orthodox or not. Example, Bishop so and so "why, I saw you make your confession of faith, you skipped (lets say) the Nicean Creed part of it, so you don't believe in all that!" It's to make sure the candidate believes in everything correctly and is in all things Orthodox. If anything, this is for his own integrity.  

The relevance is that just because an ordination happens inside the Church, if it's done contrary to the canons it's invalid. That's the relevance.

Quote
"Concerning Maximus the Cynic . . it is decreed that Maximus never was and is not now a Bishop . . since all which has been done concerning him or by him is declared to be invalid" [E.C. II:4],

even though he was an outstanding Orthodox and received his ordination from proper Orthodox bishops.


That was because he was usurping the rightful bishop, Pope Peter II acting out of his jurisdiction.

... True. And now we are talking about a multiple ordination being done, something never before done in the Orthodox Church, and something contrary to our Canons and our Holy Tradition. So if the Canons declare that an ordination done by a visiting hierarch without permission of the local hierarch is invalid, then how much more this.

Quote
This includes all those canons which proclaim invalid those Orthodox ordinations performed with substantial deviations from the canons such as without the approval of the Metropolitan [EC I:6],

Quote
The Video shows HB Patriarch Ignatius.

So? It could show St. John Chrysostom for all I care. As we say in Greek, epi tou thematos- to the subject! No body gets an exception from the Holy Canons, not even Saints, much less Patriarchs.

And where were you in 2006?[/quote]

We were in the Orthodox Church! The question is, where are you now?
[/quote]
In the diptychs, where we were before 2006.

Lord willing, I'll return to this.  I don't have time to edit. But in the meantime, do get to the point and cite which canon you claim is being violated with the multiple ordination.

Btw, " multiple ordination being done, something never before done in the Orthodox Church."  Do read Acts 13.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 03:05:19 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
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,091


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #10 on: April 24, 2010, 06:54:49 AM »

I would also like to note that the Church has something called "economia", which has many meanings when it comes to Orthodoxy, but as it relates to canons, economia is basically making an exception to the canons. The canons are not set in stone and are not an absolute yes/no, true/false, good/bad, black/white dividing line. Even if it is "wrong", I would say the Church has bigger problems to worry about than the possible breaking of such a canon.

The exercise of economy is not making an exception to the canons.  The opposite term used is "Akrevia" which is "exactness," and Economy is "taking account" - that is, modifying the letter to suit the situation if the situation calls for it.  Economy can actually be more severe than exactness, although it is rarely used in that capacity.  However, it is usually not "disregarding" or "making an exception" to the canons.

E.g. If a canon states that those who lie to their parents should do 40 prostrations and be excluded from communion for 1 week, then "akrevia" would involve that specific epitimia (penance).  However, if a spiritual father directs that 80 prostrations and 2 week exclusion from communion (minor excommunication) be done, then that is Economy, just as it would also be Economy if he said to do 10 prostrations and not miss communion.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 06:57:35 AM by Fr. George » 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.
Elpidophoros
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: OX
Posts: 292



« Reply #11 on: April 24, 2010, 07:52:20 AM »

Christ is Risen!

Does anybody recall that when the Church of Jerusalem came to the rescue of the Antiochian clergy who had been wounded by the Ben Lomond eruption, Jerusalem treated them as laymen if they had been previously ordained in multiple ordinations and they were ordained to the Priesthood anew..

The antiochian archbishop of Australia also performed multiple ordinations in Philippines. As far as I know till now no one hierarch officially condemned them as invalid.But practicaly the clergy from EP side treat them as laymen de facto. Very sad.What kind of oikonomia it can be? Metropolitan Hilarion of ROCOR ordainded more than dozen priests and deacons in Indonesia.The situation was similar(non-orthodox hot-tropical less developed country ),but he performed ordinations in normal manner. Metropolitan Nektarios of Hongkong(EP)also ordained people in those countries without any irregularity or "oikonomia".Those antiochians live in the same planet as we do,why they cannot do the same things all other jurisdictions do. A good oikonomia build church,not to split.
Logged
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,091


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #12 on: April 24, 2010, 09:28:51 AM »

^ What didn't make sense to me at the time when these ordinations were done was the reason why they were done in Damascus to begin with.  There were enough bishops here in the U.S., and (at the time) there was this idea that they were all being ordained as diocesan bishops - so why not ordain them in the states?  I think they did this big triple-ordination because they ordained them in Damascus and wanted to do it on one Sunday while the delegation was in town - not a great reason, IMO, but I'm not the judge.
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.
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,352


metron ariston


« Reply #13 on: April 24, 2010, 12:31:17 PM »

The exercise of economy is not making an exception to the canons.  The opposite term used is "Akrevia" which is "exactness," and Economy is "taking account" - that is, modifying the letter to suit the situation if the situation calls for it.  Economy can actually be more severe than exactness, although it is rarely used in that capacity.  However, it is usually not "disregarding" or "making an exception" to the canons.

