"denominations" in Orthodoxy...

[Tikhon.of.Colorado]

I was watching this video from Hellenic college, and one person  said "we're all Orthodox Christians, from many denominations." 

now, did she mean "Jurisdictions", or do we have "denominations".  I ask this because I can see the various Oriental Orthodox Churches being called "denominations".

http://www.hchc.edu/hellenic/about/video.html

thanks, everyone!  I don't mean to sound stupid, but as a new convert, there are things I have no idea about!  thanks for your patience.

[Melodist]

I was watching this video from Hellenic college, and one person  said "we're all Orthodox Christians, from many denominations." 

now, did she mean "Jurisdictions", or do we have "denominations".  I ask this because I can see the various Oriental Orthodox Churches being called "denominations".

http://www.hchc.edu/hellenic/about/video.html

thanks, everyone!  I don't mean to sound stupid, but as a new convert, there are things I have no idea about!  thanks for your patience.

We do not have denomoinations. She probably either meant "jurisdictions" or simply meant that they have students from a variety of personal backgrounds and studying for a variety of degrees.

[Irish Hermit]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

[tuesdayschild]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

The term jurisdiction refers to a given ecclesiastical entity and its parishes. Traditionally and canonically, all the parishes in a given region are governed by one bishop. Jurisdiction is used particularly in those areas where this traditional order has been upset and multiple ecclesiastical entities claim parishes in overlapping territories. Thus, it is a term of distinction which exists mainly because of an uncanonical situation, but has also come to refer generally to self-governing churches whose territories do not suffer from canonical disorder.

http://orthodoxwiki.org/Jurisdiction

[ozgeorge]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

[tuesdayschild]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

[Melodist]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

The anomoly isn't supposed to be there to begin with.

[tuesdayschild]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

The anomoly isn't supposed to be there to begin with.

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

[Melodist]

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Does this happen in places that are traditionally Orthodox?

[Irish Hermit]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

The anomoly isn't supposed to be there to begin with.

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Yes.  Me. Serbia.

[ozgeorge]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

The anomoly isn't supposed to be there to begin with.

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

The vast majority of Orthodox Christians throughout the world live under the proper canonical situation. The US, Canada, Australia and UK etc are the minority.

[Irish Hermit]

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Does this happen in places that are traditionally Orthodox?

Of course there are no overlapping Churches in the Orthodox countries.   There is no Church of Serbia in Russia.  No Church of Russia in Egypt.

[tuesdayschild]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

The anomoly isn't supposed to be there to begin with.

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Yes.  Me. Serbia.

Ha! I meant in America. So I will restate my question: Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today in America who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand? I'd really like to know.

[tuesdayschild]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

The anomoly isn't supposed to be there to begin with.

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

The vast majority of Orthodox Christians throughout the world live under the proper canonical situation. The US, Canada, Australia and UK etc are the minority.

Right. I have restated my question, because the post I originally replied to concerns the Church and jurisdictionalism in America. See reply #12.

[ozgeorge]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

The anomoly isn't supposed to be there to begin with.

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Yes.  Me. Serbia.

Ha! I meant in America. So I will restate my question: Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today in America who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand? I'd really like to know.

Anyone in the US who has travelled to Europe or the middle East would experience it first hand, as indeed our own forum member 88Devin12 currently is. Go travel and see the world!

[tuesdayschild]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

The anomoly isn't supposed to be there to begin with.

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Yes.  Me. Serbia.

Ha! I meant in America. So I will restate my question: Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today in America who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand? I'd really like to know.

Anyone in the US who has travelled to Europe of the middle East would experience it first hand, as indeed our own forum member 88Devin12 currently is. Go travel and see the world!

You mean I have to travel overseas to find a canonical Orthodox Church?

[Melodist]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

The anomoly isn't supposed to be there to begin with.

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Yes.  Me. Serbia.

Ha! I meant in America. So I will restate my question: Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today in America who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand? I'd really like to know.

Immigrants.

Just because the situation here has been the same for period of time doesn't make it any more correct.

