OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 01, 2014, 11:22:19 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Coronation of Patriarch Mstyslav, first Ukrainian Patriarch (of blessed mem  (Read 2105 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« on: February 10, 2011, 12:25:07 PM »

I found some beautiful links on youtube of Patriarch Mstyslav, first Ukrainian Patriarch (of blessed memory) which was conducted in St. Sophia's Ukrainian Orthodox Cathedral in Kyiv, Ukraine. This Cathedral is almost 1000 years old and the video of the iconostas is breathtaking. I was lucky enough to have visited the cathedral in the 90's and let me just say, it's amazing and humbling to be in such an ornate,historical, and holy temple.

Here in the United States, Metropolitan Mstyslav was perhaps best known for his decades of work to establish the Ukrainian Orthodox Church's worldwide center in South Bound Brook, N.J. It was at the Church's center that Metropolitan Mstyslav had built St. Andrew Memorial Church, which is dedicated to the memory of the victims of the 1932-1933 Great Famine in Ukraine. (This magnificent Church served as the focal point of the entire Ukrainian American community's solemn observances of the 50th anniversary of the Great Famine in 1983.)

A most tangible recognition of his strength of character and his leadership came during the synod on June 5-6, 1990, of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church when Metropolitan Mstyslav of the UOC-U.S.A. was elected as the first patriarch of the reborn Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Ukraine. Less than five months later, on October 20, 1990, Patriarch Mstyslav returned triumphantly to Ukraine at the age of 92 and after an absence of 46 years in preparation for his enthronement. His first destination on that fateful day in 1990 was St. Sophia Sobor, where the patriarch fell to his knees and kissed the ground thrice. Inside the cathedral he celebrated a moleben of thanksgiving. The next day he officiated at an archpastoral divine liturgy at St. Andrew Cathedral, where he had been consecrated as bishop back in May of 1942. Finally, on November 18 he was enthroned as patriarch of Kyiv and all Ukraine.

Alas, his tenure as patriarch was short-lived. Patriarch Mstyslav I died at the age of 95 on June 11, 1993. He was succeeded by Patriarch Volodymyr who passed in 1995 who then was suceeded by Patriarch Filaret.

Please enjpoy the videos and for my fellow Ukrainian speakers, enjoy his words in the 2nd video...

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L7PwQHCVrU in this video you can also see standing behind Pat Msytyslav, a younger Archbishop Antony of the UOCUSA
« Last Edit: February 10, 2011, 12:38:35 PM by pious1 » Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2011, 12:44:39 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L7PwQHCVrU in this video you can also see standing behind Pat Msytyslav, a younger Archbishop Antony of the UOCUSA

Thanks God  he changed his mind.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2011, 12:53:40 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L7PwQHCVrU in this video you can also see standing behind Pat Msytyslav, a younger Archbishop Antony of the UOCUSA

Thanks God  he changed his mind.

Why thank god he changed his mind? Does Ukraine not warrant their own church like Russia, Romania, Serbia, etc?
« Last Edit: February 10, 2011, 12:55:10 PM by pious1 » Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2011, 12:56:36 PM »

I thank God that 5 years later he chose to stop playing in a Church and to join THE Church (and led dosens of thousands people with him).
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,474



« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2011, 12:56:49 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L7PwQHCVrU in this video you can also see standing behind Pat Msytyslav, a younger Archbishop Antony of the UOCUSA

Thanks God  he changed his mind.

Why thank god he changed his mind? Does Ukraine not warrant their own church like Russia, Romania, Serbia, etc?
Does it want a Protestant church like England, Scotland, the Netherlands, Sweden, etc.
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
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2011, 01:01:05 PM »

BTW the words of Patriarch Mstyslav are full of martyr complex and wrongly understood patriotism.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2011, 01:01:53 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #6 on: February 10, 2011, 01:10:29 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L7PwQHCVrU in this video you can also see standing behind Pat Msytyslav, a younger Archbishop Antony of the UOCUSA

Thanks God  he changed his mind.

Why thank god he changed his mind? Does Ukraine not warrant their own church like Russia, Romania, Serbia, etc?
Does it want a Protestant church like England, Scotland, the Netherlands, Sweden, etc.

What makes the church "Protestant"? Because it is not yet recognized as cannonical?

Was the Bulgarian Orthodox Church before it was cannonically recognized considered "Protestant"? Was the Romanian?
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church has the same sacraments and beliefs as all the other Orthodox Churches, just different hierarchy.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,474



« Reply #7 on: February 10, 2011, 01:12:03 PM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L7PwQHCVrU in this video you can also see standing behind Pat Msytyslav, a younger Archbishop Antony of the UOCUSA

Thanks God  he changed his mind.

Why thank god he changed his mind? Does Ukraine not warrant their own church like Russia, Romania, Serbia, etc?
Does it want a Protestant church like England, Scotland, the Netherlands, Sweden, etc.

What makes the church "Protestant"? Because it is not yet recognized as cannonical?

Was the Bulgarian Orthodox Church before it was cannonically recognized considered "Protestant"? Was the Romanian?
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church has the same sacraments and beliefs as all the other Orthodox Churches, just different hierarchy.
Who consecrated that hiearchy?
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
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2011, 01:16:23 PM »

Was the Bulgarian Orthodox Church before it was cannonically recognized considered "Protestant"?

Church of Russia recognised it immediately. You are recognised by no one.

Quote
Was the Romanian?

For 12 years.

Quote
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church has the same sacraments and beliefs as all the other Orthodox Churches, just different hierarchy.

Taking into account what you wrote about sacraments in the Protestants Churches - it does not.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #9 on: February 10, 2011, 01:18:30 PM »

BTW the words of Patriarch Mstyslav are full of martyr complex and wrongly understood patriotism.