E.g. If a canon states that those who lie to their parents should do 40 prostrations and be excluded from communion for 1 week, then "akrevia" would involve that specific epitimia (penance).  However, if a spiritual father directs that 80 prostrations and 2 week exclusion from communion (minor excommunication) be done, then that is Economy, just as it would also be Economy if he said to do 10 prostrations and not miss communion.

Indeed. The canonical textbooks define oikonomia as "the appropriate way for a Christian to bend from ακρίβεια (exactness) without transforming the dogmatic terms for the salvation of people." [cf. Meletios Sakellaropoulos, Έκκλησιαστικον δίκαιον τής 'Ανατολικής 'Ορθοδόξου Εκκλησίας (Athens, 1898); H. Ahvizatos, Ή Οικονομία κατά το κανονικον δίκαιον τής 'Ορθοδόξου 'Εκκλησίας (Athens, 1949); or P. Bournes, Ή Εκκλησιαστική οικονομία κατά το κανονικον δίκαιον (Athens, 1971)].

In other words, there are two characteristics of oikonomia: (1) a "bending" of strictness without violation of dogma; and (2) a bending that is done for the salvation of the people involved.

Instead of using a theoretical example of oikonomia that is more "strict," you can just use an actual example from the Holy Fathers of the Sixth Ecumenical Council (aka Quinisext), who exercised oikonomiain their 12th canon, which forbids clergymen from keeping their wives after ordination to the Episcopate, even though the exactness (akribeia) of the canonical and Scriptural tradition, as represented in the 5th Apostolic canon, 1 Tim 3:2, and Titus 1:5-7, forbids such an action. However, as the Fathers of the Sixth Ecumenical make clear in the 12th canon, "we speak in this way not in contempt or rejection of the apostolic legislation but so that the people may attain salvation and prosper in greater things, and to avoid any wrong that the sacerdotal state might suffer." And, as they say in their next canon: "We, preserving the ancient rule and apostolic exactness (akribeia) and order, declare that the lawful marriages of men who are in holy orders be from this time forward firm, by no means dissolving their union with their wives..." Thus, they preserve the dogma, and bend from the exactness (in this case appearing more strict) for the salvation of the faithful, who were scandalized at the thought of married Bishops.
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)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #14 on: April 24, 2010, 02:22:09 PM »

The exercise of economy is not making an exception to the canons.  The opposite term used is "Akrevia" which is "exactness," and Economy is "taking account" - that is, modifying the letter to suit the situation if the situation calls for it.  Economy can actually be more severe than exactness, although it is rarely used in that capacity.  However, it is usually not "disregarding" or "making an exception" to the canons.

E.g. If a canon states that those who lie to their parents should do 40 prostrations and be excluded from communion for 1 week, then "akrevia" would involve that specific epitimia (penance).  However, if a spiritual father directs that 80 prostrations and 2 week exclusion from communion (minor excommunication) be done, then that is Economy, just as it would also be Economy if he said to do 10 prostrations and not miss communion.

Indeed. The canonical textbooks define oikonomia as "the appropriate way for a Christian to bend from ακρίβεια (exactness) without transforming the dogmatic terms for the salvation of people." [cf. Meletios Sakellaropoulos, Έκκλησιαστικον δίκαιον τής 'Ανατολικής 'Ορθοδόξου Εκκλησίας (Athens, 1898); H. Ahvizatos, Ή Οικονομία κατά το κανονικον δίκαιον τής 'Ορθοδόξου 'Εκκλησίας (Athens, 1949); or P. Bournes, Ή Εκκλησιαστική οικονομία κατά το κανονικον δίκαιον (Athens, 1971)].

In other words, there are two characteristics of oikonomia: (1) a "bending" of strictness without violation of dogma; and (2) a bending that is done for the salvation of the people involved.

Instead of using a theoretical example of oikonomia that is more "strict," you can just use an actual example from the Holy Fathers of the Sixth Ecumenical Council (aka Quinisext), who exercised oikonomiain their 12th canon, which forbids clergymen from keeping their wives after ordination to the Episcopate, even though the exactness (akribeia) of the canonical and Scriptural tradition, as represented in the 5th Apostolic canon, 1 Tim 3:2, and Titus 1:5-7, forbids such an action. However, as the Fathers of the Sixth Ecumenical make clear in the 12th canon, "we speak in this way not in contempt or rejection of the apostolic legislation but so that the people may attain salvation and prosper in greater things, and to avoid any wrong that the sacerdotal state might suffer." And, as they say in their next canon: "We, preserving the ancient rule and apostolic exactness (akribeia) and order, declare that the lawful marriages of men who are in holy orders be from this time forward firm, by no means dissolving their union with their wives..." Thus, they preserve the dogma, and bend from the exactness (in this case appearing more strict) for the salvation of the faithful, who were scandalized at the thought of married Bishops.
And how would they deal with I Timothy 4:3?
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
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #15 on: April 24, 2010, 02:51:14 PM »

