OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 22, 2014, 04:31:39 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: EP Bartholomew: more Ultramarist than his predecessors? The case of Paris  (Read 1209 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
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



« on: June 17, 2011, 04:43:39 PM »

Coming across the two Tomoi of the Patriarchal Exarchate for Orthodox Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe (i.e., the Phanar's Russians in Western Europe) , I noticed some interesting differences (emphasis added):
Quote
Patriarchal Tomos of 1931

Tomos of the Ecumenical Patriarch Photios II establishing the provisional Exarchate of the Russian parishes in Western Europe (02-17-1931)

To His Emimence Metropolitan Eulogius,

Having taken into account and carefully considered everything that was submitted by your Eminence and the bishops who are with you at our Great Church of Christ, based on the canonical rights of the latter as the Mother of Your Mother, the Russian Church, having studied the decisions of the General Diocesan Assembly concerning threatening and abnormal situation in which the Russian Orthodox parishes in Western Europe risque being found as to satisfy their spiritual needs and, in general, ecclesiastical, and in the issue of defense and the proper administration of their assets and properties, we have judged by synod, found opportune and decided: 

According to the duty and right of the Most Holy Ecumenical Patriarchal Throne of care, actively involved in your current difficult circumstances and receive the parishes that have found themselves in a situation so difficult and dangerous, into the direct jurisdiction of the Most Holy Ecumenical Patriarchal Throne for the purpose of fortifying them and defending them.

For this purpose, by synodal order, we decided that all Russian Orthodox parishes in Europe, while maintaining without change nor decrease the independence they had hitherto as a particular Russian organization and freely administering their particular business now be considered as forming provisionally  in the territory of Europe, a unique and special Exarchate of the Most Holy Ecumenical Patriarchal Throne directly dependent on it, being under its protection and led by it in the ecclesiastical domain where it is needed.

Similarly, we judged and decided that the provisional Russian Orthodox Exarchate thus established, continued as before to be entrusted to the central and supreme care and the administration of your Eminence to perform your duties with the title of Our Patriarchal Exarch, mentioning Our name in the liturgy and will be directly referenced to us, according to church order.

Therefore, in telling you this with joy, in response to the request of Your Eminence, We give you our blessings and order to continue, with the brothers in Christ  with you, under our supreme ecclesiastical direction and in the capacity of Our Patriarchal Exarch, in accordance with the foregoing, the work of spiritual care and administration of Russian parishes in Europe.
 
Simultaneously, we call on Your Eminence and other reverend bishops and priests to whom was entrusted the direction of the parishes under your leadership, to ensure, as appropriate to the firmness in faith, in piety, for the preservation of traditions of the pious orthodox Russian people in the parishes, the right order of parish affairs and administration of property and assets of parishes;according at the same time to give special attention to this matter that the intervention of the Holy Church in quarrels and political debates be avoided and that the sacred pulpit is never turned into a forum for political purposes, as elsewhere did your Eminence, rightly, decide and proclaim.

Finally, after declaring the performance by us then of a provisional canonical settlement to the ecclesiastical situation of the Russian Orthodox parishes in Europe, regardless of whatsoever decisions or orders from whom whatsoever, can no longer have any force or value for these parishes, their clergy and their followers, except the holy Ecumenical Patriarchal Throne, we pray to the Lord to look down with mercy and quickly bring peace and unity to the Blessed Sister Church of Russia suffering beyond all measure and  all the people all the pious orthodox and all Orthodox sisters Churches.

Giving, through Your Eminence, our blessings and prayers to all the pious parishes, we ask all the benefits of the Lord whose grace and infinite mercy be with Your Eminence.

Photios, Archbishop of Constantinople, Ecumenical Patriarch (Tserkovnyj Vestnik. 1931, No. 2).
http://exarchat.eu/spip.php?article857

EP Bartholomaios, however, had other ideas, when he issued a new Tomos (sort of like how he issued a new charter and constituion for the Greek Archdiocese of North and South America):
Quote
Patriarchal Tomos of 1999
Tomos of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, elavating the Archbishop to the rank of Exarchate of the Ecumenical Patriarchate (06/19/1999).