[tuesdayschild]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

The anomoly isn't supposed to be there to begin with.

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Yes.  Me. Serbia.

Ha! I meant in America. So I will restate my question: Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today in America who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand? I'd really like to know.

Immigrants.

Just because the situation here has been the same for period of time doesn't make it any more correct.

Agreed. But it is normal.

[ozgeorge]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

The anomoly isn't supposed to be there to begin with.

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Yes.  Me. Serbia.

Ha! I meant in America. So I will restate my question: Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today in America who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand? I'd really like to know.

Anyone in the US who has travelled to Europe of the middle East would experience it first hand, as indeed our own forum member 88Devin12 currently is. Go travel and see the world!

You mean I have to travel overseas to find a canonical Orthodox Church?

Well, technically, yes. If you want to see the Church in a particular place operating in accordance with the Canons, you have to travel overseas.

[Irish Hermit]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

The anomoly isn't supposed to be there to begin with.

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Yes.  Me. Serbia.

Ha! I meant in America. So I will restate my question: Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today in America who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand? I'd really like to know.

Immigrants.

Just because the situation here has been the same for period of time doesn't make it any more correct.

Agreed. But it is normal.

It's not normal but in the few countries of the Western world where it exists, is it such a tragedy or so destructive of church life?   And let's remember that the American Orthodox account for about 1% of Orthodoxy - not really so important as to get the Patriarachates worked up.

[Father H]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

It is not normal in traditionally Orthodox countries, it is anathema.   It is tolerated in "the diaspora." 

[ialmisry]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

It is not normal in traditionally Orthodox countries, it is anathema.   It is tolerated in "the diaspora."  

Tolerated by "whom," Father, and in what way?

Btw, it is a phenomena of "traditionally Orthodox countries."  It was common in the Balkans of the 19th century before it spread to America in the 20th century.

[ozgeorge]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

It is not normal in traditionally Orthodox countries, it is anathema.   It is tolerated in "the diaspora." 

Indeed. And to expect the vast majority of the Church to accept as canonical an uncanonical situation which is tolerated among the smallest minority of Orthodox Christians simply because they are the wealthiest is, in my opinion, nothing short of cultural colonialism.

[ozgeorge]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."   Does anyone know why this has happened?

Its an attempt to explain an anomalous situation. Overlapping episcopal jurisdictions in the so-called 'diaspora' is a new phenomenon. While it was common to refer to the local Churches as "Churches" (eg, the Seven Churches of Asia Minor), each Church was located in one city/geographical area under one Bishop. In the "diaspora" there is now more than one Bishop (and Cathedral) per city which is an anomaly.

How long does an anomaly have to last before we admit it is the new normal?

It is not normal in traditionally Orthodox countries, it is anathema.   It is tolerated in "the diaspora."  

Tolerated by "whom" and in what way?

The "whom" is the various jurisdictions in the "diaspora". The "what way" is mutual recognition.

[PeterTheAleut]

The argument between ialmisry and ozgeorge over the canonical status of the OCA has been split off and made the subject of its own thread on Faith Issues.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=33991.0

[88Devin12]

I can definitely say you can experience the proper canonical situation. I am currently in Greece, and obviously here, you have every church being under the same jurisdiction (being the Church of Greece).
The region of Greece that I'm currently in (Macedonia) is actually part of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, whereas the rest of Greece is a part of the Church of Greece (and hence the Archbishop of Athens).

You can go to every Church, hear the Liturgy in the same language (albeit it's Koine Greek), hear the same Bishops commemorated (unless you enter another diocese) and where all are in conformity with one another.

The reason we have the term "jurisdiction" is simply to denote our uncanonical situation in the United States... However, I will also say that when I explain to people the way the Orthodox Church is, I tell them about the various Churches and their Patriarchs, who have "jurisdiction" over certain regions, and yet all Churches/jurisdictions are a part of the same Church...