"To love God and our Homeland is the greatest virtue; to serve our Ukrainian Church and our Homeland is our highest duty....."   -- Metropolitan Vasyl Lypkiwskyj

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church Kyivan Patriarchate is a direct descendant of the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church of 1921 under Metroplitan Vasyl Lypkiwskyj.  The Ukrainian Orthodox faithful in the United States and Canada were all part of this church and were sent hierarchs from Ukraine to serve the faithful.  The first of which was His Beatitude Metropolitan John Theodorovich.  The UAOC was persecuted in Ukraine and thousands of Bishops and priests were executed at the hands of the Bolshevik regime.  

Logged
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,239


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #10 on: February 10, 2011, 01:23:21 PM »

Here we go again......Like the movie 'Groundhog Day', yet another US cultural reference point....
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,467


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #11 on: February 10, 2011, 01:26:37 PM »

Here we go again......Like the movie 'Groundhog Day', yet another US cultural reference point....

"They say we're young and we don't know
We won't find out until we grow
Well I don't know if all that's true
'Cause you got me, and baby I got you..."  Wink
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #12 on: February 10, 2011, 01:26:55 PM »

Was the Bulgarian Orthodox Church before it was cannonically recognized considered "Protestant"?

Church of Russia recognised it immediately. You are recognised by no one.

Quote
Was the Romanian?

For 12 years.

Quote
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church has the same sacraments and beliefs as all the other Orthodox Churches, just different hierarchy.

Taking into account what you wrote about sacraments in the Protestants Churches - it does not.

And what is the main reason that the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is NOT currently recognized by Worldwide Orthodoxy? Well politics...as Russia does not want Ukraine to have her own independent church, independent of Moscow and the EP does not want to upset Russia by recognizing it. Rememeber Ukraine has over 14 million adherents to the the UOCKP and that is 3rd largest of Orthodox adgerants next to the Russian and Romanian Orthodox Churches. Russia has never considered Ukraine as truly as seperate nation and as such the Russian church will never consider a truly independent Ukrainian church as Russians as a whole do not see Ukraine as a truly independent nation. Being as such, this is why there is a patriotic/nationalistic flair to the UOCKP.

There is nothing wrong with a patriotic sentiment within an orthodox church as all independent orthodox churches have the same flair. But because there is such anti-Ukrainian sentiment worldwide, we have the current situation. In time, we will recieve recognition and again no one has answered me why Ukraine can not have her own independent church when other nations do?
Logged
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #13 on: February 10, 2011, 01:30:58 PM »

What is interesting to me is that even though the UOCUSA under the EP since joining the EP has renounced her autocephally, they still continue to recognize Patriarch Mstyslav as "Patriarch"


http://uocofusa.com/history.html

Finally, on 14 October of 2001 we blessed the site of the future Historical and Educational Complex Museum in memory of Patriarch Mstyslav, which will complete the Consistory/Library complex building. In the courtyard of this complex will be a permanent monument commemorating the 8 million victims of the genocidal famine. This has become a long-term project for which we will have to raise a few million dollars more. We urge your support of this worthwhile project to ensure that it becomes a reality.


http://www.uocofusa.org/news_090514_1.html

We urge all parishes and individual members of our Holy Ukrainian Orthodox Church to step up their efforts in support of this important project.  It will not be just a Museum in Memory of Patriarch Mstyslav.  The Complex will be the center of religious and cultural education – with a media center and conference rooms to share who and what we are as Ukrainian Orthodox Christians.
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #14 on: February 10, 2011, 01:34:16 PM »

But because there is such anti-Ukrainian sentiment worldwide, we have the current situation.

Keep deluding yourself.
Quote
Why Ukraine can not have her own independent church when other nations do?

15/about 200 - most nations don't

Quote
What is interesting to me is that even though the UOCUSA under the EP since joining the EP has renounced her autocephaly, they still continue to recognize Patriarch Mstyslav as "Patriarch"

And Moscows calls a Roman Catholic Pope 'a Pope'. So what?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,474



« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2011, 01:36:46 PM »

Was the Bulgarian Orthodox Church before it was cannonically recognized considered "Protestant"?

Church of Russia recognised it immediately. You are recognised by no one.

Quote
Was the Romanian?

For 12 years.

Quote
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church has the same sacraments and beliefs as all the other Orthodox Churches, just different hierarchy.

Taking into account what you wrote about sacraments in the Protestants Churches - it does not.

And what is the main reason that the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is NOT currently recognized by Worldwide Orthodoxy? Well politics...as Russia does not want Ukraine to have her own independent church, independent of Moscow and the EP does not want to upset Russia by recognizing it. Rememeber Ukraine has over 14 million adherents to the the UOCKP and that is 3rd largest of Orthodox adgerants next to the Russian and Romanian Orthodox Churches. Russia has never considered Ukraine as truly as seperate nation and as such the Russian church will never consider a truly independent Ukrainian church as Russians as a whole do not see Ukraine as a truly independent nation. Being as such, this is why there is a patriotic/nationalistic flair to the UOCKP.
So what you are saying is that Ukraine merits its own autocephalous Church for politics.

There is nothing wrong with a patriotic sentiment within an orthodox church as all independent orthodox churches have the same flair. But because there is such anti-Ukrainian sentiment worldwide, we have the current situation. In time, we will recieve recognition and again no one has answered me why Ukraine can not have her own independent church when other nations do?
So you want your ecclesiastical organization to be recognized for politics.

Lebanon doesn't have its own Church, nor does Jordan nor Iraq.  Nor Canada, nor Japan, nor China...