The Holy and Great Church of Christ, following in all things the sacred canons which accord to it the relentless solicitude in regard to the Plenitude carrying the name of Christ which is found outside the local territory of the other Holy Orthodox Churches and the ordination of their bishops (canon 28 of the 4th Ecumenical Council), decided, in response to the pious request of those interested, to organize as a loving Mother the affairs of the Archdiocese of Orthodox parishes of Russian tradition in Western Europe according to what is useful for them for salvation and to provide an orderly way as befits the Church of Christ according to the recommendation of the holy Apostle "let all things be done decently and in order" (1 Cor 14.40).

Searching the regulations which admit, paternally uniting in a matter, together and in a manner to please God, to the rule of strictness [akribeia (!)]  those of philanthropy and compassion, in a manner not transforming neither softness into permissiveness nor severity into acrimony, according to the 3rd canon of the Ecumenical Council of Quinisexte, we with sympathy into the special problems of the Archdiocese of Orthodox parishes in Western Europe occdientale of Russian tradition, and have judged as necessary the special pastoral solicitude applied to them and the proposed revision of their statutes.

Having considered these issues from all points of view, we have established by writting regulations judged preferable, so that they would not weaken the zeal of the canonical strictness [akribi (!)], by reason of the pastoral economia, of those bishops who work in the pastoral service of these communities, nor that the link of their their love of the pastors of metropolitans and archbishops of the Most Holy Ecumenical Throne in Western Europe be upset, "so long as harmony prevails and that God be glorified by the Lord in the Spirit Father, Son and Holy Spirit "according to the 34th canon of the Holy Apostles.
His All Holiness is citing the last line, but alluding to the first half of said canon:
Quote
It behoves the Bishops of every nation to know the one among them who is the premier or chief, and to recognise him as their head, and to refrain from doing anything superfluous without his advice and approval: but, instead, each of them should do only whatever is necessitated by his own parish and by the territories under him. But let not even such a one do anything without the advice and consent and approval of all. For thus will there be concord, and God will be glorified through the Lord in Holy Spirit, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/cannons_apostles_rudder.htm
Hmmmm.  I wonder who His All Holiness thnks is the premier or chief of Western Europe, Russian or not. Roll Eyes
Quote
Thus the Most Holy apostolic and patriarchal Ecumenical Throne, having received the request and the proposal previously presented to His Eminence the Archbishop Sergius of Eukarpia , who is the head of the Archdiocese of the Orthodox parishes of Russian tradition in Western Europe and of the Archepiscopal Council that surround him, concerning the necessity to modify the present Statutes of this Archdiocese, taking care according to his duty and manifesting the apostolic solicitude for stability, harmony and the canonicity of how to conduct the affairs of this Archdiocese, has taken synodical notice and made known this:
1. This Archdiocese of the Orthodox parishes of Russian tradition in Western Europe, led by the Archbishop of Eukarpia Sergius, constituted in a Patriarchal Exarchate in accordance with the decisions of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of February 13, 1931, submitted directly to the Ecumenical Patriarch and his Holy and Sacred Synod, constitutes a unified ecclesiastical body, depending canonically and in an immediate manner on the Ecumenical Throne.
2. This Patriarchal Exarchate is subject to the Ecumenical Patriarchate and is administered by its own statutes, approved by the Ecumenical Throne, and maintaining the Russian liturgical ordo.  As it should, in the development of statuts in force in the Patriarchal Exarchate the laws of countries where there are communities of the Exarchatewere were taken into consideration.
3. The Patriarchal Exarchate is governed by a single presiding Bishop, having the rank and title of Archbishop-Patriarchal Exarch of the Russian Orthodox parishes in Western Europe and provides the canonically immediate link between the Ecumenical Throne and the communities composing this Patriarchal Exarchate.
The Archbishop is the head of the Patriarchal Exarchate possesssing jurisdiction under the divine and holy canons over all communities of the Exarchate and is empowered to give canonical leave, to receive, to appoint and authorize for an ecclesiastical service any cleric or layman subject to his jurisdiction.
4. Within the organization of ecclesiastical life in Western Europe, the Patriarchal Exarch-Archbishop consults with the Metropolitan of France who sits in this country.