Originally the consecrations were to take place over 3 days but Patriarch Ignatius decided that he was not up to serving 3 straight days of Episcopal Consecrations so he decided to do all 3 on the same day. 
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 02:51:42 PM by arimethea » Logged

Joseph
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,091


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #16 on: April 24, 2010, 03:00:16 PM »

Originally the consecrations were to take place over 3 days but Patriarch Ignatius decided that he was not up to serving 3 straight days of Episcopal Consecrations so he decided to do all 3 on the same day. 

That makes sense.  Did you ever hear why they weren't done in the US by His Eminence and the other Bishops?
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.
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,091


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #17 on: April 24, 2010, 03:02:44 PM »

And how would they deal with I Timothy 4:3?

Or St. Peter's vision of the animals...
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 03:03:29 PM by Fr. George » 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.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,646


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #18 on: April 24, 2010, 03:58:39 PM »

Quote
Why don't you bring it up with your bishop instead, to bring canonical proceedings?

Why would I do that?
Because it's a more responsible thing to do than to gossip about it on an Internet discussion board.  If you have a complaint about the uncanonical nature of a particular liturgical practice, I would suggest you take it up with someone who actually has the authority to do something about it (or can correct your misunderstanding of what happened).  Right now you're just gossiping.

It's called you people should be responsible and follow the canonical proceedings of the Eastern Orthodox Church. That includes not having Subdeacons do litanies. That would also include having the soon to be deacon wear a stiharion at his ordination, after all he's a subdeacon, not doing multiple ordinations at the same Divine Liturgy, and for sure not consecrating Hierarchs as shown in the video.

Quote
Doesn't seem to be the altar Gospel book, so I guess it doesn't count.

It's not for me to say if it counts or not, I'm just a lowly Reader now where in my what I am line on my profile did I put "8th Ecumenical Council" or something to that effect.

Quote
Do you have doubts about the other 2/3?

Nope, I should have been more clearer. The confession of faith is d i v i d e d amongst each of the candidates. Each candidate must make the full confession of faith by himself, otherwise in the future they may be challenged on if they are really Orthodox or not. Example, Bishop so and so "why, I saw you make your confession of faith, you skipped (lets say) the Nicean Creed part of it, so you don't believe in all that!" It's to make sure the candidate believes in everything correctly and is in all things Orthodox. If anything, this is for his own integrity.  

The relevance is that just because an ordination happens inside the Church, if it's done contrary to the canons it's invalid. That's the relevance.
But you haven't yet told us which specific canons have been violated.  How can we see the relevance in your general statement that the Church sees some ordinations as invalid if you won't tell us specifically upon what canonical grounds they are invalid?

Quote
"Concerning Maximus the Cynic . . it is decreed that Maximus never was and is not now a Bishop . . since all which has been done concerning him or by him is declared to be invalid" [E.C. II:4],

even though he was an outstanding Orthodox and received his ordination from proper Orthodox bishops.


That was because he was usurping the rightful bishop, Pope Peter II acting out of his jurisdiction.

... True. And now we are talking about a multiple ordination being done, something never before done in the Orthodox Church, and something contrary to our Canons and our Holy Tradition.
WHAT canons?

Quote
This includes all those canons which proclaim invalid those Orthodox ordinations performed with substantial deviations from the canons such as without the approval of the Metropolitan [EC I:6],

So if the Canons declare that an ordination done by a visiting hierarch without permission of the local hierarch is invalid, then how much more this.
WHAT canons?

Quote
The Video shows HB Patriarch Ignatius.

So? It could show St. John Chrysostom for all I care. As we say in Greek, epi tou thematos- to the subject! No body gets an exception from the Holy Canons, not even Saints, much less Patriarchs.
WHAT canons?

Yes, I am pressing this point, but I'm trying to make it painfully clear to you that for there to be a violation of the canons, there have to be specific canons you can cite to show the violation.  Your repeated general reference to "the Canons" without naming any one of them explicitly is not enough.

Quote
And where were you in 2006?

We were in the Orthodox Church! The question is, where are you now?
Until you can show specifically what canons have been violated and are willing to take this up with your bishop, I hardly think you have a case for arguing on an Internet discussion board that the Antiochian Orthodox Church may now be schismatic.
Logged
Chtets Ioann
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: ROCOR - Diocese of Canada
Posts: 125



« Reply #19 on: April 24, 2010, 04:10:52 PM »

Quote
WHAT Canons

I can't find a specific Canon. The closest thing I could find was St. Nikodemos' commentary on a canon having to do with ordination, and St. Nikodemos says that multiple ordinations at the same Liturgy are not allowable, and that such thing is against the tradition of the Orthodox Church.

