OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 22, 2014, 09:30:04 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Press Release: Bishop of Sourozh Leaves MP to Join EP.  (Read 12361 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Myrrh
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #90 on: June 14, 2006, 05:02:14 AM »

Don't you think you might be missing the heart of the matter?ÂÂ  There never was a consensus that the so-called 8th Ecumenical Council should be listed with the previous Seven.ÂÂ  Nor is it necessary to list the 8th with the previous Seven in order to recognize the ecumenical authority of the 8th.


You're missing my point. This isn't about consensus or opinion, it about stone cold facts.

The fact is that the 8th Ecumenical Council was understood at the time to be the 8th Ecumenical Council, by the Imperial authority, by the Patriarchates of Rome, and Constantinople, and Antioch, and Alexandria, and Jerusalem and has been called that by these same patriarchates, except for Rome from the 11th/12th c, up until a hundred years ago.

How you handle this information is up to you.

Myrrh
Logged
Myrrh
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #91 on: June 14, 2006, 05:03:10 AM »

ARCHDIOCESE OF RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCHES IN WESTERN EUROPE

  EXARCHATE OF THE ECUMENICAL PATRIARCHATE

  Communiqué No 12-6 of the Council of the Archdiocese, meeting on 9 June 2006

The Council of the Archdiocese met in an extraordinary and enlarged session on 9 June 2006, under the presidency of his Eminence, Archbishop Gabriel, in order to take cognizance of the decisions of the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of 8 June 2006 concerning the integration of His Grace Bishop Basil of Amphipolis into the Exarchate, and to examine how to apply the decisions. After the meeting, the Council issued the following declaration:

Declaration of the Council of the Archdiocese
Confronted with grave unrest in the midst of his diocese and disciplinary sanctions in his own regard which he considered ‘uncanonical and invalid’, His Grace Bishop Basil of Sergievo, formally Administrator of the Diocese of Sourozh, whose See is centred in London, addressed an appeal to His All-Holiness the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I on 16 May, in accordance with Canons 9 and 17 of the Fourth Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon, which recognises the Archbishop of Constantinople's prerogative to ‘bring justice’ to ‘any bishop or cleric’ having a difference with the authority of his regional Church.

During its session of 8 June 2006, the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Great Church of Constantinople accepted the request formulated by His Grace Bishop Basil to Patriarch Bartholomew I to be received into the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Throne with those ecclesial communities that desired to follow him, so that these communities and their pastor might not be deprived of the bond of unity with the Holy Church. By Patriarchal and Synodal decision, Bishop Basil has been received under the omophorion of the Ecumenical Patriarch and has been designated Bishop of Amphipolis, to exercise as auxiliary bishop the responsibility for the parishes of Russian tradition in the territory of the British Isles, in the canonical context of the Patriarchal Exarchate of Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe.
The Council of the Archdiocese, meeting in an extraordinary session on 9 June 2006, under the presidency of his Eminence Archbishop Gabriel, learned of these decisions and the considerations which led the Ecumenical Patriarch to turn to his Exarchate of Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe in order to integrate His Grace Bishop Basil and the communities which desire to follow him. His Eminence Archbishop Gabriel announced that for reasons of pastoral solicitude and in order to permit them a normal liturgical and spiritual life, he was receiving Bishop Basil and the communities of the British Isles which ask to be received, into the Exarchate.

The Council of the Archdiocese considers that the integration of these parishes constitutes an important stage both in the life of the Exarchate, and in the evolution of Orthodoxy as a whole in Western Europe. This decision is firstly a continuity with history, since until the end of the Second World War, the Russian parish of the Dormition in London was under the pastoral authority of Metropolitan Eulogii.

Secondly, the Council takes note of the fact that many communities founded afterwards by Metropolitan Anthony, of blessed memory, in a spirit of living witness to the Truth of Christ and using both Russian and the local languages, share with our Archdiocese the same ecclesiological vision, the same objective of rooting Orthodoxy in the countries where we are living, the same liturgical and pastoral life according to the Russian Orthodox tradition, the same attachment to the principles of the Council of Moscow of 1917-18, and the same practice in canonical and administrative matters, and ways of running the Church (both at diocesan and parish level and in parish-diocese relations). It is therefore clear that His Grace Bishop Basil and these communities naturally find their place in the Exarchate, in order to continue to lead their liturgical and spiritual life in peace, piety and the integrity of faith.

In these circumstances, and in accordance with the Patriarchal and Synodal decision, the parishes and communities of the British Isles will be organised in a special vicariate within the Exarchate, responsibility for which belongs to His Grace Bishop Basil of Amphipolis, as auxiliary bishop with extended prerogatives, following the decrees of the Council of Moscow of 1917-18, which give the possibility of creating vicariates having a 'semi-independent' status (polu-samostoiatel’nost’) within an already existing diocese (cf. Decrees of 26 July/ 8th August 1918, ‘On the Creation of New Dioceses and Vicariates’, art. 6, and of 2/15 April 1918, ‘On Vicar Bishops’, art. 1 and 2). Such an organisation allows us to take up again the practice which existed under the Metropolitans Eulogii and Vladimir of blessed memory, who granted to certain of their auxiliary bishops wide pastoral authority in precise geographical territories, without dividing our ecclesial reality, which must keep intact its unity and its internal bonds of love and fraternal communion, under the protection of the Ecumenical Throne.

The modalities according to which the vicariate for the British Isles will function will be laid out in a separate document, which will be drawn up by the Council of the Archdiocese. All these decisions will be presented to the next General Assembly of the Archdiocese, to be held in May 2007. From today, His Grace, Bishop Basil has full right to participate in the meetings of the Council of the Archdiocese.