i.e. the Greek Metropolitan of France, the one His All Holiness had in mind above when Apostoic Canon 34 was mentioned.
Quote
Consultation between the Archbishop and the head of each of the hierarchys of the Ecumenical Throne is made directly and according to the same rules of communication between them, in regard of respect for the ecclesiastical jurisdiction and administrative of one to the other.
5. In liturgical celebrations according to the ordo in force and [established] usage:
The Archbishop commemorates the name of the Ecumenical Patriarch,
The Auxiliary Bishops commemorate the Ecumenical Patriarch and Archbishop,
The parish clergy commemorate, according to Russian tradition, the Ecumenical Patriarch and the Archbishop and his Auxiliary Bishop, to the extent that the later presides at the celebration.
6.  The election of the Archbishop-Patriarchal Exarch, as well as auxiliary bishops, is done in conformity with the statutes that the Ecumenical Patriarch has approved and blessed, and according to canonical order by which these elections are done by the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate which takes into consideration the proposals of the clerical-lay Assembly of the Exarchate.
7.The operation of the Episcopal Council, the General Assembly and Archepiscopal Council of the Patriarchal Exarchate is done under the chairmanship of the Archbishop-Patriarchal Exarch in accordance with the statuts in force and approved by the Ecumenical Patriarchate.
Extraordinary General Meetings of the Patriarchal Exarchate can be presided by the Metropolitan of France, following a request from the Exarchate and by a special delegation of the Ecumenical Patriarch.
8. The Russian Orthodox Theological Institute of St. Sergius constitutes an inseparable part of this Patriarchal Exarchate and is, therefore, under the immediate supervision of the Archbishop who is at the head of the Exarchate.

And with that, canonically by the present Tomos, as in the manner of paternal recommendation, we recall "persist and hold the Orthodox traditions," as the foundations of truth and dogma; so this, which holds for what one is ignorant of or taken in doubt: "Ask your father and he will tell thee, thy elders and they will tell you" (Deut 32.7) and we guarantee that the same safety is not even thinking on anything more than one must, for not thinking too much, that one would not want to prevail over the other, not to base assurance on his own thinking, rather to seek in humility that which is the good and perfect will of the Lord.

Above all this we bless the new Exarchate-Archdiocese of Orthodox parishes of Russian tradition in Western Europe and its most honored Exarch, His Eminence the Archbishop of Eukarpia Monseigneur Sergius, as well as their Excellencies the Bishops who accompanying him, the holy priesthood, the priests sanctified by the Lord sanctified and the chosen people of God; we invoke in abondance the blessings of our God and Savior Jesus Christ and we want that the Patriarchal Exarchate, on the one hand, will continue and grow for the glory of God and the salvation of the world; and, on the other hand, our blessed brothers, both bishops and priests and monks as to the faithful bearers of the the name of Christ, we wish all blessing of the Lord, as well as peace and joy to the highest degree, the fruit of his struggles for Christ and His Orthodox faith.

As a result of which, in faith and guarantee of this, the present Patriarchal and Synodical Tomos was made by codification, transcribed and signed in This [sic] holy codex of our great Church of Christ, also otherwise sent, in identical terms and without change, and delivered to the aforesaid to be deposited in the archives by title as a reminder forever.

The year of grace 1999, the 19th of June. Indiction 7.

