OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 02, 2014, 06:59:45 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Palm Sunday protests against Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem  (Read 9149 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Antiochian
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


« on: April 25, 2005, 07:32:01 AM »



04/24/05,
Palestinian East-Orthodox Christians shout at Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem Irineos (not in the picture) as they called for his resignation during a Palm Sunday procession in Jerusalem's Old City. The Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem is under pressure to resign in a scandal dividing the Church over an alleged illegal land deal.



Shouting in Arabic and Greek, they waved posters bearing slogans denouncing Irineos, one of which read: "Judas, betrayest thou the Son of Man with a kiss?" in reference to the betrayal of Jesus by one of his disciples just before he was crucified.



If he can't understand the concerns of his masses, then perhaps it is time to bring in someone who will.

Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2005, 08:25:31 AM »

What a wonderful post for the start of Holy Week.

Perhaps the masses are wrong - sure looks it to me.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2005, 08:47:14 AM »

Armenian Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem Torkom Manoogian, left, lays a wreath at a memorial as they mark the 90th anniversary of the mass killing of the Armenian people, at the Armenian Patriarchate in Jerusalem's Old City, Monday, April 25, 2005. Armenians accuse the Turks of genocide in the killings of up to 1.5 million Armenians during World War I as part of a campaign to force them out of eastern Turkey. (AP Photo/Kevin Frayer)
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,462


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2005, 08:47:26 AM »

Eh, more Arabs riled up by propoganda--quite possibly coming from Lebanon as before*--against the lawful patriarch of Jerusalem.

(* cf. the 1994 issue of the Word Magazine reprinting an Arabic article where wild rumors against the Jerusalem Patriarchate were spread and no retraction to my knowledge ever posted).
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.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

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


« Reply #4 on: April 25, 2005, 08:55:58 AM »

alexp4uni,
I share your grief and prayers for the Armenian martyrs
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
alexp4uni
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: kinda practicing theist
Jurisdiction: ecumenical kind
Posts: 329


« Reply #5 on: April 25, 2005, 09:05:59 AM »

Well Turkey to date will not apologize for what they did. No different from Rwanda and Darfur. To the horrid killings in former Yougoslavia. To me Genocide is not the relevant number of people being killed but how a plan can be concocted to finish something off within in just a moment. To a group of people to say it never happened and then it turn do a "Pontius Pilate" - washing their hands. We can only wait for democractic process to break down oppression and intolerance.

That my little speel. And also it's a lighter side to what the original new post was.
Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #6 on: April 25, 2005, 09:09:16 AM »

Irenaios heckled by angry Arab protesters
JERUSALEM (AFP) - Angry Arab protesters mobbed Patriarch Irenaios during a religious procession in Jerusalem’s Old City yesterday, enraged over the alleged sale of politically sensitive land in the holy city to Jewish investors.

As hundreds of Christian pilgrims flocked to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre for Orthodox Palm Sunday, scores of Arab Christians joined the crowds, booing and crying, “Shame on you” as Irenaios left the basilica.

Shouting angrily in Arabic and Greek, they waved posters denouncing Irenaios. Surrounded by scores of Israeli riot police, the 65-year-old patriarch waved feebly as scores of protesters tried to push toward him, one of whom lobbed a bottle of water at him.

Scuffles broke out between the protesters and several visiting Greek pilgrims carrying Greek flags, who tried to tear down the posters and stop the demonstration.
Logged
observer
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 546

Vivre die Raznitsa!


« Reply #7 on: April 25, 2005, 01:18:56 PM »

I pray that the Patriarch of Antioch will discipline these fanatics.  We prayed for the Armenian people this weekend. I hope too that the Amenian Patriarch will resolve his differences with His Holiness Irenaeos.  See you at Pascha!
Logged

Thou shalt not prefer one thing to another (Law of Liberalism)
eleni
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155



« Reply #8 on: April 25, 2005, 01:23:55 PM »

There is definately something wrong here......
And in the middle of Passion Week ...............(My mistake....middle week....sorry....I just read Palm Sunday) 

Do you all beleive that this all could have been a set up?

helen.