It goes without saying that this new form of organisation within our ecclesial reality is only a provisional stage — albeit an important one - on the road which must lead towards the creation of a unified Local Church, regrouping all the Orthodox faithful living in the countries of Western Europe. The proposal to establish such a Local Church, formulated by the Clergy-laity Assembly of the Exarchate in 1949, under the presidency of Metropolitan Vladimir, of blessed memory, remains a fundamental objective for the Exarchate, one which it will not be possible to bring to fruition except in the context of a Pan-Orthodox conciliar process, engaged in under the responsibility of His All-Holiness, the Ecumenical Patriarch by all the Orthodox Churches of the region, and with the participation of all the Orthodox ecclesial communities present in our lands, for ‘all are called to share at the Table of the Lord’.

Fundamentally, the Archdiocese is itself already a Local Church, as is every diocese in each place, where the fullness of the Church manifests itself in the celebration of the Holy Eucharist, offered by the bishop, surrounded by the college of presbyters and all the People of God. With all the dioceses of the other patriarchates, with which it is already in communion, it constitutes the first fruits of a Local Church on the territory of Western Europe, where the Lord has called us to live. It is in this perspective, which is in conformity with Orthodox ecclesiology, that the Archdiocese intends to move forward with all those who wish to contribute ‘here and now’ to the construction of the Church of Christ, beyond differences of language, nationality and ethnic origin, yet without abandoning the practices and usages of the rich and precious ecclesial Tradition received from our Fathers in the Faith. In accordance with their teaching, we must seek, through humble prayer and participation in the holy and life-giving divine Mysteries, the grace and light of the Lord Jesus, so as to be judged worthy to live in the fullness of ‘the bond of love’ which unites his disciples.

Paris, 9 June 2006

 
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,899


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #92 on: June 14, 2006, 07:58:06 AM »

You're missing my point. This isn't about consensus or opinion, it about stone cold facts.
Facts, maybe, but filtered through the point of view of the presenter.  PensaT has also presented stone cold facts, yet you conveniently choose to ignore those because they don't fit your point of view.  I'm not saying your conclusions are wrong; I'm just saying that the picture you present is not complete.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2006, 07:58:53 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #93 on: June 14, 2006, 10:17:34 AM »


You're missing my point. This isn't about consensus or opinion, it about stone cold facts.

The fact is that the 8th Ecumenical Council was understood at the time to be the 8th Ecumenical Council, by the Imperial authority, by the Patriarchates of Rome, and Constantinople, and Antioch, and Alexandria, and Jerusalem and has been called that by these same patriarchates, except for Rome from the 11th/12th c, up until a hundred years ago.

How you handle this information is up to you.

IF this is the Case, then why does the Synod of Constantinople in 1583, which was summoned in direct opposostion to the Latin church, refer and apeal to the authority of 'the customs of the Church which the seven Holy Oecumenical Councils have decreed' instead of the customs of the Church which the eight or nine Holy Ecumenical Oecumenical Councils have decreed?

In fact, while I have seen a few obscure references talking about a so-called eighth or so-called ninth synod here and there, I have never seen a reference refering to the eight Holy Oecumenical Synods of the Church or the nine Holy Oecumenical Synods of the Church. Implying that these Synods are not Oecumenical as the first seven are, and thus to refer to them as such is little more than open deceit, I presume for some political agenda you are trying to advance.

However, this is not to say that they are without Authority, they were promulgated by a Synod summoned by the Emperor, they bear Imperial Authority, and by virtue of the Authority of the Emperor these Synods (as well as several others that were sumoned by the Emperor prior to the fall of the City) have authority over all Christians. But still, these Synods are not equal to the seven, they are lesser Synods than then seven Oecumenical Synods. Not by much, but they are still subject to them.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #94 on: June 14, 2006, 10:22:06 AM »

George (ozgeorge),

I would just point out that I edited the post after you quoted it, I believe; I tried to soften my points to reflect my undecided stance.  You are right to sense that I do have some opinions that I am trying to field--I take this site seriously as a discussion forum as well as a debate forum so sometimes I really do try to talk a point out.  I am trying to figure out what those canons really mean, etc.  We were told in seminary that all canonical transfers in America in the SCOBA churches are done with the blessing of the bishops and that this is standard Orthodox practice.  I will have to actually find in my notes if I can (having taken 36 classes I am not sure I can) where this was said but it was repeated multiple times.  Probably in my church order class is where it was. If I can find anything, I will.  Otherwise, I think the best thing for me to do is drag out those canons and look at them again. I'll get back to you.  I'm writing you this message since you are on a different time zone and I can't do this until I get off work so I don't want you to think I am ignoring you.

Anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,360


metron ariston


« Reply #95 on: June 14, 2006, 11:18:03 AM »

IF this is the Case, then why does the Synod of Constantinople in 1583, which was summoned in direct opposostion to the Latin church, refer and apeal to the authority of 'the customs of the Church which the seven Holy Oecumenical Councils have decreed' instead of the customs of the Church which the eight or nine Holy Ecumenical Oecumenical Councils have decreed?

Well, that's obvious, GiC! All people who speaks in such a Latin way (including those Patriarchs at the Synod of Constantinople in 1583, the Byzantine canonists, St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite and those who use his supposed "Rudder", and every Orthodox Bishop in the last 1,000 years, since they pledged at their installation to uphold the "Seven Holy Oecumenical Councils" -- as if there weren't Nine!) are pussyfooting around the subject. Duuuuuuuh! Use some cold-hard facts that I like.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2006, 11:24:43 AM by pensateomnia » Logged

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

Posts: 98


« Reply #96 on: June 15, 2006, 09:24:01 PM »

Well, where do you differ from the Roman Catholics?