 † Bartholomew of Constantinople
[Members of the Holy Synod]
No idea that Russia is their Mother Church, nor that the situation is provisional and brought on by exceptional circumstances.  No, it is only seen as a concession due to the Phanar's largesse that they are not placed under the Greek Metropolitan of France, the "head" of the Church there.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,468


WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 17, 2011, 10:20:26 PM »

No idea that Russia is their Mother Church, nor that the situation is provisional and brought on by exceptional circumstances.  No, it is only seen as a concession due to the Phanar's largesse that they are not placed under the Greek Metropolitan of France, the "head" of the Church there.

What if after 80 years, these Churches do not want to return to the MP?  Has the MP asked for them and been refused by the EP?

Why not all the Autocephalous Churches submit themselves to the EP in a similar manner except that none of them wish to risk schism; however, if the deep thinkers of the Phanar are resembling Bill Gates or the Star Trek Borg by wishing to absorb Orthodox Churches into what they (EP / Phanar) think is Orthodoxy (which is presented to the faithful through the GOA) - I don't want to see that happen in my lifetime.   angel

As long as the Churches made a free-will decision to remain under the EP before and after the issuance of the 1999 Tomos, then the circumstances from 1931 are no longer provisional or exceptional.
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 #2 on: June 18, 2011, 12:35:07 AM »

No idea that Russia is their Mother Church, nor that the situation is provisional and brought on by exceptional circumstances.  No, it is only seen as a concession due to the Phanar's largesse that they are not placed under the Greek Metropolitan of France, the "head" of the Church there.

What if after 80 years, these Churches do not want to return to the MP?
They returned after 14 years, under the same Met. Eulogius (who received the Tomos from the EP in February 1931 when Moscow appointed Met. Eleutherij Bogoiavlenski), when he reconciled with the Patriarchate of Moscow and was renamed Exarch of Moscow in Western Europe.  Much of the website of the Patriarchal Exarchate for Orthodox Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe trashes this decision.  He was succeeded by Met. Seraphim Loukianov as Moscow's exarch a year later, but many of the parishes went into schism again from Moscow and turned to the Phanar.  Those who remained with Met. Seraphim and Moscow had Bp. Nicolas Eremin of Korun succeed him in 1960.  In 1968 Pierre L'Huillier (later of New York) was consecrated as bishop of Korsun/Chersonese to become exarch, establishing thereafter the titular title and see for the Exarch in Paris: in 1980 he was translated to the OCA (and became the preeminent canonist on the continent).  The Phanar issued its 1999 Tomos during the interregnum before the present Archbishop Innocent Vassiliev succeeded Bp. Gury Shelimov.

Has the MP asked for them and been refused by the EP?
Among other things, the Phanar has sued Moscow in the French courts and lost.  The Moscow Exarchate pulled out of the Frence version of SCOBA just before the Chambesy accords called for the Episcopal Assembly (which just seems to be the prior SCOBA like organization) because of the allegedly heavy hand and autocratic centralizing tendencies of the Metropolitan mentioned in EP's Bartholomew's Tomos.

Why not all the Autocephalous Churches submit themselves to the EP in a similar manner
what would be hoped to be gained by such a foolish action?

except that none of them wish to risk schism;
many of them don't wish to risk furthering the ultramarist heresy.

however, if the deep thinkers of the Phanar are resembling Bill Gates or the Star Trek Borg by wishing to absorb Orthodox Churches into what they (EP / Phanar) think is Orthodoxy (which is presented to the faithful through the GOA) - I don't want to see that happen in my lifetime.   angel
I don't have such a low opinion of the GOA.
As long as the Churches made a free-will decision to remain under the EP before and after the issuance of the 1999 Tomos, then the circumstances from 1931 are no longer provisional or exceptional.
The 1999 shannanigans was in a series of acts, e.g. installing the same year the Congolese Cypriot Greek Stephanos as Metropolitan of Estonia persuant to the tomos His All Holiness issued/reactivated in 1996, althought the Estonian breed, born, baptized, chrismated, consecrated speaking Metropolitan of Tallin and All Estonia in 1990 became Patriarch Alexii of Moscow and installed his Estonian breed, born, baptized, chrismated, confessing, consecrated speaking Metropolitan Cornelius of Tallin and All Estonia to succeed him in his natal see.