The situation in the United States can't ever be considered the norm, because it's un-canonical and yes, un-Orthodox in the first place. This is one of the major reasons why the "Mother Churches" want the "diaspora" to be unified.
There should be a Church of the United States, a Church of Canada, a Church of Central America, a Church of South America, a Church of Australia, etc... (of course, I'm just trying to list the regions with their own Episcopal Assemblies)

This is simply the way our Church works.

[ialmisry]

I can definitely say you can experience the proper canonical situation. I am currently in Greece, and obviously here, you have every church being under the same jurisdiction (being the Church of Greece).
The region of Greece that I'm currently in (Macedonia) is actually part of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, whereas the rest of Greece is a part of the Church of Greece (and hence the Archbishop of Athens).

You are aware that the EP struck the late Archbishop of Athens from the diptychs over jurisdiction over Northern Greece, no?  IIRC the Archbishop didn't come crawling to Canossa.

You can go to every Church, hear the Liturgy in the same language (albeit it's Koine Greek), hear the same Bishops commemorated (unless you enter another diocese) and where all are in conformity with one another.

Well, I'd prefer the confusion in the US over how such conformity came about:

At their peak, just before the Balkan Wars,there were 6 secondary gymnasiums, and 113 primary schools, teaching in Vlach. Due to the ongoing pressures from the Greek Church in the Ottoman provinces of Rumelia, Vlachs and their schools were viewed with suspicion. In 1880 Greek guerrillas attacked some villages near Resen because the village priests had committed the unpardonable sin of using Vlach in the church services. In the same year the Greek bishop of Kastoria had the schoolmaster in Klissoura arrested because he taught in the Vlahs'native language. A momentous date in the history of the Vlachs was May 23, 1905, when the Sultan issued a decree officially recognizing the Vlachs and affirming their rights to maintain their schools and churches. Following the proclamation of the decree, the Greek bishops, and the armed bands they supported, unleashed a campaign of terror on the Aromanians to discourage them from taking advantage of their rights. In 1905, the Vlach abbot of the Holy Archangel monastery in the Meglen region was murdered by a Greek band. In the summer of 1905 some villages near Bitola were attacked. On October 27, 1905, Greek guerillas attacked the village of Avdela in the Pindus, birthplace of Apostol Margarit, and razed it to the ground. Then in 1906, in the town of Véria(Berea), the priest Papanace was murdered as he was on his way to church to serve the Divine Liturgy in Vlach. The Romanian Vlach school in the village of Avdhela in Pindus, which was one of the first Romanian sponsored Vlach schools, active as early as 1867, was burned and razed to the ground on 27 October 1905 by Greek guerrillas.[37] This event prompted street anti-Greek demonstrations in Bucharest in the autumn of 1905 of the Aromanians living there, and a rupture of diplomatic relations between Romania and Greece

February 1952, the Aromanian Church 'Biserica ramana Santu Dumitru', burned by German troops in spring 1944. The priest Costa Bacou officiated the last allowed liturgy in Aromanian language. Afterwards, he was not permitted anymore because he refused to forcibly officiate the divine service in Greek language

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromanians#Interbellum_and_World_War_II

The reason we have the term "jurisdiction" is simply to denote our uncanonical situation in the United States...

The uncanonical situation in the Unites States is not new to the region you are in: while the US had one jurisdiction, there were five involved in the area of present day Greece that you are in.  They solved the problem by slitting a good number of throats.

The situation in the United States can't ever be considered the norm, because it's un-canonical and yes, un-Orthodox in the first place. This is one of the major reasons why the "Mother Churches" want the "diaspora" to be unified.
There should be a Church of the United States, a Church of Canada, a Church of Central America, a Church of South America, a Church of Australia, etc... (of course, I'm just trying to list the regions with their own Episcopal Assemblies)

This is simply the way our Church works.

If the "Mother Churches" want the "diaspora" to be unified, they are hiding that desire very well.

But do enjoy your trip. Tell me if you are going to Kavalla.