I'm sure they're quite delighted that you reject the Orthodox 8th as an Ecumenical Council, because two hundred or so years later they changed their minds about accepting it and decided to accept the previous council of Pope Nicholas which the Orthodox/RCC 8th Ecumenical of Pope John VIII condemned.






Happy thinking.

Myrrh
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #97 on: June 15, 2006, 09:41:43 PM »

Well, where do you differ from the Roman Catholics?
In the same way the Orthodox Church does which ennumerates only Seven Councils as Oecumenical.
Myrrh, I think you are misunderstanding what they are saying. No one has disputed the authority of the "8th Council", not even it's Oecumenical status. They are simply stating a fact that Liturgically, Synodically and therefore "officially", the Church as a whole has only clearly stated that Seven Councils are Oecumenical. It may well be that the 8th is also Oecumenical, but until the Oecumenical Church officially states this, no one, not even a local Synod, has the authority to state that this is the official opinion of the Oecumenical Church.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Myrrh
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #98 on: June 15, 2006, 09:58:40 PM »

Just to help you out here, some lists of RCC Ecumenical Councils.

The following is the list of the general councils recognized by Roman Catholics (the numbering is the customary one, and the opening year is given): (1) 1 Nicaea, 325; (2) 1 Constantinople, 381; (3) Ephesus, 431; (4) Chalcedon, 451; (5) 2 Constantinople, 553; (6) 3 Constantinople, 680; (7) 2 Nicaea, 787; (Cool 4 Constantinople, 869; (9) 1 Lateran, 1123; (10) 2 Lateran, 1139; (11) 3 Lateran, 1179; (12) 4 Lateran, 1215; (13) 1 Lyons, 1245; (14) 2 Lyons, 1274; (15) Vienne, 1311; (16) Constance, 1414; (17) Basel and Ferrara-Florence, 1431, 1438; (18) 5 Lateran, 1512; (19) Trent, 1545; (20) 1 Vatican, 1869; (21) 2 Vatican, 1962 (see separate articles on each council; e.g., Nicaea, First Council of). The Orthodox Eastern Church recognizes the first seven and counts the Trullan Synod of 692 as an ecumenical extension of the Third Council of Constantinople. The first council was the model for the rest.

http://reference.allrefer.com/encyclopedia/C/council-recognized-councils.html

.................................


The RCC list of its 21 Ecumenical Councils

http://www.newadvent.org/library/almanac_14388a.htm

VII. SECOND COUNCIL OF NICAEA
Year: 787
Summary: The Second Council of Nicaea was convoked by Emperor Constantine VI and his mother Irene, under Pope Adrian I, and was presided over by the legates of Pope Adrian; it regulated the veneration of holy images. Between 300 and 367 bishops assisted.
Further Reading: www.newadvent.org/cathen/11045a.htm

VIII. FOURTH COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE
Year: 869
Summary: The Fourth General Council of Constantinople, under Pope Adrian II and Emperor Basil numbering 102 bishops, 3 papal legates, and 4 patriarchs, consigned to the flames the Acts of an irregular council (conciliabulum) brought together by Photius against Pope Nicholas and Ignatius the legitimate Patriarch of Constantinople; it condemned Photius who had unlawfully seized the patriarchal dignity. The Photian Schism, however, triumphed in the Greek Church, and no other general council took place in the East.
Further Reading: www.newadvent.org/cathen/04310b.htm

IX. FIRST LATERAN COUNCIL
Year: 1123
Summary: The First Lateran Council, the first held at Rome, met under Pope Callistus II. About 900 bishops and abbots assisted. It abolished the right claimed by lay princes, of investiture with ring and crosier to ecclesiastical benefices and dealt with church discipline and the recovery of the Holy Land from the infidels.
Further Reading: www.newadvent.org/cathen/09016b.htm

..................................

http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/articles/ecumcncl.htm


Eighth Ecumenical Council -- Constantinople IV
LOCATION: Constantinople ÂÂ
YEARS: A.D. 869 - 870 ÂÂ
POPE: Hadrian II, 867 - 872 ÂÂ
EMPEROR: Basil, 867 - 886 ÂÂ

ACTION:  Called by Emperor Basil and ratified by Pope Hadrian II, this council condemned and deposed PHOTIUS (820 - 891), the patriarch of Constantinople and author of the Greek schism.

NOTE:  In 1054 the Greek schism was actually consummated by Michael Cerularius, the Patriarch of Constantinople at that time.  PHOTIUS attacked enforced clerical celibacy, the addition by the West of the "FILIOQUE" to the Creed, and the crowning of Charlemagne in the West. CERULARIUS (about 200 years later) closed the churches of the Latins in Constantinople, had the Blessed Sacrament cast out and trodden underfoot as invalid, and persisted in refusing to see the three delegates sent by Pope Leo IX (1049 - 1054).  On 16 July, 1054, they publicly placed on the altar of Saint Sophia the document containing his excommunication.

HERETIC: ÂÂ  PHOTIUS.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(The Eastern Councils end here and the Western begin.)