and this "free will" stuff was the basis of the Phanar's pot and kettle council that condemned phyletism as a heresy: the Bulgarians didn't want the Phanariots any longer, followed soon after by the Phanar condemning Antioch as schismatic when the place where the disciples were first called Christians again became masters of their own house.   "Free will" is not a concept known in the Phanar's canonical tradition.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,468


WWW
« Reply #3 on: June 18, 2011, 01:06:53 AM »

No idea that Russia is their Mother Church, nor that the situation is provisional and brought on by exceptional circumstances.  No, it is only seen as a concession due to the Phanar's largesse that they are not placed under the Greek Metropolitan of France, the "head" of the Church there.

What if after 80 years, these Churches do not want to return to the MP?
They returned after 14 years, under the same Met. Eulogius (who received the Tomos from the EP in February 1931 when Moscow appointed Met. Eleutherij Bogoiavlenski), when he reconciled with the Patriarchate of Moscow and was renamed Exarch of Moscow in Western Europe.

Was this a case of buyer's remorse or did the MP (in 1945) emulate the EP in creating a similar canonical structure?

  Much of the website of the Patriarchal Exarchate for Orthodox Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe trashes this decision.

So why haven't they returned to the MP unless the EP refuses to release them to their proper canonical home?   Huh

He was succeeded by Met. Seraphim Loukianov as Moscow's exarch a year later, but many of the parishes went into schism again from Moscow and turned to the Phanar.

Is it fair for Churches to play ping-pong with their Jurisdictions?  I realize that the 1960's were a turbulent period; however, Churches were seen as sources of stability and if people decided to play ping-pong between the EP and MP - doesn't sound like Christian behavior to me....   Huh

Those who remained with Met. Seraphim and Moscow had Bp. Nicolas Eremin of Korun succeed him in 1960.  In 1968 Pierre L'Huillier (later of New York) was consecrated as bishop of Korsun/Chersonese to become exarch, establishing thereafter the titular title and see for the Exarch in Paris: in 1980 he was translated to the OCA (and became the preeminent canonist on the continent).  The Phanar issued its 1999 Tomos during the interregnum before the present Archbishop Innocent Vassiliev succeeded Bp. Gury Shelimov.

His All Holiness attempted to cut buyer's remorse off at the knees?

Has the MP asked for them and been refused by the EP?
Among other things, the Phanar has sued Moscow in the French courts and lost.

A pathetic shame for Patriarchates to solve their problems in the civil courts.  Paul could plead his case before Romans; so there is a precedent for all this legalism coming from the EP.   Undecided

 
The Moscow Exarchate pulled out of the Frence version of SCOBA just before the Chambesy accords called for the Episcopal Assembly (which just seems to be the prior SCOBA like organization) because of the allegedly heavy hand and autocratic centralizing tendencies of the Metropolitan mentioned in EP's Bartholomew's Tomos.

If a Bishop is heavy-handed and autocratic, that could be seen by the Clergy and Laity as a reason to return to the EP; hence, more buyer's remorse for leaving the EP in the first place.

 
Why not all the Autocephalous Churches submit themselves to the EP in a similar manner
what would be hoped to be gained by such a foolish action?

Unity - on a global level?  One world with one Bishop in each city just as the Apostles established and the Byzantine Empire maintained?

 
except that none of them wish to risk schism;
many of them don't wish to risk furthering the ultramarist heresy.

If they reject the EP's ultramarism, that would amount to schism.

 
however, if the deep thinkers of the Phanar are resembling Bill Gates or the Star Trek Borg by wishing to absorb Orthodox Churches into what they (EP / Phanar) think is Orthodoxy (which is presented to the faithful through the GOA) - I don't want to see that happen in my lifetime.   angel
I don't have such a low opinion of the GOA.

Has the Holy Synod of the EP been stacked with deep thinkers like the current His All Holiness?  If I asked 100 people at any GOA Church to name one other Orthodox Jurisdiction under the EP besides their own, I'm going to be labeled insane and probably receive a handful of correct answers....