« Last Edit: April 25, 2005, 01:25:33 PM by eleni » Logged

A Prudent man foresees evil and hides himself;
The simple pass on and are punished.
-Proverbs27:12-
Tikhon29605
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 532


May I become Thy Tabernacle through Communion.


« Reply #9 on: April 26, 2005, 02:12:36 AM »

How do you "discipline" nameless laymen in a crowd? If it were priests of the Antiochian jurisdiction shouting and screaming and throwing water bottles at the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem, I could imagine some discipline taking place.  But with thousands of people in a crowd? Unless, of course, we invent some kind of Orthodox "Homeland Security" force. LOL I have to laugh a little, as this is really a sad thing to happen, esp. at the beginning of Holy Week.
Logged
Antiochian
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


« Reply #10 on: April 26, 2005, 07:50:02 AM »

Excuse me, but it seems you all perceive the Antiochians and our Arab Orthodox brethren as mere fanatics.

I'm sure if an Armenian Patriarch sold Armenian land to Turks, you would not deem them fanatics at all!

To the Greeks here defending your Greek clergymen. If you want him so much, take him back to Greece, because the Arabs don't! We are not fanatical, we - like every nation - wish to have our issues and concerns respected and represented. Irineos represents the Arab Orthodox, and he has failed to respect them.

By the way, my prayers for the Armenian victims of the genocide, for I care about the wellbeing of all Orthodox nations, unlike some here who endorse every Orthodox cause except the Arab Orthodox cause.



Logged
eleni
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 155



« Reply #11 on: April 26, 2005, 09:57:31 AM »

It is rather very sad to see that WE all Orthodox Christians screaming and fighting with each other...
I can see now the devil and his demons laughing and rejoicing in our arguments....

We all should respect the Holy week .......and rejoice that Pascha will arrive once again for the whole world...

All this is happening for a reason......that reason is because we are living in Apocalyptic times...

Never in History has there been Orthodoxy like this(corrcet me if Im wrong)....This week is when Christ was much in prayer ......we should pick up our CROSS and follow Him...

Pray for me a sinner,
Lord have mercy
Lord have mercy
Lord have mercy
............................I make many mistakes in life and sometimes speak about things that does not concern me.....and I speak before I think....much prayer on my side should help me........please pray for me a sinner
helen....

Why I mentioned that this whole buisness thing about the Patriarch Of Jerusalem is/or may be a set up........ is because I have read certain information  in regards to what is happening and for reasons that are not known to many may be why all this is happening...
Thanks for listening
helen...
Logged

A Prudent man foresees evil and hides himself;
The simple pass on and are punished.
-Proverbs27:12-
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,462


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #12 on: April 26, 2005, 10:14:04 AM »

"Antiochian",

I live in New York and have met many Arabs that absolutely want nothing to do with the Antiochian Patriarchate and its propoganda compaign against the Jerusalem Patriarchate. These Arabs are die-hard pro-Jerusalem.  Patriarch Ireneaus didn't do any of the things he is accused of; it's most likely a plot by the usual suspects (dissatisfied Israeli officials or Palestinian Muslim crime bosses) to stir up trouble.  It's funny that when this happens, the only people we hear about it from are Antiochians--such as that evil article published against the JP in 1994 for the same issue (alleged land selling).

This issue started it seems to me back in 1991 when Pat. Didodoros of Blessed Memory became the first Patriarch to walk on the streets with Palestinians carrying a Palestinian flag and rescue a Palestinian hospital from being taken over by Israelis who wanted to make it into an apartment building for Jewish settlers. Ever since then, every year or two we hear about "the JP trying to sell land."  If he sold all the land he is accused of selling he'd probably not have any left! LOL

Let me just be clear sir, I actually do support adding Arab bishops to the patriarchate, but on the condition they do not come from Lebanon and that they are not trained at Balamand.  I am not against Balamand or Lebanon but I am very concerned about the JP being made into a mirror image of the ecumenistic Patriarchate of Antioch, where people like Met Georges Khoder teach that the Holy Spirit works in Islam, etc.  So if the Arab clergy will become bishops in Jerusalem they need to be trained in a traditional seminary there, or abroad, in my opinion, and they need to be indigenous Palestinians or Jordanians.