Can the Ruthenians get their own Church in Zakarpattia?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,474



« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2011, 01:40:34 PM »

What is interesting to me is that even though the UOCUSA under the EP since joining the EP has renounced her autocephally, they still continue to recognize Patriarch Mstyslav as "Patriarch"


http://uocofusa.com/history.html

Finally, on 14 October of 2001 we blessed the site of the future Historical and Educational Complex Museum in memory of Patriarch Mstyslav, which will complete the Consistory/Library complex building. In the courtyard of this complex will be a permanent monument commemorating the 8 million victims of the genocidal famine. This has become a long-term project for which we will have to raise a few million dollars more. We urge your support of this worthwhile project to ensure that it becomes a reality.


http://www.uocofusa.org/news_090514_1.html

We urge all parishes and individual members of our Holy Ukrainian Orthodox Church to step up their efforts in support of this important project.  It will not be just a Museum in Memory of Patriarch Mstyslav.  The Complex will be the center of religious and cultural education – with a media center and conference rooms to share who and what we are as Ukrainian Orthodox Christians.
Many Ukrainian Orthodox Christians are canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Christians.
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
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2011, 01:48:13 PM »

Was the Bulgarian Orthodox Church before it was cannonically recognized considered "Protestant"?

Church of Russia recognised it immediately. You are recognised by no one.

Quote
Was the Romanian?

For 12 years.

Quote
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church has the same sacraments and beliefs as all the other Orthodox Churches, just different hierarchy.

Taking into account what you wrote about sacraments in the Protestants Churches - it does not.

And what is the main reason that the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is NOT currently recognized by Worldwide Orthodoxy? Well politics...as Russia does not want Ukraine to have her own independent church, independent of Moscow and the EP does not want to upset Russia by recognizing it. Rememeber Ukraine has over 14 million adherents to the the UOCKP and that is 3rd largest of Orthodox adgerants next to the Russian and Romanian Orthodox Churches. Russia has never considered Ukraine as truly as seperate nation and as such the Russian church will never consider a truly independent Ukrainian church as Russians as a whole do not see Ukraine as a truly independent nation. Being as such, this is why there is a patriotic/nationalistic flair to the UOCKP.
So what you are saying is that Ukraine merits its own autocephalous Church for politics.

There is nothing wrong with a patriotic sentiment within an orthodox church as all independent orthodox churches have the same flair. But because there is such anti-Ukrainian sentiment worldwide, we have the current situation. In time, we will recieve recognition and again no one has answered me why Ukraine can not have her own independent church when other nations do?
So you want your ecclesiastical organization to be recognized for politics.

Lebanon doesn't have its own Church, nor does Jordan nor Iraq.  Nor Canada, nor Japan, nor China...

Can the Ruthenians get their own Church in Zakarpattia?

Do Lebenon, Iraq, Canada, Japan, or China have a population where the majority are Orthodox? Again why can Bulgaria, Romania, Serbia, Greece, etx have thier own church and Ukraine can't?

If the Ruthenians wanted their own church and Ruthenia becomes a seperate country, I dont see why not.
Such a Local Church must also enjoy internal freedom from outside political interference, resulting in compromises. If freedom from politically-motivated compromises is essential, then freedom from spiritual compromise is even more essential. Politically-motivated compromises in ecumenism have led individual into spiritual compromises. Certain ‘Orthodox’ clergy are not just adopting the Roman Catholic calendar, but are also involved in ecumenism with Roman Catholicism and Protestantism to the point of renouncing Orthodox teaching.


To have the freedom to stand alone also means having an independent monastic life, with at least one fairly large monastery and one fairly large convent. Such monastic establishments should be able to supply the Local Church with a depth of spiritual life which parishes cannot provide. Such a monastery should be a source of bishops. It should also be able to provide a seminary, later with access to universities where, if necessary, doctorates in Church history and academic theology can be taken. Perhaps elders and eldresses might also appear in them to help guide the life of the Church. -Metr Kallistos (Ware) in Detroit

Logged
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #18 on: February 10, 2011, 01:50:40 PM »

What is interesting to me is that even though the UOCUSA under the EP since joining the EP has renounced her autocephally, they still continue to recognize Patriarch Mstyslav as "Patriarch"


http://uocofusa.com/history.html

Finally, on 14 October of 2001 we blessed the site of the future Historical and Educational Complex Museum in memory of Patriarch Mstyslav, which will complete the Consistory/Library complex building. In the courtyard of this complex will be a permanent monument commemorating the 8 million victims of the genocidal famine. This has become a long-term project for which we will have to raise a few million dollars more. We urge your support of this worthwhile project to ensure that it becomes a reality.


http://www.uocofusa.org/news_090514_1.html

We urge all parishes and individual members of our Holy Ukrainian Orthodox Church to step up their efforts in support of this important project.  It will not be just a Museum in Memory of Patriarch Mstyslav.  The Complex will be the center of religious and cultural education – with a media center and conference rooms to share who and what we are as Ukrainian Orthodox Christians.
Many Ukrainian Orthodox Christians are canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Christians.


We all know that the cannonical Ukrainian church under Met Volodymyr is under the Russian church and is not independent. It has a similiar relationship to the Russian church as Ukraine the country had as the Ukraine SSR under the Soviets. Just as Ukraine SSR had its own UN seat, it answered to Moscow and had no real independence which is the same as the UOCMP. Her head is the Russian Patriarch and is a Russian church, not Ukrainian.
Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,969


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #19 on: February 10, 2011, 01:51:27 PM »

God hates whining.
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.
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #20 on: February 10, 2011, 01:52:12 PM »

Again ialmisry, answer me why Ukraine can not have her own independent Ukrainian church with her own patriarch like the nations of Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, and Serbia?

Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #21 on: February 10, 2011, 02:00:44 PM »

Do Lebenon, Iraq, Canada, Japan, or China have a population where the majority are Orthodox?

No, but Macedonia, Belarus, Moldova and Montenegro have.

Quote
Have thier own church and Ukraine can't?

Many Ukrainians are not mature enough for the autocephaly. You show a great example.