Ninth Ecumenical Council -- Lateran I
LOCATION: The Basilica of Saint John Lateran in Rome ÂÂ
YEAR: A.D. 1123 ÂÂ
POPE: Callistus II, 1119 - 1124 ÂÂ
EMPEROR: Henry V, 1106 - 1125 ÂÂ

ACTION:  Called and ratified by Pope Callistus II, this council confirmed the Concordat of Worms (1122) between Emperor Henry V and Pope Callistus II, which secured that all elections of Bishops and Abbots should be made freely by the proper ecclesiastical authorities (electors).  In Germany the emperor was to preside over these free elections and then bestow temporal power on the bishop so chosen, in return for temporal fealty.  Outside Germany the emperor was to have no part in any elections.

NOTE:  Also dealt with at this council was the subject of clerical marriages.  It was decided that once ordained, a priest may not marry in either Latin or Eastern Rites.

CONTROVERSY:  LAY INVESTITURE.

......................................................


I'm really surprised that any Orthodox would reject the 8th as an Ecumenical Council.


St Photios pray for us!

Myrrh



Logged
Myrrh
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #99 on: June 15, 2006, 10:15:40 PM »

In the same way the Orthodox Church does which ennumerates only Seven Councils as Oecumenical.
Myrrh, I think you are misunderstanding what they are saying. No one has disputed the authority of the "8th Council", not even it's Oecumenical status. They are simply stating a fact that Liturgically, Synodically and therefore "officially", the Church as a whole has only clearly stated that Seven Councils are Oecumenical. It may well be that the 8th is also Oecumenical, but until the Oecumenical Church officially states this, no one, not even a local Synod, has the authority to state that this is the official opinion of the Oecumenical Church.


George - I'll repeat this once more. The Church has stated that the council of 879 is the 8th Ecumenical Council.

Certainly up until 1848 there was no dispute about this from the Orthodox Patriarchates which were there at the time. It was official in 879 and it continues to be officially the Orthodox 8th Ecumenical Council.


Please, I'm reluctant to put more stress on this fact except as I'm doing, by mentioning it, however, and not directed at you or anyone in particular -
 
Up until 100 years or so ago EVERYONE knew that this is where the RCC and the Orthodox parted company, the argument about WHICH 8th was Ecumenical, not "was there an 8th?".

Sorry, getting a bit tired of this, and I'm not going to post again on it unless anyone is interested in discussing why this has changed.

Myrrh


Logged
Myrrh
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #100 on: June 16, 2006, 09:05:23 PM »

p.s. just to say that I didn't put in the smiley on the first list of RCC Ecumenical Councils; it doesn't appear on the original page but somehow copies across.

Myrrh
Logged
Myrrh
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 98


« Reply #101 on: June 19, 2006, 06:55:57 AM »


George - I'll repeat this once more. The Church has stated that the council of 879 is the 8th Ecumenical Council.

Certainly up until 1848 there was no dispute about this from the Orthodox Patriarchates which were there at the time. It was official in 879 and it continues to be officially the Orthodox 8th Ecumenical Council.


Please, I'm reluctant to put more stress on this fact except as I'm doing, by mentioning it, however, and not directed at you or anyone in particular -
 
Up until 100 years or so ago EVERYONE knew that this is where the RCC and the Orthodox parted company, the argument about WHICH 8th was Ecumenical, not "was there an 8th?".

Sorry, getting a bit tired of this, and I'm not going to post again on it unless anyone is interested in discussing why this has changed.

Myrrh




Just to finish this off, for my interest if for no one else's.

I think this emphasis on the 7 Councils is to do with the fact that the iconoclast arguments were still around, and for a few centuries more very strong.

Photios insisted, at the 8th Ecumenical, that the 7th be confirmed as Orthodox and from that the arguments defending Orthodoxy (including Rome) began to be under this banner - We are the Church of the 7 councils not the 6 - hence the Triumph of Orthodoxy. So "the 7 councils" has nothing to do with being a proof that the 8th didn't happen, it's a different argument.


Myrrh
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #102 on: June 20, 2006, 03:07:37 AM »

The Sourozh diocesan assembly determined to preserve unity with the Moscow Patriarchate

Moscow, June 19, Interfax - Members of the Sourozh diocesan assembly meeting in the London cathedral of the Dormition and All Saints on Saturday expressed their willingness to overcome dissention.

The crisis in the diocese broke out after its former administrator bishop Basil (Osborne) had decided to move to the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.

Participants in the meeting head the message of Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Russia to all the faithful of the Sourozh diocese and resolved to continue the diocesan life ‘according to the traditions that Metropolitan Anthony taught us’ and in communion with the Mother Church to which the late founder of the diocese ‘has been faithful during his long and outstanding ministry.’

The assembly officially recognized archbishop Innokenty of Korsun as the new administrator of the diocese. Actions were taken ‘to replace the members of the assembly who have recently relinquished their authority’ due to their move to the jurisdiction of Constantinople, says the assembly’s letter to Patriarch Alexy signed by the eldest clergyman of the diocese Benedict Ramsdan on behalf of all members.

The meeting supported the Patriarch’s decision to appoint a commission to investigate the problems in the Sourozh diocese, the official site of the Moscow Patriarchate reported Monday.

A speech of Archbishop Mark of Berlin and Germany, an administrator of the parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church outside of Russia in Great Britain was met with applause. He urged to preserve the unity of the Church in paying equal attention to the needs of people of different national and cultural background.

The supporters of bishop Basil did not attend the meeting.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #103 on: June 20, 2006, 09:49:08 AM »

Starting to look like a 'tempest/teapot'-thing, kiddies.