[ozgeorge]

their peak, just before the Balkan Wars,there were 6 secondary gymnasiums, and 113 primary schools, teaching in Vlach. Due to the ongoing pressures from the Greek Church in the Ottoman provinces of Rumelia, Vlachs and their schools were viewed with suspicion. In 1880 Greek guerrillas attacked some villages near Resen because the village priests had committed the unpardonable sin of using Vlach in the church services. In the same year the Greek bishop of Kastoria had the schoolmaster in Klissoura arrested because he taught in the Vlahs'native language. A momentous date in the history of the Vlachs was May 23, 1905, when the Sultan issued a decree officially recognizing the Vlachs and affirming their rights to maintain their schools and churches. Following the proclamation of the decree, the Greek bishops, and the armed bands they supported, unleashed a campaign of terror on the Aromanians to discourage them from taking advantage of their rights. In 1905, the Vlach abbot of the Holy Archangel monastery in the Meglen region was murdered by a Greek band. In the summer of 1905 some villages near Bitola were attacked. On October 27, 1905, Greek guerillas attacked the village of Avdela in the Pindus, birthplace of Apostol Margarit, and razed it to the ground. Then in 1906, in the town of Véria(Berea), the priest Papanace was murdered as he was on his way to church to serve the Divine Liturgy in Vlach. The Romanian Vlach school in the village of Avdhela in Pindus, which was one of the first Romanian sponsored Vlach schools, active as early as 1867, was burned and razed to the ground on 27 October 1905 by Greek guerrillas.[37] This event prompted street anti-Greek demonstrations in Bucharest in the autumn of 1905 of the Aromanians living there, and a rupture of diplomatic relations between Romania and Greece

Isnt there a rule about copying and pasting large chunks of material- even from such scholastically trustworthy and independent sites as Wikipedia? So as to help you avoid any disciplinary action from the mods, here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromanians

[ozgeorge]

I can definitely say you can experience the proper canonical situation. I am currently in Greece, and obviously here, you have every church being under the same jurisdiction (being the Church of Greece).
The region of Greece that I'm currently in (Macedonia) is actually part of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, whereas the rest of Greece is a part of the Church of Greece (and hence the Archbishop of Athens).

You are aware that the EP struck the late Archbishop of Athens from the diptychs over jurisdiction over Northern Greece, no?

The Oecumenical Patriarchate sanctioned (not "struck from the diptych") the former Archbishop of Athens for appointing a Bishop to Thessaloniki claiming that his synod had the right to do without seeking approval of the Oecumenical Patriarchate. Thessaloniki is the Oecumenical Patriarchate's jurisdiction, not the Church of Greece's. His All-Holiness was preserving Canonical Orthodox order in the Church and the Archbishop of Athens was in the wrong.

IIRC the Archbishop didn't come crawling to Canossa.

The Archbishop indeed accepted the Oecumenical Patriarchate's jurisdiction over Thessaloniki, and the matter was resolved and the sanctions lifted.

See how easy it is? Love and humility always win.

[Alpo]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."

I wonder whether I'm only non-English speaker here who doesn't feel comfortable with this even when talking/writing in English. "Jurisdiction" just doesn't feel right even thoug I know that technically it's perfectly correct. In Finland nobody talks about jurisdictions even though we have a Finnish word for it. For Finns "jurisdiction" is "kirkko" (church) or "paikalliskirkko (local church) so "jurisdiction" feels rather clumsy.

[ozgeorge]

I am not an American and it seems to many of us outside America that the word "Jurisdiction" has virtually replaced the word "Church."

I wonder whether I'm only non-English speaker here who doesn't feel comfortable with this even when talking/writing in English. "Jurisdiction" just doesn't feel right even thoug I know that technically it's perfectly correct. In Finland nobody talks about jurisdictions even though we have a Finnish word for it. For Finns "jurisdiction" is "kirkko" (church) or "paikalliskirkko (local church) so "jurisdiction" feels rather clumsy.