Quote
Such a Local Church must also enjoy internal freedom from outside political interference, resulting in compromises.

So internal political interference is OK?

Quote
Certain ‘Orthodox’ clergy are not just adopting the Roman Catholic calendar, but are also involved in ecumenism with Roman Catholicism and Protestantism to the point of renouncing Orthodox teaching.

When did they renounce anything?
Why Protestant baptism is valid and revised-Julian calendar is invalid according to your Church?
Why despite all this heresies you want to be recognised by us?

God hates whining.

+1
« Last Edit: February 10, 2011, 02:01:34 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #22 on: February 10, 2011, 02:06:09 PM »

Do Lebenon, Iraq, Canada, Japan, or China have a population where the majority are Orthodox?

No, but Macedonia, Belarus, Moldova and Montenegro have.

Quote
Have thier own church and Ukraine can't?

Many Ukrainians are not mature enough for the autocephaly. You show a great example.

Quote
Such a Local Church must also enjoy internal freedom from outside political interference, resulting in compromises.

So internal political interference is OK?

Quote
Certain ‘Orthodox’ clergy are not just adopting the Roman Catholic calendar, but are also involved in ecumenism with Roman Catholicism and Protestantism to the point of renouncing Orthodox teaching.

When did they renounce anything?
Why Protestant baptism is valid and revised-Julian calendar is invalid according to your Church?
Why despite all this heresies you want to be recognised by us?

God hates whining.

+1

How am I not mature, I'm not name calling and i'm not putting anyone down.
How is Ukraine "not mature"?
Logged
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #23 on: February 10, 2011, 02:11:58 PM »


No, but Macedonia, Belarus, Moldova and Montenegro have.

Quote
Have thier own church and Ukraine can't?

If they want their own independent church, they have the right to form one. Montenegro and Macedonia have, but like Ukraine are currently unrecognized due to what else "POLITICS"
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,474



« Reply #24 on: February 10, 2011, 02:15:49 PM »

Again ialmisry, answer me why Ukraine can not have her own independent Ukrainian church with her own patriarch like the nations of Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, and Serbia?
Michal has relieved me of the burden, but I'll add that Bucovina, Vojvodina, Montenegro and Transylvania all have Orthodox majorities and had their own autocephalous Churches, but do no longer.

The Church of Greece isn't headed by a patriarch.

And you are begging the question: I never said Ukraine can't have her own independent Ukrainian Orthodox (note the inclusion of "Orthodox") Church with her own patriarch. In fact, I am on record in support of that: my admission that Ukraine doesn't have it and a deposed metropolitan is not he doesn't change 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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,474



« Reply #25 on: February 10, 2011, 02:17:11 PM »


No, but Macedonia, Belarus, Moldova and Montenegro have.

Quote
Have thier own church and Ukraine can't?

If they want their own independent church, they have the right to form one. Montenegro and Macedonia have, but like Ukraine are currently unrecognized due to what else "POLITICS"
and what else is driving you? "POLITICS."
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
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #26 on: February 10, 2011, 02:20:27 PM »

Again ialmisry, answer me why Ukraine can not have her own independent Ukrainian church with her own patriarch like the nations of Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, and Serbia?
Michal has relieved me of the burden, but I'll add that Bucovina, Vojvodina, Montenegro and Transylvania all have Orthodox majorities and had their own autocephalous Churches, but do no longer.

The Church of Greece isn't headed by a patriarch.

And you are begging the question: I never said Ukraine can't have her own independent Ukrainian Orthodox (note the inclusion of "Orthodox") Church with her own patriarch. In fact, I am on record in support of that: my admission that Ukraine doesn't have it and a deposed metropolitan is not he doesn't change that.

Transylvania ,Bucovina, and Vojvodina, are not independent countries and haven't been perscuted by the Russians the way the Ukrainians have been. Comparing apples and oranges.

So ok if you dislike Pat Filaret, was Pat Mstyslav of blessed memory a "schismatic and heretic"? Because this post wasn't about Filaret but about the beauty of the St. Sophia and the Beauty of the ordination of Ukraine's first Patriarch.

Logged
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #27 on: February 10, 2011, 02:21:23 PM »

The drive for freedom and away from Russian influence. Not politics...
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #28 on: February 10, 2011, 02:26:12 PM »

Was Pat Mstyslav of blessed memory a "schismatic and heretic"? Because this post wasn't about Filaret but about the beauty of the St. Sophia and the Beauty of the ordination of Ukraine's first Patriarch.

Heretic - IDK, schismatic - yes.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
pious1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 170


« Reply #29 on: February 10, 2011, 02:38:54 PM »

Was Pat Mstyslav of blessed memory a "schismatic and heretic"? Because this post wasn't about Filaret but about the beauty of the St. Sophia and the Beauty of the ordination of Ukraine's first Patriarch.

Heretic - IDK, schismatic - yes.

A schismatic is a person who creates or incites schism in an organization or who is a member of a splinter group. Schismatic as an adjective means pertaining to a schism or schisms, or to those ideas, policies, etc. that are thought to lead towards or promote schism.