This too will pass.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,360


metron ariston


« Reply #104 on: June 20, 2006, 10:09:16 AM »

Isn't it interesting that they did not capitalize "bishop" when referring to Bishop Basil, but they did capitalize all other titles?
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #105 on: August 20, 2006, 01:22:28 AM »

Oh dear....

This is from the website of Exarchate of Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe (Vicarate of Great Britain and Ireland):
"Forthcoming visit of Archbishop Gabriel of Comana to the Episcocal Vicariate
Archbishop Gabriel of Comana will visit the Episcopal Vicariate of Great Brtain and Ireland at the end of August.
He will celebrate the Divine Liturgy at the parish of SS Aidan and Chad, Nottingham on Sunday 27 August.
He will then travel to Oxford, where he will celebrate the Vigil and Liturgy for the Feast of the Dormition of the Mother of God (Old Style) for the Russian Parish of the Annunciation.
"

However, the website of the the parish of SS Aidan and Chad, Nottingham where the Bishop will celebrate the Liturgy says:
"We are an English speaking Parish which is part of the Russian Orthodox Diocese of Sourozh..."

Hmmm.....
"I see a bad moon rising.
I see trouble on the way......"
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #106 on: August 20, 2006, 06:13:10 AM »

Given the 2005 copywrite on the website, who knows when it was last updated?

We'll see soon.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #107 on: August 20, 2006, 06:48:33 AM »

Well, this has just appeared on the Diocese of Sourozh website. It is a letter dated 17th August 2006 from Archbishop Innokenty (the temporary Administrator of the Diocese since  Bishop Basil left for the EP) addressed to Bishop Gabriel regarding his upcoming celebration of the Liturgy the the Church in Nottingham..

Quote
EGLISE ORTHODOXE RUSSE
Patriarcat de Moscou
Diocèse de Chersonèse
26, rue Péclet - 75015 PARIS
tel. + 33 1 48 28 99 90
fax. + 33 1 48 28 74 54
e-mail : korsoun@free.fr

Archevêque de Chersonèse

 

HIS EMINENCE, THE MOST REVEREND GABRIEL,
ARCHBISHOP OF COMANA,
EXARCH OF THE ECUMENICAL PATRIARCHATE

Your Eminence!

We have learned from the announcement on the web-site of the English Vicariate of the Archdiocese headed by you, that you intend to celebrate the Divine Liturgy on the 27th August this year in the parish of the Diocese of Sourozh of the Moscow Patriarchate in the city of Nottingham (Great Britain). Neither the Rector nor any part of the parishioners have as yet begun any process that could lead to a canonical resolution of their problems.

As temporary Administrator of the Diocese of Sourozh, I object in the strongest possible terms to your absolutely unlawful action, to this interference in the internal affairs of another diocese and of one of its parishes.

You are doing this at a time when you are well aware of the divisions and sufferings of the flock of the Sourozh diocese. You should also be aware that the clergy and people of the parish in Nottingham are likewise suffering and divided.

Instead of facilitating a canonical and peaceful resolution of the problems that exist, by your unlawful actions you are sowing the  seeds of yet greater disturbance in the minds and hearts of the people.

I deeply regret that you, Vladyka, have not heeded the pleas expressed in my letter to you dated 21st June this year. Do you fully appreciate the pernicious consequences that may result  from an ecclesiastical policy such as that which you are pursuing?

I consider it my duty to warn you, Vladyka, that through such grievously uncanonical actions you are taking upon yourself full responsibility for further deterioration in the relations between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Archdiocese which you lead.

With love in Christ,

+Innokenty
Archbishop of Korsun
Temporary Administrator of the Diocese of Sourozh

Source: http://www.sourozh.org/info/letters/letter170806.html

I wonder what the "uncanonical problems of the rector and parishoners" of the Nottinham Church are? Sounds like they may possible wish to join the EP as well.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2006, 06:51:19 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #108 on: August 20, 2006, 07:38:57 AM »

So it would seem, perhaps.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Starlight
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of USA (Ecumenical Patriarchate)
Posts: 1,537


« Reply #109 on: August 20, 2006, 11:07:48 PM »

Sounds like they may possible wish to join the EP as well.
Yes, I think you are right. I am getting this impression as well now. And if so, they are right in their decision.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #110 on: October 28, 2006, 07:58:32 AM »

Oh dear....

This is from the website of Exarchate of Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe (Vicarate of Great Britain and Ireland):
"Forthcoming visit of Archbishop Gabriel of Comana to the Episcocal Vicariate

Archbishop Gabriel of Comana will visit the Episcopal Vicariate of Great Brtain and Ireland at the end of August.
He will celebrate the Divine Liturgy at the parish of SS Aidan and Chad, Nottingham on Sunday 27 August.
He will then travel to Oxford, where he will celebrate the Vigil and Liturgy for the Feast of the Dormition of the Mother of God (Old Style) for the Russian Parish of the Annunciation.
"

However, the website of the the parish of SS Aidan and Chad, Nottingham where the Bishop will celebrate the Liturgy says:
"We are an English speaking Parish which is part of the Russian Orthodox Diocese of Sourozh..."

Hmmm.....
"I see a bad moon rising.
I see trouble on the way......"