But in Finland, unlike the USA (and my own country of Australia) you don't have the problem we do of having multiple Bishops from different paikalliskirkko (local Churches) in the same geographical area. For instance, the city of New York is within the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America under Archbishop Demetrios, as well as being within the Antiochian Orthodox Diocese of New York and Washington under Metropolitan Paul, as well as being within OCA's Diocese of New York and New Jersey under Bishop Michael, as well as being within the ROCOR Diocese of Eastern America and New York under Metropolitan Hilarion...etc. So already we have a city with an Achbishop, two Metropolitans and a Bishop each with separate synods. If we call them "local Churches" ( which technically they are) then there are at least four "local Churches" with separate synods each responsible for the Orthodox Clergy and Faithful the same city- remember "Local Church" means "The Church (singular) in a particular location". But the reality is that Archbishop Demetrios is only responsible only for the Greek Orhodox in New York, Metropolitan Paul is responsible for the Antiochians in New York, Bishop Michael is responsible for the members of he OCA and Archbishop Hilarion for the members of ROCOR. Now we could simply say that there are four separate Churches with four separate Bishops in New York, and we'd be correct, however this is canonically incorrect in that the Canons quite clearly state that one city can only have one ruling Bishop. You cannot have two Archbishops of New York under the canons any more than you could have two Archbishops of Contantinople or two Archbishops of Moscow. So, either the situation needs to change or the canons need to change or both. So using the term "jurisdiction" rather than "Church" is an attempt to make an uncanonical situation slightly less uncanonical as well as trying to explain to others that we are indeed One Church despite the fact that we are administered separately in the same geographical area and not under the same Bishop. In Sydney, the Greek Orthodox Cathedral is a few blocks away from the Antiochian Cathedral, I can commune in both of them, yet they commemorate different Bishops in their liturgies. This would never happen in Poland, hence you have no need to talk of "jurisdiction".

[Alpo]

Yes, I do understand why those in diaspora talk about jurisdictions instead of churches. I'm not saying that is somehow wrong. It just doesn't feel natural for me and it occurred to me whether it's the same for other non-English speakers.

[Benjamin the Red]

Yes, I do understand why those in diaspora talk about jurisdictions instead of churches. I'm not saying that is somehow wrong. It just doesn't feel natural for me and it occurred to me whether it's the same for other non-English speakers.

Let's hope it continues to feel wrong and unnatural, because it is, and pray for this uncanonical situation to be resolved!

It comes a little too natural for me, since I've come into a "local church" which is not a single "local church" but a cluster of administratively separate Orthodox churches. I hate it, but I naturally think about it that way, especially when planning a trip and looking for a parish to attend. I know the usual trends within the various churches and know what to expect in the basic differences between Greek, Antiochians, ROCOR, OCA, Serbian, etc. and will hear a different metropolitan (or archbishop) commemorated in different places.

I hate that I can go to three churches in my area and hear commemorations for "Metropolitan Jonah", "Metropolitan Philip" AND "Archbishop Demetrios." We're so disjuncted. I mean, locally we keep up with what the other parishes are doing (and have a couple times a year we all come together, like Sunday of Orthodoxy vespers and for VCS), but we aren't a single, local church. It's so abnormal, and I hope I get to see a resolution sometime before I die!

[mike]

The US, Canada, Australia and UK etc are the minority.

But the influential one (SVS).

[Punch]

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Does this happen in places that are traditionally Orthodox?

I would argue that it did at some times during their history.  And why would it matter.  Europe and the Americas are not traditionally Orthodox countries with only very small parts of their population actually Orthodox.  What is shameful are the number of people that get all butt hurt over "jurisdictions" in pagan or heretical countries with comparatively few Orthodox Christians.  Comparing Orthodox Contries with (at least as some point in their history) Orthodox rulers to completely non-Orthodox countries with no tradition of Orthodoxy and no history of Orthodox government is rather useless in my view.

[ialmisry]

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Does this happen in places that are traditionally Orthodox?

Of course there are no overlapping Churches in the Orthodox countries.   There is no Church of Serbia in Russia.  No Church of Russia in Egypt.