In 50 years from now the Antiocheans will ordain a woman to the priesthood. And then you'll come and you'll say WHAT Canon forbids that! There is no canon that forbids that. **** The Canons, or rules to be more literal were instituted by the Holy Fathers as issues came up in the Church. Had Arianism not come up, there would be no Canon pertaining to it. No one questioned that the Theotokos fell asleep and went bodily to Heaven, therefore there are no Canons concerning her Dormition.

How is this gossip? In my view, something very important has come up which could mean a huge group of people are outside the Orthodox Church. Should this not be addressed for their own salvation?

And is it not something the Antiocheans should be aware of so they can bring it up amongst themselves? When the schismatics in Ukraine made their own Church in 1918 they got a Hierarchy by having priests and lay people ordain a Bishop. Obviously that is unallowable, and the same goes for doing multiple ordinations at the same Divine Liturgy.



Text of post modified to enforce compliance with the Moratorium on Discussing Homosexual Conduct  -PtA
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 04:17:24 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,917



« Reply #20 on: April 24, 2010, 04:13:10 PM »

Until you can show specifically what canons have been violated and are willing to take this up with your bishop, I hardly think you have a case for arguing on an Internet discussion board that the Antiochian Orthodox Church may now be schismatic.

I would be more worried about their communion with the Syriac "Miaphysites" and of their public acceptance of their "mysteries" as valid. I would also be more worried about their refusal to accept those who want to convert from "Miaphysitism" to the Orthodox Catholic Church.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 04:14:24 PM by Alveus Lacuna » Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #21 on: April 24, 2010, 04:16:24 PM »


Quote
WHAT Canons

I can't find a specific Canon. The closest thing I could find was St. Nikodemos' commentary on a canon having to do with ordination, and St. Nikodemos says that multiple ordinations at the same Liturgy are not allowable, and that such thing is against the tradition of the Orthodox Church.

In 50 years from now the Antiocheans will ordain a woman to the priesthood. And then you'll come and you'll say WHAT Canon forbids that! There is no canon that forbids that. There is also no Canon that forbids gay marriage, maybe the Antiocheans will start marrying gay people and you'll tell me, WHAT canon forbids that? The Canons, or rules to be more literal were instituted by the Holy Fathers as issues came up in the Church. Had Arianism not come up, there would be no Canon pertaining to it. No one questioned that the Theotokos fell asleep and went bodily to Heaven, therefore there are no Canons concerning her Dormition.

Now don't go moving the goalposts! Smiley
Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #22 on: April 24, 2010, 04:18:59 PM »

Until you can show specifically what canons have been violated and are willing to take this up with your bishop, I hardly think you have a case for arguing on an Internet discussion board that the Antiochian Orthodox Church may now be schismatic.

I would be more worried about their communion with the Syriac "Miaphysites" and of their public acceptance of their "mysteries" as valid. I would also be more worried about their refusal to accept those who want to convert from "Miaphysitism" to the Orthodox Catholic Church.

In the immortal words of Fred Savage in The Princess Bride, I'm not worried, I'm just concerned, and they're not the same thing angel (In other words, yes, it concerns me)
Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,646


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #23 on: April 24, 2010, 04:32:06 PM »

Quote
WHAT Canons

I can't find a specific Canon. The closest thing I could find was St. Nikodemos' commentary on a canon having to do with ordination, and St. Nikodemos says that multiple ordinations at the same Liturgy are not allowable, and that such thing is against the tradition of the Orthodox Church.
Well, if you have this commentary of St. Nikodemos handy and can quote it here, please do!  Just remember that that's all it is--commentary--and that without the canon that is the object of the commentary, the commentary by itself doesn't mean a whole lot.

In 50 years from now the Antiocheans will ordain a woman to the priesthood.
It hasn't happened yet and may never happen, so why worry about it?

And then you'll come and you'll say WHAT Canon forbids that! There is no canon that forbids that.
Let's cross that bridge when we get there, if we ever do.  Unlike that one Tom Cruise movie from a few years ago, Minority Report, we're not into punishing people for crimes they're going to commit.

The Canons, or rules to be more literal were instituted by the Holy Fathers as issues came up in the Church. Had Arianism not come up, there would be no Canon pertaining to it. No one questioned that the Theotokos fell asleep and went bodily to Heaven, therefore there are no Canons concerning her Dormition.
I think you may be confusing canons with dogmas.  They are, in fact, two totally different things.