It seems the parish of Sts. Aidan and Chad in Nottingham has indeed left the Diocese of Sourozh since this post and has joined the Exarchate of Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe (Oecumenical Patriarchate). Not only are they are now listed under the Exarchate's website, the domain name they were using when they were under Sourozh (http://orthodoxnet.co.uk) is now the domain name used by the Exarchate for all it's parishes in the UK.
But wait, there's more! This is from the Synodal decisions of the Diocese of Sourozh:

http://www.sourozh.org/info/docs/synod061006_112_en.html
"The Holy Synod agrees to the request of His Eminence Archbishop Gabriel of Comana concerning the canonical transfer of a clergyman of the Russian Orthodox Church
from the minutes of the meeting of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, chaired by His Holiness the Patriarch, 6th October, 2006
Minute no. 112
HEARD: The report of Most Reverend Metropolitan Yuvenaly of Kruititsk and Kolomna about the request addressed to him by Archbishop Gabriel of Comana to give his blessing to the transfer of Archpriest Georgy Ashkov, a cleric of the Diocese of Moscow, to the Exarchate of Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe.
RESOLVED:
To bless Archpriest Georgy Ashkov to transfer to the Exarchate of Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, and in connection with that to send to Archbishop Gabriel of Comana a Letter of Excardination in respect of the above-mentioned clergyman. "


I wonder if any of our British posters can tell us what might be going on?
« Last Edit: October 28, 2006, 08:05:14 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Starlight
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christianity
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of USA (Ecumenical Patriarchate)
Posts: 1,537


« Reply #111 on: October 28, 2006, 10:21:33 PM »

Ozgeorge,
Thank you very much for great information.
Actually, while I used to live in UK for a short period of time, I tried to keep myself updated about events in Sourozh diocese. When I was living there I belonged to the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Thyateira and Great Britain. I completely support the decision of Bishop Basil, whom I had an honor to meet. He is a good leader and a very spiritual person.
What I can say that over the half of the diocese went with Bishop Basil Osborne to the Exarchate of Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe of the Ecumenical Patriarchate). Not only are. As far I understood from one of the reports, a couple of priests went to the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Thyateira and Great Britain of the Ecumenical Patriarchate instead. Definitely, that Bishop Basil issued his blessing to transfer to all clergy which may decide to do so, before he left the MP himself. It seems that now the life of the Vicariate started to normalize and develop. So Bishop Basil and his supporters proceeded according to the Canon Law.
The MP ignores both the real situation and Canon Law and continues to consider Bishop Basil their subordinate. They keep telling him to come to the meeting of Moscow Synod. Also, Moscow Synod made a decision about concentration to the episcopacy of Archimandrite Elisey Ganaba. His title will be Bishop of Bogorodsk, an Auxiliary Bishop of Korsun Diocese. Nevertheless, he will be base in London with the authority to supervise remains of Surozh Diocese. For some strange reason he is not a new Bishop of Surozh. Korsun Diocese of MP centered in Paris with the authority of MP parishes in France, Spain, Portugal (very small number in that country) and Italy. Korsun Diocese is led by Archbishop Innocent (or Innokenty according to Russian version of his name) Vasiliev, the head of sad-known commission, which was sent by the MP to Surozh Diocese. Priest Mikhail Dudko, another member of that commission received a permanent assignment in Surozh Diocese.
Regarding Fr. Mitred Protopriest George Ashkov. He became famous in early 1990’s for his efforts in reconstruction of previously closed and destroyed Orthodox churches in Moscow region. Fr. George used to hold an office of the Dean of Fomino Deanery of Moscow diocese. Then he moved to France and joined the Exarchate of Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe. He serves as an assistant priest in the cathedral in Nice, France together with (2) other priests.
http://www.exarchat.org/spip.php?article514
http://www.exarchat.org/spip.php?article195
Therefore, Fr. George Ashkov never was the part of the Vicariate in UK and Ireland.
Actually, Fr. George initially received a blessing to transfer from Metropolitan Yuvenaly of Kruititsk and Kolomna, his ruling hierarch prior to the transfer, according to all necessary procedures. Then later, after the fact, the Synod of Moscow Patriarchate suddenly innovated the Canon Law by creation of a new absurd requirement that all clergy of the MP, who decide to transfer to other Local Orthodox churches may do so only with the blessing of the Moscow Synod. Some priests of the MP describe the new requirement as slavery. Somehow, Fr. George has been mentioned together with priests and deacons of Surozh Diocese in the list of priests, whose transfer the MP does not recognize. Surprisingly, the very same meeting of the Synod of Moscow Patriarchate issued a blessing to transfer to Fr. George Ashkov.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #112 on: October 29, 2006, 12:01:20 AM »

Thanks for the information Starlight. It has shed a lot of light on this situation for me.
Actually, Fr. George initially received a blessing to transfer from Metropolitan Yuvenaly of Kruititsk and Kolomna, his ruling hierarch prior to the transfer, according to all necessary procedures. Then later, after the fact, the Synod of Moscow Patriarchate suddenly innovated the Canon Law by creation of a new absurd requirement that all clergy of the MP, who decide to transfer to other Local Orthodox churches may do so only with the blessing of the Moscow Synod. Some priests of the MP describe the new requirement as slavery. Somehow, Fr. George has been mentioned together with priests and deacons of Surozh Diocese in the list of priests, whose transfer the MP does not recognize. Surprisingly, the very same meeting of the Synod of Moscow Patriarchate issued a blessing to transfer to Fr. George Ashkov.
I see...It seems that the Synod "issuing a blessing" for Fr. George to transfer carries the same message as the Synod "summoning" Bishop Basil... And they wonder why people are leaving... Wink
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
hedley
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #113 on: October 31, 2006, 12:34:08 PM »



As you can imagine, many  Orthodox  faithful in England are stunned by the sad news of this fissure.

On the face of it, the church flunked the challenge of ethnic discord.

When you talk to them (apparently),  heirarchs on both sides  find it difficult to see the merits of the other's position. It could  be that administrative ineptitude rather than skulduggery, is what led to this pass.