I'm afraid such is not the case, Father. The Church of Serbia, for instance, has its diocese of Timisoara in Romania (whose website interestingly is in Croatian/Serbian in Latin script, depending how you want to see it).
http://www.rastko.rs/rastko-ro/00ah_ser.htm
And the Church of Romania has its Diocese of Dacia Felix in Serbia and the Diocese of Gyula and Hungary in Hungary (which is part of the Patriarchate of Serbia).  The Romanian Metropolitan of Bessarabia just won his suit in the European Court of Human Rights against the government of Moldova, where Mosocw's Moldovan Orthodox Church had been given exclusive jurisdiction, and Bessarabia/Romania claims jurisdiction over all the Moldovan communities in Russia. On the otherside, ROCOR has followers in Moldova.  In addition, the Patriarch of All Romania has the title of "Locum Tenens of Caesarea in Cappadocia."

Egypt/Alexandria/Africa stands out in that it is the only place which is not majority Orthodox with large numbers/areas of never Orthodox which is not treated as "diaspora"-it has a Holy Synod of All Africa and not an "episcopal synod"-and has very little jurisdictional overlap: the only exception being the Church of Sinai, which is at the highest level of autonomy, and is under the jurisdiction of Jerusalem, not Alexandria. Besides Cyprus (and even that is historically not as clear as it might seem), no other Orthodox country seems to have escaped jurisdictional overlap in the past century.  And it is only in the last century that there has been overlap of jurisdictions in the "diaspora."

[deusveritasest]

Could we perhaps get a working and agreeable/authoritative definition of "denomination" going here?

[Melodist]

Could we perhaps get a working and agreeable/authoritative definition of "denomination" going here?

I consider denominatinos to be entirely different bodies. The Baptist church is not the same body as the Methodist church is not the same body as the Pentecostal Churches of God etc..., but I do not believe that "denomination" really applies to Orthodoxy because, even if under different bishops, we are one Body because we share the one Bread by maintaining communion and a common faith with each other. The only exceptions to that in ancient non-Protestant Christianity that traces itself to the apostles would be schisms like the Old Believers, Synod of Milan, etc... and the divisions between entire communions (EO/OO/RC).

I think "denomination" can only be properly applied to Protestant churches because, despite being entirely seperate churches with seperate faiths, they (for the most part) accept each other as being equally united in Christ. This is probably why after a month of posting "which church is the true Church" there hasn't been a single Protestant post, and not even a defense of the "invisible church" view of ecclesiology because no one church can make such a claim because they are believed to all be equally true.

[Irish Hermit]

I'm afraid such is not the case, Father. The Church of Serbia, for instance, has its diocese of Timisoara in Romania...

Hardly the fault of thr Serbs but the result of the 1919 Treaty of Versailles created by the Allied Powers who after WWI redrew some national boundaries and stranded about 80,000 Serbs in Romania.

[mike]

And the Church of Romania has its Diocese of Dacia Felix in Serbia and the Diocese of Gyula and Hungary in Hungary (which is part of the Patriarchate of Serbia)]/b].

What?

Emphasis mine.

[ialmisry]

And the Church of Romania has its Diocese of Dacia Felix in Serbia and the Diocese of Gyula and Hungary in Hungary (which is part of the Patriarchate of Serbia)]/b].

What?

Emphasis mine.

It's a holdover from when the Patriarchate of Pec was translated to Karlowitz, which after the Ausgleich between the Austrian Hapsburgs and the Hungarian nationalists, fell in the Kingdom of Hungary.  The Church of Czernowitz/Bukowina/Bucovina by definition was outside of Hungary, and the Church of Nagy-Szeben/Hermanstadt/Sibiu/Transylvania, given the animus towards the Hungarians, insisted on the distinction between Romanian Transylvania and Hungary. Like the Dalmatian Coast, Serbia thereby got Hungary by default (it temporarily got Czechoslovakia the same way: St. Gorazd was consecrated therefore by the Serbs) after WWI. That is why, for instance, Hungary is not in an Episcopal Assembly.

Just looking up to confirm what I remembered, and it turns out the Serbian Diocese of Buda, with its see at Sentandreja, claims jurisdiction in the Czech Lands and Slovakia.  So the CzS Church is not as free of jurisdictionalism as I had thought.