In religion, the charge of schism is distinguished from that of heresy, since the offence of schism concerns not differences of belief or doctrine but promotion of, or the state of, division,[1] but schisms frequently involve mutual accusations of heresy


The 1866 Constitution of Romania declared the Orthodox Church to be "independent of any foreign hierarchy", but it was a law passed in 1872 that declared the church to be "autocephalous". After a long period of negotiations with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, the latter finally recognized in 1885 the Metropolis of Romania, which was raised to the rank of Patriarchy in 1925.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Orthodox_Church

The struggle between the Bulgarians, led by Neofit Bozveli and Ilarion Makariopolski, and the Greeks intensified throughout the 1860s. By the end of the decade, Bulgarian bishoprics had expelled most of the Greek clerics, thus the whole of northern Bulgaria, as well as the northern parts of Thrace and Macedonia had effectively seceded from the Patriarchate. The Ottoman government restored the Bulgarian Patriarchate under the name of "Bulgarian Exarchate" by a decree (firman) of the Sultan promulgated on February 28, 1870. The original Exarchate extended over present-day northern Bulgaria (Moesia), Thrace without the Vilayet of Adrianople, as well as over north-eastern Macedonia. After the Christian population of the bishoprics of Skopje and Ohrid voted in 1874 overwhelmingly in favour of joining the Exarchate (Skopje by 91%, Ohrid by 97%), the Bulgarian Exarchate became in control of the whole of Vardar and Pirin Macedonia. The Bulgarian Exarchate was partially represented in southern Macedonia and the Vilayet of Adrianople by vicars. Thus, the borders of the Exarchate included all Bulgarian districts in the Ottoman Empire.

The Patriarchate of Constantinople opposed the change, promptly declaring the Bulgarian Exarchate schismatic and its adherents heretics. Although the status and the guiding principles of the Exarchate reflected the canons, the Patriarchate argued that “surrender of Orthodoxy to ethnic nationalism” was essentially a manifestation of heresy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_Orthodox_Church

So I guess the Bulgarian church from 1870 to 1925 there really wasn't a Bulgarian Patriarchate because she wasn't recognized by the EP and was considered "schismatic"

So anyone that had any rites performed on them from the Bulgarian Church during this time were null and void since it wasn't considered "cannonical" until 1925
Same with the Romanians?

On March 3, 1990, the Patriarch of Constantinople recognized and approved the Autocephaly of the Georgian Orthodox Church (which had in practice been exercised or at least claimed since the 5th century) as well as the Patriarchal honour of the Catholicos. Georgia's subsequent independence in 1991 saw a major revival in the fortunes of the Georgian Orthodox Church. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodoxy_in_Georgia_(country)

So any Georgian Orthodox before 1990 was considered a "schismatic" as well since the Georgian Orthodox Patriarchate dates back to  466 when the Patriarchate of Antioch elevated the Bishop of Mtskheta to the rank of Catholicos of Kartli.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,474



« Reply #30 on: February 10, 2011, 02:44:44 PM »

Again ialmisry, answer me why Ukraine can not have her own independent Ukrainian church with her own patriarch like the nations of Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, and Serbia?
Michal has relieved me of the burden, but I'll add that Bucovina, Vojvodina, Montenegro and Transylvania all have Orthodox majorities and had their own autocephalous Churches, but do no longer.

The Church of Greece isn't headed by a patriarch.

And you are begging the question: I never said Ukraine can't have her own independent Ukrainian Orthodox (note the inclusion of "Orthodox") Church with her own patriarch. In fact, I am on record in support of that: my admission that Ukraine doesn't have it and a deposed metropolitan is not he doesn't change that.

Transylvania ,Bucovina, and Vojvodina, are not independent countries and haven't been perscuted by the Russians the way the Ukrainians have been. Comparing apples and oranges.
Not exactly, they were persecuted more by the Polish Kings, the Hapsburges, the Ottomans and Phanariots?  Would you have prefered them?  Bohdan Khmelnytsky decided otherwise at Pereyaslav.

So ok if you dislike Pat Filaret, was Pat Mstyslav of blessed memory a "schismatic and heretic"? Because this post wasn't about Filaret but about the beauty of the St. Sophia and the Beauty of the ordination of Ukraine's first Patriarch.
You brought up Archbishop Antony of the UOCUSA in this post.

Who consecrated "Pat Mstyslav"? I've already asked that:
Who consecrated that hiearchy?
I know who consecrated the deposed met. Filaret-the same authority which canonically deposed him.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,474



« Reply #31 on: February 10, 2011, 02:48:06 PM »

Was Pat Mstyslav of blessed memory a "schismatic and heretic"? Because this post wasn't about Filaret but about the beauty of the St. Sophia and the Beauty of the ordination of Ukraine's first Patriarch.

Heretic - IDK, schismatic - yes.

A schismatic is a person who creates or incites schism in an organization or who is a member of a splinter group. Schismatic as an adjective means pertaining to a schism or schisms, or to those ideas, policies, etc. that are thought to lead towards or promote schism.

In religion, the charge of schism is distinguished from that of heresy, since the offence of schism concerns not differences of belief or doctrine but promotion of, or the state of, division,[1] but schisms frequently involve mutual accusations of heresy


The 1866 Constitution of Romania declared the Orthodox Church to be "independent of any foreign hierarchy", but it was a law passed in 1872 that declared the church to be "autocephalous". After a long period of negotiations with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, the latter finally recognized in 1885 the Metropolis of Romania, which was raised to the rank of Patriarchy in 1925.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Orthodox_Church

The struggle between the Bulgarians, led by Neofit Bozveli and Ilarion Makariopolski, and the Greeks intensified throughout the 1860s. By the end of the decade, Bulgarian bishoprics had expelled most of the Greek clerics, thus the whole of northern Bulgaria, as well as the northern parts of Thrace and Macedonia had effectively seceded from the Patriarchate. The Ottoman government restored the Bulgarian Patriarchate under the name of "Bulgarian Exarchate" by a decree (firman) of the Sultan promulgated on February 28, 1870. The original Exarchate extended over present-day northern Bulgaria (Moesia), Thrace without the Vilayet of Adrianople, as well as over north-eastern Macedonia. After the Christian population of the bishoprics of Skopje and Ohrid voted in 1874 overwhelmingly in favour of joining the Exarchate (Skopje by 91%, Ohrid by 97%), the Bulgarian Exarchate became in control of the whole of Vardar and Pirin Macedonia. The Bulgarian Exarchate was partially represented in southern Macedonia and the Vilayet of Adrianople by vicars. Thus, the borders of the Exarchate included all Bulgarian districts in the Ottoman Empire.