The good news is that Sourozh is in communion with the EP; their bishop has been seen attending liturgy at the EP Monastery in Essex.

Sourozh is in current possession the Knightsbridge cathedral, the jewel in the crown. The parishes have always been periphery.

comment

I remember Metropolitan Anthony once saying that when you own a property you think you own it, but it owns you. Cetainly great properties do seem to absorb a lot of resources. If they have lost the cathedral,
it  may be that Bishop Basil's set up has been let free  to put more focus on pastoral and evangelical matters.

At the same time the new clergy at Sourozh will be better qualified to attend to the needs of the expatriates; garner their support and that of the MP.

It is a mess, but perhaps not altogether an unholy mess. After all, the cats cradle of patriarchal intercommunion still holds.











The good news is that everyone is still in communion. A  bishop attatched to Sourozh MP) has been seen attending liturgy at St John The Babtist Monastery (EP) in Essex.

Neither side  seems to see much in the other side's case.

Sourozh is in possession of the Knightsbridge cathedral. It is the crown jewel of the diocise; the parishes are periphery.

Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #114 on: February 11, 2009, 03:59:58 AM »

I wonder how this will play out.
The story continues:
The Battle Over Britain's Orthodox Church
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,19663.0.html
« Last Edit: February 11, 2009, 04:00:38 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #115 on: November 16, 2010, 01:50:10 PM »

Didn't the bishop in question end up leaving the episcopate, and the EP lost the properties in British court?
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
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,967


« Reply #116 on: November 16, 2010, 02:14:37 PM »

Didn't the bishop in question end up leaving the episcopate, and the EP lost the properties in British court?

He was defrocked and laicized at his request so that he could marry at age 72.  See:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,26121.0.html

« Last Edit: November 16, 2010, 02:14:58 PM by jah777 » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #117 on: April 08, 2011, 02:50:18 PM »

If he participated in an ecumenical prayer service, as you said, then what was the problem? Is there any proof that this was not the reason he was deposed? I am not going to even try to justify Met. Sergios' beliefs, but if he excommunicated him for breaking a canon (one which we need more excommunication for, imo) then where is the wrong?

It is ultimately for the Church to determine who is a heretic, who is now, what prayer is canonical, what prayer is uncannonical, etc. And, like it or not, the Church today has a far more limited understanding of who are heretics than you do (e.g. Latins are regarded as schismatics for canonical purposes, not heretics), and as far as the canons against praying with heretics, these apply only to liturgical prayer (i.e. concelebration of actual services). This is not only the posistion of the Great Church of Christ, but also of Moscow, Antioch, Alexandria, etc., etc...including the OCA, of which you claim to be a member.

As a side note on canons in general, Constantinople as the highest court of appeal has the right to interpret the canons as she sees fit, so it is ultimately her interpretations, not yours or mine, that have authority in the Church. Furthermore, as anyone who has read Balsamon can attest to, the official interpretation may not always be the most apparent and straightforward. I dont know how much Roman/Byzantine Law you have studied, but before you start offering interpretations of canons I'd recommend that you at least familiarize yourself with the Code and Novels of Justinian (and at least browse the Pandects so you know how the law is applied), the Novels of Leo the Wise, the commentaries of Balsamon, Aristenos, Zonaras (at the very least familiarize yourself with their methodology and thinking), and then do some study in Byzantine Case Law to try to grasp the procedure and arguments applied in Byzantine Civil (and often by extension ecclesiastical and Orthodox Canonical) Cases (not that case law carries much weight in and of itself in a civil law system, but it is still important to understand thought, procedure, and the nature of legal debate and argument). Many today maybe familiary with the Napoleonic Code, as it serves as the basis for both French, or perhaps Louisiana State Law (as well as being a very strong influence on, if not the basis of, German Law). And while that would be a nice start, the Roman System throws in twists and turns that not even the French would allow in their court rooms today (for one thing, they don't have this same notion of the continuity of law that the Romans had, no French court today would hear an arugment based on the Code of Justinian, even if it served as the basis for the Napoleonic Code, but Byzanitne courts up to the fall of the City would hear arguments based on the Twelve Tables).

Oh, I thought he was. Was he just deposed or something?

I dont belive he was even deposed, I think he was simply removed from his see...transferred...though I'm not 100% certain on that. Of course, the ruling of Constantinople on the matter invalidated any such decision by the Synod of Moscow.
LOL. A blast from the past. The ruling of the London court invalidated any claims by the Phanar. And no, not even Constantinople has the authority to interpret the canons as they see fit, something that this sad little episode brought home.
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
serb1389
Lord, remember me when you come into your Kingdom!
Global Moderator
Merarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 8,427


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #118 on: April 08, 2011, 03:01:47 PM »

If he participated in an ecumenical prayer service, as you said, then what was the problem? Is there any proof that this was not the reason he was deposed? I am not going to even try to justify Met. Sergios' beliefs, but if he excommunicated him for breaking a canon (one which we need more excommunication for, imo) then where is the wrong?

It is ultimately for the Church to determine who is a heretic, who is now, what prayer is canonical, what prayer is uncannonical, etc. And, like it or not, the Church today has a far more limited understanding of who are heretics than you do (e.g. Latins are regarded as schismatics for canonical purposes, not heretics), and as far as the canons against praying with heretics, these apply only to liturgical prayer (i.e. concelebration of actual services). This is not only the posistion of the Great Church of Christ, but also of Moscow, Antioch, Alexandria, etc., etc...including the OCA, of which you claim to be a member.