 
As long as the Churches made a free-will decision to remain under the EP before and after the issuance of the 1999 Tomos, then the circumstances from 1931 are no longer provisional or exceptional.
The 1999 shannanigans was in a series of acts, e.g. installing the same year the Congolese Cypriot Greek Stephanos as Metropolitan of Estonia persuant to the tomos His All Holiness issued/reactivated in 1996, althought the Estonian breed, born, baptized, chrismated, consecrated speaking Metropolitan of Tallin and All Estonia in 1990 became Patriarch Alexii of Moscow and installed his Estonian breed, born, baptized, chrismated, confessing, consecrated speaking Metropolitan Cornelius of Tallin and All Estonia to succeed him in his natal see.

Maybe the EP and MP were scared by Y2K mania?   Huh

 
"Free will" is not a concept known in the Phanar's canonical tradition.

It was free will for Sultan Mehmet to sack Constantinople.  Sultan Mehmet could have left Haghia Sophia in peace as an Orthodox Church, take away 10,000 beautiful women to his harem and left the EP alone in "respecting the people of the book" per the Qur'an.  Some "people" in the GOA have already exercised their "free will" and rejected what their EP has become.   Sad
Logged
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,468


WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 18, 2011, 05:12:01 PM »

 
except that none of them wish to risk schism;
many of them don't wish to risk furthering the ultramarist heresy.

If they reject the EP's ultramarism, that would amount to schism.

The other Orthodox Churches ought to call out the EP on this newly minted heresy and they can deal with that in a proper canonical forum (seems like the Episcopal Assemblies is not a proper canonical forum or even these synaxises of Autocephalous Orthodox Church leaders.   Wink  What are the other autocephalous Orthodox Churches afraid of, besides schism?    Huh

Besides, if His All Holiness reposes, do you think his replacement will continue down this road of "ultramarism?"

ultramarist heresy? care to explain?
The Old Rome was beyond the mountains-ultra mont(anist)-seperating it from the world over which it claimed universal jurisdiction.  The Phanar in New Rome claims universal jurisdiction over the lands beyond the seas-ultra mar(ist)-hence a more appropriate title.  Sort of like France d'outre mer.
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 #5 on: June 18, 2011, 05:32:42 PM »

Besides, if His All Holiness reposes, do you think his replacement will continue down this road of "ultramarism?"

Possibly.

ultramarist heresy? care to explain?
The Old Rome was beyond the mountains-ultra mont(anist)-seperating it from the world over which it claimed universal jurisdiction.  The Phanar in New Rome claims universal jurisdiction over the lands beyond the seas-ultra mar(ist)-hence a more appropriate title.  Sort of like France d'outre mer.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2011, 05:37:13 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,468


WWW
« Reply #6 on: June 18, 2011, 10:36:16 PM »

Besides, if His All Holiness reposes, do you think his replacement will continue down this road of "ultramarism?"
Possibly.

Who was the Hierarch in your picture?  Metropolitan John (Zizoulas) of Pergamon?  If he becomes the next EP, we will see the healing of the Great Schism ... with a greater schism ...    Shocked
Logged
Father H
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian--God's One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: UOCofUSA-Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 2,611



« Reply #7 on: June 18, 2011, 11:31:29 PM »

The "provisional" part is that it is a parallel jurisdiction to others already there.   There is no heresy here.  There is a different reading of the canons. 
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 #8 on: June 19, 2011, 12:34:58 AM »

Besides, if His All Holiness reposes, do you think his replacement will continue down this road of "ultramarism?"
Possibly.

Who was the Hierarch in your picture?  Metropolitan John (Zizoulas) of Pergamon?  If he becomes the next EP, we will see the healing of the Great Schism ... with a greater schism ...    Shocked
Met. Elpidophoros of Prusa (the Ottomans first capital, btw)
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,20260.0.html
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
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 #9 on: June 19, 2011, 02:04:53 AM »

The Spirit is descended!
The "provisional" part is that it is a parallel jurisdiction to others already there.   There is no heresy here.  There is a different reading of the canons. 
The Vatican has different readings of the canons as well.