How is this gossip? In my view, something very important has come up which could mean a huge group of people are outside the Orthodox Church. Should this not be addressed for their own salvation?
If you feel this strongly about it, then address it.  All I'm saying is that you need to address it with those who actually have the authority to do something about it, rather than merely sound off about it on an Internet discussion board with the hope that others will join you in getting just as inflamed about it as you are.  There's a lot of background information that a youtube video just cannot capture, and without knowledge of that background information, any response we offer may be totally off target.  That's why you need to address this issue with those who have the authority to request a formal ecclesiastical investigation into this possible liturgical abuse.  You're judging what you see in the video without asking questions first, and you're trying to stir us up to join you in your judgment of the Antiochian Orthodox Church.  I'm telling you that I will do no such thing and that I will urge others here to do no such thing until we know this situation much better than we can from watching a mere youtube video.

And is it not something the Antiocheans should be aware of so they can bring it up amongst themselves?
What good will that do, pray tell?

When the schismatics in Ukraine made their own Church in 1918 they got a Hierarchy by having priests and lay people ordain a Bishop. Obviously that is unallowable, and the same goes for doing multiple ordinations at the same Divine Liturgy.
Yet you still haven't shown us why this should be so obvious.  What specific canons have been violated?
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 04:35:06 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,723


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #24 on: April 24, 2010, 04:49:12 PM »

In the Armenian Church, ordinations are done all the time where more than one person is being ordained.  It doesn't bother anyone.  

I'm really wondering if a canon banning the practice really exists, or if it is just a tradition that developed among the EO over time?  If a canon does exist, perhaps it was promulgated after Chalcedon?

Here are some examples from the Armenian Church:

Three bishops being ordained at Etchmiadzin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY7zpgVuz3o&feature=player_profilepage&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2FArmenianChurch%23p%2Fu%2F1%2FBY7zpgVuz3o


27 priests being ordained at Etchmiadzin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJuhSkFput0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NU1vao19Nzk


5 deacons being ordained at Etchmiadzin:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=997kmiC-dZo


2 priests being ordained at the Western Diocese in the US:

http://www.armenianchurchwd.com/ordination-and-consecration-of-two-priests-at-western-diocese/
« Last Edit: May 04, 2010, 12:57:32 AM by Salpy » Logged

Cymbyz
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 496



« Reply #25 on: April 24, 2010, 04:59:38 PM »

I suspect the practice of doing individual ordinations in the Chalcedonian Churches arose out of a feeling that the orders of seniority would be better preserved that way.
Logged

The end of the world
is as near as the day of your death;
watch and pray.
 
 Yahoo! & WLM ID: Owen
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #26 on: April 24, 2010, 06:07:56 PM »

Originally the consecrations were to take place over 3 days but Patriarch Ignatius decided that he was not up to serving 3 straight days of Episcopal Consecrations so he decided to do all 3 on the same day. 

That makes sense.  Did you ever hear why they weren't done in the US by His Eminence and the other Bishops?

The sense at the time was to put the action (creating Diocesan bishops in a Self Ruled Archdiocese) above question, being done by the highest authority.
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
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,461


WWW
« Reply #27 on: April 24, 2010, 06:21:49 PM »

If these are existing Bishops in the Patriarch of Antioch, why were they reconsecrated en masse unless they were first defrocked?

Looks fishy, sounds fishy....   Angry
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 06:24:10 PM by SolEX01 » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #28 on: April 24, 2010, 06:37:09 PM »

If these are existing Bishops in the Patriarch of Antioch, why were they reconsecrated en masse unless they were first defrocked?

Looks fishy, sounds fishy....   Angry
They weren't consecrated already. Two auxiliary bishops had been consecrated, were elevated to Diocesan bishop, and they can be seen here consecrating the three new diocesan bishops.
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
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #29 on: April 24, 2010, 06:46:43 PM »

Originally the consecrations were to take place over 3 days but Patriarch Ignatius decided that he was not up to serving 3 straight days of Episcopal Consecrations so he decided to do all 3 on the same day. 

That makes sense.  Did you ever hear why they weren't done in the US by His Eminence and the other Bishops?

A decision by the Synod of Antioch in the late 1990's made the preferred place of consecration for all bishops of the Patriarchate to be at the Patriarchal Cathedral or one of the Patriarchal monasteries (in code speak the Monastery of St. Elias in Lebanon).
Logged

Joseph
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #30 on: April 24, 2010, 06:54:58 PM »

And is it not something the Antiocheans should be aware of so they can bring it up amongst themselves? When the schismatics in Ukraine made their own Church in 1918 they got a Hierarchy by having priests and lay people ordain a Bishop. Obviously that is unallowable, and the same goes for doing multiple ordinations at the same Divine Liturgy.