The Patriarchate of Constantinople opposed the change, promptly declaring the Bulgarian Exarchate schismatic and its adherents heretics. Although the status and the guiding principles of the Exarchate reflected the canons, the Patriarchate argued that “surrender of Orthodoxy to ethnic nationalism” was essentially a manifestation of heresy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_Orthodox_Church

So I guess the Bulgarian church from 1870 to 1925 there really wasn't a Bulgarian Patriarchate because she wasn't recognized by the EP and was considered "schismatic"

So anyone that had any rites performed on them from the Bulgarian Church during this time were null and void since it wasn't considered "cannonical" until 1925
Same with the Romanians?

On March 3, 1990, the Patriarch of Constantinople recognized and approved the Autocephaly of the Georgian Orthodox Church (which had in practice been exercised or at least claimed since the 5th century) as well as the Patriarchal honour of the Catholicos. Georgia's subsequent independence in 1991 saw a major revival in the fortunes of the Georgian Orthodox Church. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodoxy_in_Georgia_(country)

So any Georgian Orthodox before 1990 was considered a "schismatic" as well since the Georgian Orthodox Patriarchate dates back to  466 when the Patriarchate of Antioch elevated the Bishop of Mtskheta to the rank of Catholicos of Kartli.
since you have elevated the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople as supreme pontiff, I guess you have answered your own question, as the EP only recognizes Met. Volodymyr as primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
podkarpatska
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,239


SS Cyril and Methodius Church, Mercer, PA


WWW
« Reply #32 on: February 10, 2011, 03:08:38 PM »

Here we go again......Like the movie 'Groundhog Day', yet another US cultural reference point....

"They say we're young and we don't know
We won't find out until we grow
Well I don't know if all that's true
'Cause you got me, and baby I got you..."  Wink

Like the great Yogi Berra said (Don't worry, he's not a swami  for you folks outside of the USA, but a beloved sports figure of the US well known for his malaprops.): "It's deja vu all over again" because 'it won't be over until the fat lady sings.'

Really, we've been over this subject again and again. No one's mind is going to be changed by any measure of argument or debate.

It seems to me (and I am willing to guess that this holds true to a majority of Orthodox in the states)  since the Moscow Patriarchate saw fit to grant autocephaly to the former Metropolia some thirty years ago in spite of the then and now current state of affairs of Orthodoxy in the United States, it is intellectually dishonest to argue that Ukraine shouldn't be entitled to its own self-ruling church in that Ukraine is a self-governing, independent nation which is separate and distinct from Russia. That is not to say that the UOC-KP is such a church or entitled to any canonical recognition in its own right, but merely to note that the current state of affairs and schism within the nation of Ukraine needs to be regularized.

And yes, the UOC-MP is the canonically recognized Orthodox body in Ukraine today and yes, the UOC-USA, along with ACROD, are self-ruling entities under the omophorion of the EP rather than being submitted to or obligated to the Church of Russia. And...if you ask any of the Bishops or clergy of those two jurisdictions why this is so, they will be upfront and tell you that it is because of the heavy yoke of history surrounding the relationship of the Church of Russia, and the POLITICS of the Russian Empire that led them to Constantinople.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2011, 03:12:56 PM by podkarpatska » Logged
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,969


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #33 on: February 10, 2011, 03:27:30 PM »

Was Pat Mstyslav of blessed memory a "schismatic and heretic"? Because this post wasn't about Filaret but about the beauty of the St. Sophia and the Beauty of the ordination of Ukraine's first Patriarch.

Heretic - IDK, schismatic - yes.

A schismatic is a person who creates or incites schism in an organization or who is a member of a splinter group. Schismatic as an adjective means pertaining to a schism or schisms, or to those ideas, policies, etc. that are thought to lead towards or promote schism.

In religion, the charge of schism is distinguished from that of heresy, since the offence of schism concerns not differences of belief or doctrine but promotion of, or the state of, division,[1] but schisms frequently involve mutual accusations of heresy


The 1866 Constitution of Romania declared the Orthodox Church to be "independent of any foreign hierarchy", but it was a law passed in 1872 that declared the church to be "autocephalous". After a long period of negotiations with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, the latter finally recognized in 1885 the Metropolis of Romania, which was raised to the rank of Patriarchy in 1925.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Orthodox_Church

The struggle between the Bulgarians, led by Neofit Bozveli and Ilarion Makariopolski, and the Greeks intensified throughout the 1860s. By the end of the decade, Bulgarian bishoprics had expelled most of the Greek clerics, thus the whole of northern Bulgaria, as well as the northern parts of Thrace and Macedonia had effectively seceded from the Patriarchate. The Ottoman government restored the Bulgarian Patriarchate under the name of "Bulgarian Exarchate" by a decree (firman) of the Sultan promulgated on February 28, 1870. The original Exarchate extended over present-day northern Bulgaria (Moesia), Thrace without the Vilayet of Adrianople, as well as over north-eastern Macedonia. After the Christian population of the bishoprics of Skopje and Ohrid voted in 1874 overwhelmingly in favour of joining the Exarchate (Skopje by 91%, Ohrid by 97%), the Bulgarian Exarchate became in control of the whole of Vardar and Pirin Macedonia. The Bulgarian Exarchate was partially represented in southern Macedonia and the Vilayet of Adrianople by vicars. Thus, the borders of the Exarchate included all Bulgarian districts in the Ottoman Empire.