The Phanar set up its own jurisdiction, the Greek Orthodox Metropolitinate of France 30 years after the 1931 Tomos to Met. Eulogius, and we must remember that a) Moscow has originally named Met. Eulogius as its exarch in France before the 1931 Tomos, b) Met. Eulogius was not the first Russian exarch in France.  In fact, the jurisdiction of the Russian Church dates from the days of the Czars.

So the Phanar, except for the years 1945-6, had its exarchate in France for 30 years before it set up a Greek one.  Why couldn't Arb. George Tarassov, bishop of the Patriarchal Exarchate for Orthodox Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe in 1961, have been made Metropolitan of France?  Why did he have to remain "bishop of Syracuse"? Was it because he was ordained deacon and priest before the Tomos of 1931 by Met. Eulogius when he was still exarch for the Moscow Patriarchate/the Russian Church? Why, a few years after the establishment of the "Greek Orthodox Metropolitanate of France,"
Quote
The Exarchate was closed by Patriarch Athenagoras I through a letter dated 22 November 1965, with an assembly meeting 16–18 February 1966 noting that such provisional ethnic structures were no longer necessary, given that the passage of several generations had allowed immigrants to become accustomed to their new lands, which were now made up of more and more converts to the faith.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchal_Exarchate_for_Orthodox_Parishes_of_Russian_Tradition_in_Western_Europe
Yeah, I'm sure the "Greek Orthodox Metropolitinate of France" isn't ethnic.

Why wasn't the Phanar's jurisdiction based on the Patriarchal Exarchate for Orthodox Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe, seeing as it was the largest Orthodox group in France?  Why instead was it demoted to a deanery for the upstart "Greek Orthodox Metropolitinate of France"? which, btw, has a bishop with the title of France, and not some dead see.

Why is the exarch-archbishop mandated in the new tomos to consult with the Greek Metropolitan "who sits in this country" (whereas the exarch-archbishop sits in Eucarpia and other dead sees, the Greek Metropolitan sits in France)?

On the official web site it is claimed that Met. Emmanuel "It retains the direction of the representation of the Orthodox Church to the EU."
http://metropolegrecque.typepad.com/blog/m%C3%A9tropolite.html
(He, however, only represents the Greek Church.  Met. Hilarion doesn't take order from him when he represents Moscow to the EU.)  Why didn't the head of the "accustomed" Orthodox of Western Europe be nominated to represent "the Orthodox Church" to the EU?

I think the answer is easily seen, from the first line, in the heavy dependence of the 1999 Tomos on the canon 28 myth, and espeically how, on that basis, it doesn't see anything provisional nor unusual with Russians being under the Phanar and not Moscow, and under its junior metropolitan of France.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: ACROD
Posts: 8,576


Pokrov


WWW
« Reply #10 on: June 19, 2011, 09:18:01 AM »

-yawn-
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 #11 on: June 19, 2011, 10:26:13 AM »

-yawn-
Why the different treatment in naming of Greek dioceses versus the non-Greeks ones then?

The Constantinople has (in their opinion) the jurisdiction over the whole are that is not under the canonical jurisdiction of other Churches (North and South America, Western Europe, Eastern Asia, Australia and Oceania). The Greek ethnicity is the dominant one in the Church of Constantinople so the parallel Churches (ACROD, UOC, Russian Exarchate, Albanian) that exist on the territories of the Greek Dioceses (GOA, Western European Dioceses) are considered to be extra jurisdictions (like jurisdictions of the other Churches) in contrary to the canonical (one territory - one Bishop) Greek jurisdiction. Hierarchs from the non-Greek EP jurisdictions cannot be named after the real cities because they would have the authority over the lands that already have EP Bishops.

That sounds accurate to me as it has been explained by others over the years.