Was this the ideal, No! I think we all agree on that but, I don't see why you are getting so upset about this when your bishops don't seem to have any issue with it. One of the bishops you are being critical of is Bishop Mark of Toledo and he has a very good relationship with the ROCOR hierarchy. Bishop Mark served with the other ROCOR bishops at the funeral of your first hierarch a couple of years ago and, I know for a fact, that they knew of the circumstances under which he was consecrated and, they not only treated him as a bishop but gave him one of the high places of standing since he was from Antioch.
Logged

Joseph
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,461


WWW
« Reply #31 on: April 24, 2010, 06:57:46 PM »

If these are existing Bishops in the Patriarch of Antioch, why were they reconsecrated en masse unless they were first defrocked?

Looks fishy, sounds fishy....   Angry
They weren't consecrated already. Two auxiliary bishops had been consecrated, were elevated to Diocesan bishop, and they can be seen here consecrating the three new diocesan bishops.

How can Bishops Thomas and Mark serve for years in their Dioceses (or as auxiliary Bishops or as whatever Hierarchs Met. Philip and Pat. Ignatius want to call them) without first being consecrated until July 2009?  Bishops Thomas and Mark are going into the altar as Priests to be consecrated, not as incumbent Bishops!!

I didn't realize that a Bishop elect could wear the vestments of a Bishop without being formally consecrated.  Maybe that was why Met. Philip had all this confusion because each Diocesan Bishop was just a Bishop-elect waiting to be consecrated formally at the Patriarchal Cathedral on non-US soil?   Huh
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 07:00:23 PM by SolEX01 » Logged
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 2,968


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #32 on: April 24, 2010, 07:24:44 PM »

If these are existing Bishops in the Patriarch of Antioch, why were they reconsecrated en masse unless they were first defrocked?

Looks fishy, sounds fishy....   Angry
They weren't consecrated already. Two auxiliary bishops had been consecrated, were elevated to Diocesan bishop, and they can be seen here consecrating the three new diocesan bishops.

How can Bishops Thomas and Mark serve for years in their Dioceses (or as auxiliary Bishops or as whatever Hierarchs Met. Philip and Pat. Ignatius want to call them) without first being consecrated until July 2009?  Bishops Thomas and Mark are going into the altar as Priests to be consecrated, not as incumbent Bishops!!

I didn't realize that a Bishop elect could wear the vestments of a Bishop without being formally consecrated.  Maybe that was why Met. Philip had all this confusion because each Diocesan Bishop was just a Bishop-elect waiting to be consecrated formally at the Patriarchal Cathedral on non-US soil?   Huh
The video was posted in July of 2009 of the consecrations that took place in December of 2004. 
Logged

Joseph
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,461


WWW
« Reply #33 on: April 24, 2010, 07:44:05 PM »

The video was posted in July of 2009 of the consecrations that took place in December of 2004.

I'm now a happy camper.  Thanks.   Smiley
Logged
Chtets Ioann
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: ROCOR - Diocese of Canada
Posts: 125



« Reply #34 on: April 24, 2010, 11:09:12 PM »

Quote
Text of post modified to enforce compliance with the Moratorium on Discussing Homosexual Conduct  -PtA

Antioch could learn a thing or two in keeping with rules and tradition, if only they were as zealous as the forum. Sorry for mentioning that, I'm new so I didn't know the H or G word was forbidden till Pentecost.

Again, being new I'm not so familiar with quoting and all that, but some people said something along the lines of Bishop so and so co celebrates with the ROCOR hierarchy, and your ROCOR, so whats your problem?

To clarify: I saw something that has never been done before in the Orthodox Church, to date. From what I gather, the Fathers of the Church are against this practice.

I'd like to quote the Moscow Synod of 1666 on this subject. Ie, cluster Ordinations. This is in refrence to such ordinations that took place in the western dioceses of the Moscow Patriarchate at that time.
Quote
In the Holy Eastern Church there is no such ordo, and no such custom

St. Nikodemos is a leading authority on the Canons. He put together the Rudder for crying out loud. St. Nikodemos is commenting on Apostolic Canon 58, which forbids more than one ordination of the same person to the same office. He talks about not ordaining more than one deacon, presbyter, or Hierarch per Liturgy in addition to this. A case made for accepting St. Nikodemos as an authority on this is based on his status as a Father of the Church and codifier of the Pedalion (The Rudder).


Further more, St. Symeon of Thessaloniki says about singular ordinations "this is the custom we have seen."

Someone said that this is all gossip. If me asking about a practice that is obviously wrong is gossip, then Lord have mercy.

Someone else said something about the Armenian Church, the Syrian Church etc. From the point that they left the Orthodox Church, it doesn't matter how many ordinations they do or what they do liturgically at all, since they are graceless.

Someone else told me to "take it up with your Bishop." That's wonderful advice. So, I think we should shut the forum down, and go right to our Bishops for everything. The Roman Catholic - Filioque - Purgatory thread it's 30 something odd page. Honestly LOL.

Of course, when I see my Bishop I will ask him. I'd love to get his view on this.