The Patriarchate of Constantinople opposed the change, promptly declaring the Bulgarian Exarchate schismatic and its adherents heretics. Although the status and the guiding principles of the Exarchate reflected the canons, the Patriarchate argued that “surrender of Orthodoxy to ethnic nationalism” was essentially a manifestation of heresy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_Orthodox_Church

So I guess the Bulgarian church from 1870 to 1925 there really wasn't a Bulgarian Patriarchate because she wasn't recognized by the EP and was considered "schismatic"

So anyone that had any rites performed on them from the Bulgarian Church during this time were null and void since it wasn't considered "cannonical" until 1925
Same with the Romanians?

On March 3, 1990, the Patriarch of Constantinople recognized and approved the Autocephaly of the Georgian Orthodox Church (which had in practice been exercised or at least claimed since the 5th century) as well as the Patriarchal honour of the Catholicos. Georgia's subsequent independence in 1991 saw a major revival in the fortunes of the Georgian Orthodox Church. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodoxy_in_Georgia_(country)

So any Georgian Orthodox before 1990 was considered a "schismatic" as well since the Georgian Orthodox Patriarchate dates back to  466 when the Patriarchate of Antioch elevated the Bishop of Mtskheta to the rank of Catholicos of Kartli.

The Georgian Orthodox Church had been under the Russian Holy Synod from the early 19th century until 1918. The Church of Constantinople was still in communion with the Church of Georgia up until 1990. Her recognition autocephaly was a moot point, in that the Church of Georgia had been autocephalous for centuries, and in communion with the Orthodox Churches. The Church of Constantinople doesn't recognize the autocephaly of the OCA either, nor do other ancient patriarchates, but they nonetheless regard it as canonical and in communion.
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.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,474



« Reply #34 on: February 10, 2011, 05:07:26 PM »

Was Pat Mstyslav of blessed memory a "schismatic and heretic"? Because this post wasn't about Filaret but about the beauty of the St. Sophia and the Beauty of the ordination of Ukraine's first Patriarch.

Heretic - IDK, schismatic - yes.

A schismatic is a person who creates or incites schism in an organization or who is a member of a splinter group. Schismatic as an adjective means pertaining to a schism or schisms, or to those ideas, policies, etc. that are thought to lead towards or promote schism.

In religion, the charge of schism is distinguished from that of heresy, since the offence of schism concerns not differences of belief or doctrine but promotion of, or the state of, division,[1] but schisms frequently involve mutual accusations of heresy


The 1866 Constitution of Romania declared the Orthodox Church to be "independent of any foreign hierarchy", but it was a law passed in 1872 that declared the church to be "autocephalous". After a long period of negotiations with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, the latter finally recognized in 1885 the Metropolis of Romania, which was raised to the rank of Patriarchy in 1925.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Orthodox_Church

The struggle between the Bulgarians, led by Neofit Bozveli and Ilarion Makariopolski, and the Greeks intensified throughout the 1860s. By the end of the decade, Bulgarian bishoprics had expelled most of the Greek clerics, thus the whole of northern Bulgaria, as well as the northern parts of Thrace and Macedonia had effectively seceded from the Patriarchate. The Ottoman government restored the Bulgarian Patriarchate under the name of "Bulgarian Exarchate" by a decree (firman) of the Sultan promulgated on February 28, 1870. The original Exarchate extended over present-day northern Bulgaria (Moesia), Thrace without the Vilayet of Adrianople, as well as over north-eastern Macedonia. After the Christian population of the bishoprics of Skopje and Ohrid voted in 1874 overwhelmingly in favour of joining the Exarchate (Skopje by 91%, Ohrid by 97%), the Bulgarian Exarchate became in control of the whole of Vardar and Pirin Macedonia. The Bulgarian Exarchate was partially represented in southern Macedonia and the Vilayet of Adrianople by vicars. Thus, the borders of the Exarchate included all Bulgarian districts in the Ottoman Empire.

The Patriarchate of Constantinople opposed the change, promptly declaring the Bulgarian Exarchate schismatic and its adherents heretics. Although the status and the guiding principles of the Exarchate reflected the canons, the Patriarchate argued that “surrender of Orthodoxy to ethnic nationalism” was essentially a manifestation of heresy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_Orthodox_Church

So I guess the Bulgarian church from 1870 to 1925 there really wasn't a Bulgarian Patriarchate because she wasn't recognized by the EP and was considered "schismatic"

So anyone that had any rites performed on them from the Bulgarian Church during this time were null and void since it wasn't considered "cannonical" until 1925
Same with the Romanians?

On March 3, 1990, the Patriarch of Constantinople recognized and approved the Autocephaly of the Georgian Orthodox Church (which had in practice been exercised or at least claimed since the 5th century) as well as the Patriarchal honour of the Catholicos. Georgia's subsequent independence in 1991 saw a major revival in the fortunes of the Georgian Orthodox Church. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodoxy_in_Georgia_(country)

So any Georgian Orthodox before 1990 was considered a "schismatic" as well since the Georgian Orthodox Patriarchate dates back to  466 when the Patriarchate of Antioch elevated the Bishop of Mtskheta to the rank of Catholicos of Kartli.

The Georgian Orthodox Church had been under the Russian Holy Synod from the early 19th century until 1918. The Church of Constantinople was still in communion with the Church of Georgia up until 1990. Her recognition autocephaly was a moot point, in that the Church of Georgia had been autocephalous for centuries, and in communion with the Orthodox Churches. The Church of Constantinople doesn't recognize the autocephaly of the OCA either, nor do other ancient patriarchates, but they nonetheless regard it as canonical and in communion.
LOL. Georgia is an ancient patriarchate which does recognize the autocephaly of the OCA.
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
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,969


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #35 on: February 10, 2011, 05:11:09 PM »

Was Pat Mstyslav of blessed memory a "schismatic and heretic"? Because this post wasn't about Filaret but about the beauty of the St. Sophia and the Beauty of the ordination of Ukraine's first Patriarch.

Heretic - IDK, schismatic - yes.