[Father H]

Normally your posts are well thought out, but this one is not.  Border disputes are not the same as overlapping jurisdictions in whole countries.  Furthermore, many of your other examples show zero example of overlapping jurisdiction.   Alexandria did not and does not claim jurisdiction over the Sinai.   The Sinai parishes in Cairo are spelled out as metochia.   That Romania holds title of locum tenens of Caesarea-Cappadocia is irrelevant to the situation, as the title locum tenens is powerless when there is a local canonical hierarch in a local synod (and in any case, is an accidental title that got carried over generations after it was applicable).   The rest of the situations are in states that have been in a turmoil of boundary wars and identity, particularly the instances connected with Serbia.   That this effects regions does not decry cross jurisdictionalism throughout whole patriarchates.   Again, border disputes are not the same thing as the toleration of overlapping jurisdictions throughout who countries.     

I agree. But it began, and it remains. Is there an Orthodox Christian alive today who has ever known the proper canonical situation first-hand?

Does this happen in places that are traditionally Orthodox?

Of course there are no overlapping Churches in the Orthodox countries.   There is no Church of Serbia in Russia.  No Church of Russia in Egypt.

I'm afraid such is not the case, Father. The Church of Serbia, for instance, has its diocese of Timisoara in Romania (whose website interestingly is in Croatian/Serbian in Latin script, depending how you want to see it).
http://www.rastko.rs/rastko-ro/00ah_ser.htm
And the Church of Romania has its Diocese of Dacia Felix in Serbia and the Diocese of Gyula and Hungary in Hungary (which is part of the Patriarchate of Serbia).  The Romanian Metropolitan of Bessarabia just won his suit in the European Court of Human Rights against the government of Moldova, where Mosocw's Moldovan Orthodox Church had been given exclusive jurisdiction, and Bessarabia/Romania claims jurisdiction over all the Moldovan communities in Russia. On the otherside, ROCOR has followers in Moldova.  In addition, the Patriarch of All Romania has the title of "Locum Tenens of Caesarea in Cappadocia."

Egypt/Alexandria/Africa stands out in that it is the only place which is not majority Orthodox with large numbers/areas of never Orthodox which is not treated as "diaspora"-it has a Holy Synod of All Africa and not an "episcopal synod"-and has very little jurisdictional overlap: the only exception being the Church of Sinai, which is at the highest level of autonomy, and is under the jurisdiction of Jerusalem, not Alexandria. Besides Cyprus (and even that is historically not as clear as it might seem), no other Orthodox country seems to have escaped jurisdictional overlap in the past century.  And it is only in the last century that there has been overlap of jurisdictions in the "diaspora."

[ialmisry]

Normally your posts are well thought out, but this one is not.

 

Don't know about well, but thanks for the kind words Father.

Border disputes are not the same as overlapping jurisdictions in whole countries.  Furthermore, many of your other examples show zero example of overlapping jurisdiction.   Alexandria did not and does not claim jurisdiction over the Sinai.   The Sinai parishes in Cairo are spelled out as metochia.   That Romania holds title of locum tenens of Caesarea-Cappadocia is irrelevant to the situation, as the title locum tenens is powerless when there is a local canonical hierarch in a local synod (and in any case, is an accidental title that got carried over generations after it was applicable).   The rest of the situations are in states that have been in a turmoil of boundary wars and identity, particularly the instances connected with Serbia.   That this effects regions does not decry cross jurisdictionalism throughout whole patriarchates.   Again, border disputes are not the same thing as the toleration of overlapping jurisdictions throughout who countries.   

It goes beyond border disputes. In the case of Serbia, Hungary, let alone Serbia, does not border the Czech Republic, yet, as I found out today, Serbia's Buda exarchate claims jurisdiction over it, and the rest of the territory of the autocephalous Czech-Slovak Church.  I don't know the particulars: I do know that Mosocw gave a Tomos of Autocephaly in 1951, Constantinople continuing to claim it without basis until 1998, but I don't know of Serbia explicitely yielding jurisdiction.