Logged
Chtets Ioann
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: ROCOR - Diocese of Canada
Posts: 125



« Reply #35 on: April 24, 2010, 11:12:39 PM »

And I forgot...

ialmisry said:

Quote
The sense at the time was to put the action (creating Diocesan bishops in a Self Ruled Archdiocese) above question, being done by the highest authority.

The highest authority in the Orthodox Church is the Lord Himself, the Gospels, Holy Tradition, the Holy Fathers, and the Holy Canons. We don't make up our own rules as we see fit. That's what the Pope in Rome does.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,019


"My god is greater."


« Reply #36 on: April 24, 2010, 11:14:06 PM »

As St. Basil said, both written and unwritten tradition have the same force for piety. It is a received tradition not to consecrate more than one bishop at a time. Canons are nice but there's plenty of Orthodox tradition that doesn't have a canon connected to it but which we still consider binding. I wouldn't say that the Antiochian abuse is the sort of thing one breaks communion over, but it certainly seems problematic to me.

Like Alveus, I think the arrangements with the non-Chalcedonians are a more troubling question.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 11:15:13 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,723


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #37 on: April 24, 2010, 11:28:47 PM »


Like Alveus, I think the arrangements with the non-Chalcedonians are a more troubling question.

Yeah, if you spend too much time around us, you may end up catching our Multiple Ordination Cooties, and find yourself with way too many bishops being ordained at one time.
Logged

Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,723


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #38 on: April 24, 2010, 11:34:27 PM »

Someone else said something about the Armenian Church, the Syrian Church etc. From the point that they left the Orthodox Church, it doesn't matter how many ordinations they do or what they do liturgically at all, since they are graceless.


Nice.  

I mentioned the Armenian practice purely for the reason that it sometimes helps to compare our traditions.  Since, the OO's and EO's have been separated geographically and politically for several centuries, comparisons can be helpful in finding out how ancient a practice is.  Very often in matters like these our practices and beliefs will be very similar, and that attests to a very ancient, pre-fifth century origin.  

In this case, however, there is a difference in our traditions, which means one practice is ancient and the other isn't.  I'm not saying your practice is an innovation.  It could be that ours is.  I don't know.  I just would like to see the canon that forbids the practice in the EO Church.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 11:35:01 PM by Salpy » Logged

Chtets Ioann
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: ROCOR - Diocese of Canada
Posts: 125



« Reply #39 on: April 24, 2010, 11:38:24 PM »

Quote
I mentioned the Armenian practice purely for the reason that it sometimes helps to compare our traditions.  Since, the OO's and EO's have been separated geographically and politically for several centuries, comparisons can be helpful in finding out how ancient a practice is. Very often in matters like these our practices and beliefs will be very similar, and that attests to a very ancient, pre-fifth century origin.  

In this case, however, there is a difference in our traditions, which means one practice is ancient and the other isn't.  I'm not saying your practice is an innovation.  It could be that ours is.  I don't know.  I just would like to see the canon that forbids the practice in the EO Church.

Read above what Iconodule said.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 11:38:52 PM by Chtets Ioann » Logged
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,723


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #40 on: April 24, 2010, 11:40:55 PM »

Iconodule said a lot of things.  Specifically what are you referring to?
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 11:41:19 PM by Salpy » Logged

Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,094


Goodbye for now, my friend


« Reply #41 on: April 24, 2010, 11:44:31 PM »

Yeah, if you spend too much time around us, you may end up catching our Multiple Ordination Cooties, and find yourself with way too many bishops being ordained at one time.

I know this wasn't addressed to me, but I feel that indirectly it sort of was, so I have to say, that's not fair, Salpy. I really enjoy the posts of Oriental Orthodox such as yourself, Mina, Ekhristosanesti, and in past times Mor Ephrem. But there is nonetheless issues to be worried about. For example, I was taught when I became Orthodox that I couldn't commune until I was officially received into the Church, because shared communion meant more than just "let's be friends," and even more than "we agree with each other," but it also said something about the status of both of us vis-a-vis Church membership. Orthodoxy was exclusivistic, and so even if I agreed with her intellectually and followed her practices as a catechumen, that wasn't yet enough to allow me to receive communion. I had to formally and officially unite myself to her. Now, please do not misunderstand, I am not saying that I expect Oriental Orthodox to convert like I did. What I am saying is that it is not quite so cut and dry and clear that we are the same Church yet. There are still problems to resolve, so far as I understand it. But perhaps I am wrong to be worried... would you argue that all the problems have been resolved? Not to turn this into an Oriental Orthodox discussion, and you're probably sick of certain of those topics, but if you could indulge me a moment...?
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 11:45:38 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

Paradosis ≠ Asteriktos ≠ Justin
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,960



« Reply #42 on: April 24, 2010, 11:47:22 PM »

And I forgot...

ialmisry said:

Quote
The sense at the time was to put the action (creating Diocesan bishops in a Self Ruled Archdiocese) above question, being done by the highest authority.