A schismatic is a person who creates or incites schism in an organization or who is a member of a splinter group. Schismatic as an adjective means pertaining to a schism or schisms, or to those ideas, policies, etc. that are thought to lead towards or promote schism.

In religion, the charge of schism is distinguished from that of heresy, since the offence of schism concerns not differences of belief or doctrine but promotion of, or the state of, division,[1] but schisms frequently involve mutual accusations of heresy


The 1866 Constitution of Romania declared the Orthodox Church to be "independent of any foreign hierarchy", but it was a law passed in 1872 that declared the church to be "autocephalous". After a long period of negotiations with the Patriarchate of Constantinople, the latter finally recognized in 1885 the Metropolis of Romania, which was raised to the rank of Patriarchy in 1925.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Orthodox_Church

The struggle between the Bulgarians, led by Neofit Bozveli and Ilarion Makariopolski, and the Greeks intensified throughout the 1860s. By the end of the decade, Bulgarian bishoprics had expelled most of the Greek clerics, thus the whole of northern Bulgaria, as well as the northern parts of Thrace and Macedonia had effectively seceded from the Patriarchate. The Ottoman government restored the Bulgarian Patriarchate under the name of "Bulgarian Exarchate" by a decree (firman) of the Sultan promulgated on February 28, 1870. The original Exarchate extended over present-day northern Bulgaria (Moesia), Thrace without the Vilayet of Adrianople, as well as over north-eastern Macedonia. After the Christian population of the bishoprics of Skopje and Ohrid voted in 1874 overwhelmingly in favour of joining the Exarchate (Skopje by 91%, Ohrid by 97%), the Bulgarian Exarchate became in control of the whole of Vardar and Pirin Macedonia. The Bulgarian Exarchate was partially represented in southern Macedonia and the Vilayet of Adrianople by vicars. Thus, the borders of the Exarchate included all Bulgarian districts in the Ottoman Empire.

The Patriarchate of Constantinople opposed the change, promptly declaring the Bulgarian Exarchate schismatic and its adherents heretics. Although the status and the guiding principles of the Exarchate reflected the canons, the Patriarchate argued that “surrender of Orthodoxy to ethnic nationalism” was essentially a manifestation of heresy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_Orthodox_Church

So I guess the Bulgarian church from 1870 to 1925 there really wasn't a Bulgarian Patriarchate because she wasn't recognized by the EP and was considered "schismatic"

So anyone that had any rites performed on them from the Bulgarian Church during this time were null and void since it wasn't considered "cannonical" until 1925
Same with the Romanians?

On March 3, 1990, the Patriarch of Constantinople recognized and approved the Autocephaly of the Georgian Orthodox Church (which had in practice been exercised or at least claimed since the 5th century) as well as the Patriarchal honour of the Catholicos. Georgia's subsequent independence in 1991 saw a major revival in the fortunes of the Georgian Orthodox Church. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthodoxy_in_Georgia_(country)

So any Georgian Orthodox before 1990 was considered a "schismatic" as well since the Georgian Orthodox Patriarchate dates back to  466 when the Patriarchate of Antioch elevated the Bishop of Mtskheta to the rank of Catholicos of Kartli.

The Georgian Orthodox Church had been under the Russian Holy Synod from the early 19th century until 1918. The Church of Constantinople was still in communion with the Church of Georgia up until 1990. Her recognition autocephaly was a moot point, in that the Church of Georgia had been autocephalous for centuries, and in communion with the Orthodox Churches. The Church of Constantinople doesn't recognize the autocephaly of the OCA either, nor do other ancient patriarchates, but they nonetheless regard it as canonical and in communion.
LOL. Georgia is an ancient patriarchate which does recognize the autocephaly of the OCA.

I didn't mean "all" ancient patriarchates. I did omit a definite article. I was illustrating how the Church of Constantinople's recognition of autocephaly doesn't have bearing on other Churches or a Church's communion with the other Orthodox Churches.
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.
Monk Vasyl
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: UOC of USA
Posts: 623


Monk Vasyl
WWW
« Reply #36 on: February 10, 2011, 11:00:02 PM »

Was Pat Mstyslav of blessed memory a "schismatic and heretic"? Because this post wasn't about Filaret but about the beauty of the St. Sophia and the Beauty of the ordination of Ukraine's first Patriarch.

Heretic - IDK, schismatic - yes.

Pray tell me how was His Holiness a heretic?  I'll grant you a schismatic, but NOT a heretic.
Logged

The unworthy hierodeacon, Vasyl
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #37 on: February 11, 2011, 12:01:32 AM »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L7PwQHCVrU in this video you can also see standing behind Pat Msytyslav, a younger Archbishop Antony of the UOCUSA

Thanks God  he changed his mind.

Why thank god he changed his mind? Does Ukraine not warrant their own church like Russia, Romania, Serbia, etc?

Not under schismatic conditions.
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
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #38 on: February 11, 2011, 12:05:02 AM »

Do Lebenon, Iraq, Canada, Japan, or China have a population where the majority are Orthodox? Again why can Bulgaria, Romania, Serbia, Greece, etx have thier own church and Ukraine can't?

Perhaps they could have if they had undergone the appropriate, non-schismatic order of operations.
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
deusveritasest
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: None
Jurisdiction: None
Posts: 7,528



WWW
« Reply #39 on: February 11, 2011, 12:06:57 AM »

If they want their own independent church, they have the right to form one.

No, they don't. They were part of the Russian church and such a thing would be an affair of the Russian church in general, not just its Ukrainian segment.
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 #40 on: February 11, 2011, 07:13:18 AM »

Heretic - IDK, schismatic - yes.

Pray tell me how was His Holiness a heretic?  I'll grant you a schismatic, but NOT a heretic.

IDK - I don't know.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.212 seconds with 68 queries.