Somewhere here we have a thread on the flareup between Romania and Serbia (a rarity, as they usually get along very well): the Serbs are used to for centuries being spread across several states, and the Romanians have been getting away from having other Churches owning their land (the metochia of Sinai and Jerusalem owned a third of the country before the Prince united the Metropolis of Moldavia and the Metropolis of Ungrovalahia and nationalized the foreign monastic holdings).  It goes beyond a few miles along the border.

Would you characterize the fight of Bucharest and Moscow over the whole of the Republic of Moldova as a border dispute?  The Metropolitan of Bessarabia claims all Moldovans throughout the jurisdicton of Moscow in Russia, Ukraine, etc.  What of Estonai? Both Mosocw and Constantinople claim the whole country, a country where Orthodoxy is the largest religion and had an Orthodox Church in 1030. Briefly it split the Orthodox world in two.

As I said, Alexandria is the only area that has no real jurisdictional issues to speak of.  I mention Sinai because it is the only real question: as I said it is autonmous, under Jerusalem, but Sinai has been ruled from Cairo for well over a millenium, and there the Pope of Alexandria plays the role that the Ecumenical Patriarch played/plays in Constantinople as head of the EO.  Hence the Abbot-Archbishop lives in his metochion in Cairo.  The EP's former bishop Osborne of Sourozh brought up that West of Egypt belongs to Rome but that seems to be believed less than his interpretation of canon 28.

And well to the 17th, Antioch was still coveting Cyprus, and thereafter had to repeatedly have Antioch and Constantinople manage its affairs-the last time was a crisis which dragged on for decades and propelled then Archimandriate Meletios Metaxakis onto his career.

[ialmisry]

I can definitely say you can experience the proper canonical situation. I am currently in Greece, and obviously here, you have every church being under the same jurisdiction (being the Church of Greece).
The region of Greece that I'm currently in (Macedonia) is actually part of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, whereas the rest of Greece is a part of the Church of Greece (and hence the Archbishop of Athens).

You are aware that the EP struck the late Archbishop of Athens from the diptychs over jurisdiction over Northern Greece, no?

The Oecumenical Patriarchate sanctioned (not "struck from the diptych")

His All Holiness said otherwise:

b) with unutterable sadness and pain we resolve the interruption of communion with His Beatitude Christodoulos, Archbishop of Athens, his name being stricken from the Diptychs of our Holy Great Church of Christ, and himself being rendered unable to commune with us, or with the clergy and monks who are subject to our Church, either in worship or in administration;

http://www.goarch.org/news/goa.news1121

the former Archbishop of Athens for appointing a Bishop to Thessaloniki claiming that his synod had the right to do without seeking approval of the Oecumenical Patriarchate. Thessaloniki is the Oecumenical Patriarchate's jurisdiction, not the Church of Greece's. His All-Holiness was preserving Canonical Orthodox order in the Church and the Archbishop of Athens was in the wrong.

There were other issues as well, like being commemorated as the primate of the Church of Greece. Was the Archbishop wrong in this as well?

Btw, the founding of the parish in New Orleans (which is what I think you are alluding to above) violated the same Tomos that was invoked on this occasion against Athens.

IIRC the Archbishop didn't come crawling to Canossa.

The Archbishop indeed accepted the Oecumenical Patriarchate's jurisdiction over Thessaloniki, and the matter was resolved and the sanctions lifted.

See how easy it is? Love and humility always win.

Yes, they do. But that's begging the question of whether that was what was involved here.

Btw

f) we make it known that in the event that this canonical anomaly should continue, the Ecumenical Patriarchate will be forced to proceed with the abrogation of the Patriarchal and Synodical Act of 1928.

What Greece would have done next would have been interesting.

[PeterTheAleut]

This argument (i.e., Orthodox-Protestant dialogue) between ialmisry and Keble regarding the definition of "denomination" has been split off and moved to Orthodox-Protestant Discussion.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=34066.0

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Faith Issues (Moderator: Mor Ephrem) > Topic: "denominations" in Orthodoxy...