The highest authority in the Orthodox Church is the Lord Himself

He was the One doing the consecrating, using HB's hands.


Quote
, the Gospels, Holy Tradition, the Holy Fathers, and the Holy Canons. We don't make up our own rules as we see fit. That's what the Pope in Rome does.

Well, evidently you do, because you said that HB Pat. Ignatius was acting uncanonically, and yet you cannot produce the canon to condemn him.

Btw, there are canons about accusing a bishop falsely.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2010, 11:49:15 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
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,646


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #43 on: April 24, 2010, 11:50:56 PM »

Quote
Text of post modified to enforce compliance with the Moratorium on Discussing Homosexual Conduct  -PtA

Antioch could learn a thing or two in keeping with rules and tradition, if only they were as zealous as the forum. Sorry for mentioning that, I'm new so I didn't know the H or G word was forbidden till Pentecost.

Again, being new I'm not so familiar with quoting and all that, but some people said something along the lines of Bishop so and so co celebrates with the ROCOR hierarchy, and your ROCOR, so whats your problem?

To clarify: I saw something that has never been done before in the Orthodox Church, to date. From what I gather, the Fathers of the Church are against this practice.

I'd like to quote the Moscow Synod of 1666 on this subject. Ie, cluster Ordinations. This is in refrence to such ordinations that took place in the western dioceses of the Moscow Patriarchate at that time.
Quote
In the Holy Eastern Church there is no such ordo, and no such custom
Can you give us specific information regarding how we can read for ourselves what this synod said about the matter?

St. Nikodemos is a leading authority on the Canons. He put together the Rudder for crying out loud. St. Nikodemos is commenting on Apostolic Canon 58, which forbids more than one ordination of the same person to the same office.
I just finished reading all 85 of the Apostolic Canons (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xvii.iv.html) yet found nothing in them that even comes close to mandating what you say Apostolic Canon 58 does.  In fact, here's what Apostolic Canon 58 really says:

"If any bishop or presbyter neglects the clergy or the people, and does not instruct them in the way of godliness, let him be excommunicated, and if he persists in his negligence and idleness, let him be deposed."

Maybe I'm reading the wrong body of canons.  If so, would you kindly point me to the canons I should be reading?  Thank you.

He talks about not ordaining more than one deacon, presbyter, or Hierarch per Liturgy in addition to this. A case made for accepting St. Nikodemos as an authority on this is based on his status as a Father of the Church and codifier of the Pedalion (The Rudder).
And yet all you can do is give us a paraphrase of what St. Nikodemos supposedly said.  Can you give a verbatim quote and credit your source so we can see for ourselves that he really said what you attribute to him?

Further more, St. Symeon of Thessaloniki says about singular ordinations "this is the custom we have seen."
Again, we need a source so we can read this quote from St. Symeon for ourselves.

Someone said that this is all gossip. If me asking about a practice that is obviously wrong is gossip, then Lord have mercy.
I suppose I should clarify what I was thinking about your activity on this thread.  It's not so much gossip as it is you accusing an Orthodox church of being in schism without proof.  Others here have indeed validated your claim that a multiple ordination was performed.  What has not been proven is that this violates the canons, as you claim.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2010, 12:05:59 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,723


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #44 on: April 24, 2010, 11:52:14 PM »

Yeah, if you spend too much time around us, you may end up catching our Multiple Ordination Cooties, and find yourself with way too many bishops being ordained at one time.

I know this wasn't addressed to me, but I feel that indirectly it sort of was, so I have to say, that's not fair, Salpy. I really enjoy the posts of Oriental Orthodox such as yourself, Mina, Ekhristosanesti, and in past times Mor Ephrem. But there is nonetheless issues to be worried about. For example, I was taught when I became Orthodox that I couldn't commune until I was officially received into the Church, because shared communion meant more than just "let's be friends," and even more than "we agree with each other," but it also said something about the status of both of us vis-a-vis Church membership. Orthodoxy was exclusivistic, and so even if I agreed with her intellectually and followed her practices as a catechumen, that wasn't yet enough to allow me to receive communion. I had to formally and officially unite myself to her. Now, please do not misunderstand, I am not saying that I expect Oriental Orthodox to convert like I did. What I am saying is that it is not quite so cut and dry and clear that we are the same Church yet. There are still problems to resolve, so far as I understand it. But perhaps I am wrong to be worried... would you argue that all the problems have been resolved? Not to turn this into an Oriental Orthodox discussion, and you're probably sick of certain of those topics, but if you could indulge me a moment...?

It's not the comment, but the spirit in which some of these comments can be made.  And don't worry, I didn't mean you.   Smiley
Logged

Tags: bishops Ordination cheval mort multiple ordinations 
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 0.187 seconds with 71 queries.