As a side note on canons in general, Constantinople as the highest court of appeal has the right to interpret the canons as she sees fit, so it is ultimately her interpretations, not yours or mine, that have authority in the Church. Furthermore, as anyone who has read Balsamon can attest to, the official interpretation may not always be the most apparent and straightforward. I dont know how much Roman/Byzantine Law you have studied, but before you start offering interpretations of canons I'd recommend that you at least familiarize yourself with the Code and Novels of Justinian (and at least browse the Pandects so you know how the law is applied), the Novels of Leo the Wise, the commentaries of Balsamon, Aristenos, Zonaras (at the very least familiarize yourself with their methodology and thinking), and then do some study in Byzantine Case Law to try to grasp the procedure and arguments applied in Byzantine Civil (and often by extension ecclesiastical and Orthodox Canonical) Cases (not that case law carries much weight in and of itself in a civil law system, but it is still important to understand thought, procedure, and the nature of legal debate and argument). Many today maybe familiary with the Napoleonic Code, as it serves as the basis for both French, or perhaps Louisiana State Law (as well as being a very strong influence on, if not the basis of, German Law). And while that would be a nice start, the Roman System throws in twists and turns that not even the French would allow in their court rooms today (for one thing, they don't have this same notion of the continuity of law that the Romans had, no French court today would hear an arugment based on the Code of Justinian, even if it served as the basis for the Napoleonic Code, but Byzanitne courts up to the fall of the City would hear arguments based on the Twelve Tables).

Oh, I thought he was. Was he just deposed or something?

I dont belive he was even deposed, I think he was simply removed from his see...transferred...though I'm not 100% certain on that. Of course, the ruling of Constantinople on the matter invalidated any such decision by the Synod of Moscow.
LOL. A blast from the past. The ruling of the London court invalidated any claims by the Phanar. And no, not even Constantinople has the authority to interpret the canons as they see fit, something that this sad little episode brought home.

which ruling?  any links to that?
Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #119 on: April 08, 2011, 03:16:54 PM »

If he participated in an ecumenical prayer service, as you said, then what was the problem? Is there any proof that this was not the reason he was deposed? I am not going to even try to justify Met. Sergios' beliefs, but if he excommunicated him for breaking a canon (one which we need more excommunication for, imo) then where is the wrong?

It is ultimately for the Church to determine who is a heretic, who is now, what prayer is canonical, what prayer is uncannonical, etc. And, like it or not, the Church today has a far more limited understanding of who are heretics than you do (e.g. Latins are regarded as schismatics for canonical purposes, not heretics), and as far as the canons against praying with heretics, these apply only to liturgical prayer (i.e. concelebration of actual services). This is not only the posistion of the Great Church of Christ, but also of Moscow, Antioch, Alexandria, etc., etc...including the OCA, of which you claim to be a member.

As a side note on canons in general, Constantinople as the highest court of appeal has the right to interpret the canons as she sees fit, so it is ultimately her interpretations, not yours or mine, that have authority in the Church. Furthermore, as anyone who has read Balsamon can attest to, the official interpretation may not always be the most apparent and straightforward. I dont know how much Roman/Byzantine Law you have studied, but before you start offering interpretations of canons I'd recommend that you at least familiarize yourself with the Code and Novels of Justinian (and at least browse the Pandects so you know how the law is applied), the Novels of Leo the Wise, the commentaries of Balsamon, Aristenos, Zonaras (at the very least familiarize yourself with their methodology and thinking), and then do some study in Byzantine Case Law to try to grasp the procedure and arguments applied in Byzantine Civil (and often by extension ecclesiastical and Orthodox Canonical) Cases (not that case law carries much weight in and of itself in a civil law system, but it is still important to understand thought, procedure, and the nature of legal debate and argument). Many today maybe familiary with the Napoleonic Code, as it serves as the basis for both French, or perhaps Louisiana State Law (as well as being a very strong influence on, if not the basis of, German Law). And while that would be a nice start, the Roman System throws in twists and turns that not even the French would allow in their court rooms today (for one thing, they don't have this same notion of the continuity of law that the Romans had, no French court today would hear an arugment based on the Code of Justinian, even if it served as the basis for the Napoleonic Code, but Byzanitne courts up to the fall of the City would hear arguments based on the Twelve Tables).

Oh, I thought he was. Was he just deposed or something?

I dont belive he was even deposed, I think he was simply removed from his see...transferred...though I'm not 100% certain on that. Of course, the ruling of Constantinople on the matter invalidated any such decision by the Synod of Moscow.
LOL. A blast from the past. The ruling of the London court invalidated any claims by the Phanar. And no, not even Constantinople has the authority to interpret the canons as they see fit, something that this sad little episode brought home.

which ruling?  any links to that?
If I get a chance, we have a thread on it somewhere. The Court turned over all the disputed property back to Moscow.  In the US, according to the law, the same result would have obtained.
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: 21,470


« Reply #120 on: April 08, 2011, 03:23:43 PM »

which ruling?  any links to that?

Second week of June 2009 but I have only Polish sources ;P
Logged
serb1389
Lord, remember me when you come into your Kingdom!
Global Moderator
Merarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 8,427


Michał Kalina's biggest fan

FrNPantic
WWW
« Reply #121 on: April 08, 2011, 04:12:39 PM »

thank you to both of you!  i'll hunt it down later. 
Logged

I got nothing.
I forgot the maps
March 27th and May 30th 2010 were my Ordination dates, please forgive everything before that
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.177 seconds with 59 queries.