It would be odd that the Phanar abolishes the established local exarchate on the excuse that it is "accustomed to their new lands," setting in its place a Metropolitinate of France made up of recent Greek immigrants, if it were not so typical.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,468


WWW
« Reply #12 on: June 19, 2011, 01:47:33 PM »

Who was the Hierarch in your picture?  Metropolitan John (Zizoulas) of Pergamon?  If he becomes the next EP, we will see the healing of the Great Schism ... with a greater schism ...    Shocked
Met. Elpidophoros of Prusa (the Ottomans first capital, btw)
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,20260.0.html

Thank you and Happy Father's Day!   Smiley
« Last Edit: June 19, 2011, 01:47:49 PM by SolEX01 » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

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



« Reply #13 on: April 10, 2013, 05:23:51 PM »

I was reminded of something I had forgotten when I posted this thread, when I came across it, the letter of Patriarch Alexei of Moscow of blessed memory to the EP Bartholomew:
Quote
Bearing in mind what has been said, we are completely justified in contesting the statement of Your Holiness to the effect that the Exarchate of Russian Parishes in Western Europe is 'one of the forms of pastoral care that is incumbent' upon the Church of Constantinople. The theory that this Exarchate is obliged to be subject to the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople is refuted by the very history of this ecclesiastical entity. We must remember that in the official documents of the Church of Constantinople concerning the status of the Russian parishes in Western Europe it is accepted that their Mother Church is the Russian Orthodox Church, and that the system of administration established for these parishes has a provisional character. There is no ambiguity concerning this in the Tomos of Patriarch Photios of 17 February 1931. Commenting on this document, Patriarch Photios himself wrote in a letter (No. 1428, 25 June 1931) to Metropolitan Sergii, Deputy Locum Tenens of the Patriarchal Throne, that 'the situation should remain in this provisional state until, with God's help, unity can be re-established with our Sister Church of Russia'. Similarly, His Holiness Patriarch Athenagoras, in a letter (No. 671, 22 November 1965) to Archbishop Georges of Eudokiada, mentioning the fact that 'the Church of Russia has freed itself of divisions, acquired an internal organisation and freedom of action in its affairs outside Russia', announces the suppression of the Exarchate of Russian Parishes in Western Europe, 'which had a provisional character', and recommends that it join itself to the Patriarchate of Moscow, 'which can and should always demonstrate and manifest its fatherly love for these parishes'. The fact that the Patriarchate of Constantinople received back into its jurisdiction this diocese of Russian parishes in 1971 does not change in any way the provisional character of the current situation of the Russian Archdiocese, since in its first paragraph the relevant Tomos refers back to the Tomos of Patriarch Photios. Thus the Church of Constantinople, in these official documents, has recognised unambiguously the right of the Archdiocese of Russian Parishes in Western Europe to reunite itself with the Mother Church -- the Russian Orthodox Church -- without this being the manifestation of 'an extremely secularised and erroneous spiritual state' or of 'an erroneous ethnic understanding'.
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles5/PatAlexisCanon28.php
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
Luckster
Double Dipper
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 140



« Reply #14 on: April 11, 2013, 10:59:30 AM »

I was reminded of something I had forgotten when I posted this thread, when I came across it, the letter of Patriarch Alexei of Moscow of blessed memory to the EP Bartholomew:
Is it common for other Patriarchs to not address the Ecumenical Patriarchate as "Ecumenical"?
Logged
arimethea
Getting too old for this
Section Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

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


Does anyone really care what you think?


« Reply #15 on: April 11, 2013, 11:17:17 AM »

I was reminded of something I had forgotten when I posted this thread, when I came across it, the letter of Patriarch Alexei of Moscow of blessed memory to the EP Bartholomew:
Is it common for other Patriarchs to not address the Ecumenical Patriarchate as "Ecumenical"?

Yes, as a usage title it has only been used starting at some point in the 1900's.
Logged

Joseph
Tags: EP Bashing cheval mort 
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.113 seconds with 42 queries.