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.
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,423


« Reply #13 on: April 26, 2005, 11:39:04 AM »


Let me just be clear sir, I actually do support adding Arab bishops to the patriarchate, but on the condition they do not come from Lebanon and that they are not trained at Balamand. I am not against Balamand or Lebanon but I am very concerned about the JP being made into a mirror image of the ecumenistic Patriarchate of Antioch, where people like Met Georges Khoder teach that the Holy Spirit works in Islam, etc. So if the Arab clergy will become bishops in Jerusalem they need to be trained in a traditional seminary there, or abroad, in my opinion, and they need to be indigenous Palestinians or Jordanians.

Anastasios

Anastasio,
While I don't doubt (at least most of) what you're saying, just FYI that there is one Arab Bishop in the JP....and he's the cousin of an Antiochian Subdeacon who occasionally posts here.  This subdeacon is Palestinian himself and says that the his cousin is rather marginalized as a Bishop there. 
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #14 on: April 26, 2005, 12:49:57 PM »

Though the accusations against the Patriarchate of Jerusalem have been demonstrated to be absurd and nothing more than anti-Christian propaganda; another point needs to be made, the Church has the right to sell her lands if she deems it necessary or appropriate, she has no responsibility towards maintaining Arab control over Jerusalem. With this said, I support a Palestinian homeland and their attempts to protect themselves against the Jews, but this is not the responsibility of the Church. The Church in Jerusalem is not an Arab Church, it is a Greek, or shall I say (lest this leads to confusion over what 'Greek' is, again) a Roman Church. The Patriarchate of Jerusalem predates the coming of the Arabs to the Holy Land by centuries, and is a fundamentally different organization, and at times has different Goals. We must resist the danger of turning the Ancient Throne of St. James into nothing more than a symbol or object of Modern Nationalism, which it seems that these protestors want to do to it.
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: 10,462


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #15 on: April 26, 2005, 12:50:22 PM »

Thanks Elisha for the correction. I have heard from time to time that there are and have been Arab bishops in Jerusalem, and I hope for more in the future. I didn't realize there was an Arab bishop at this time, as most reports say all the bishops are Greek. I guess those reports are inaccurate. Thank you Smiley
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.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,462


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #16 on: April 26, 2005, 12:52:06 PM »

Are the Arab Christians currently living in Palestine the descendents of pre-Islamic Arab tribes who became Christian, the descendents of Greeks who assimilated Arabic language but who are still Rum, or a mix of the two?

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.
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #17 on: April 26, 2005, 12:59:12 PM »

I'm not entirely certain Anastasios, the distinction I was trying to make was more cultural and political than ethnic, though I would be interested in knowing the origins of the current Arab-Christians in the Holy Land.
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: 10,462


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #18 on: April 26, 2005, 01:21:58 PM »

I'm not entirely certain Anastasios, the distinction I was trying to make was more cultural and political than ethnic, though I would be interested in knowing the origins of the current Arab-Christians in the Holy Land.

A distinction which I agree with, btw.
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.
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,423


« Reply #19 on: April 26, 2005, 01:45:30 PM »

Though the accusations against the Patriarchate of Jerusalem have been demonstrated to be absurd and nothing more than anti-Christian propaganda; another point needs to be made, the Church has the right to sell her lands if she deems it necessary or appropriate, she has no responsibility towards maintaining Arab control over Jerusalem. With this said, I support a Palestinian homeland and their attempts to protect themselves against the Jews, but this is not the responsibility of the Church.
Fine.

The Church in Jerusalem is not an Arab Church, it is a Greek, or shall I say (lest this leads to confusion over what 'Greek' is, again) a Roman Church.
Care to explain this even more? Because it just doesn't make any sense and seems to completely ignore history.

The Patriarchate of Jerusalem predates the coming of the Arabs to the Holy Land by centuries, and is a fundamentally different organization, and at times has different Goals. We must resist the danger of turning the Ancient Throne of St. James into nothing more than a symbol or object of Modern Nationalism, which it seems that these protestors want to do to it.
The "Patriarchate" means absolutely NOTHING without a flock. While your statement of not wanting to turn the Patriarchal Throne into a political/nationalist symbol is fine, it completely ignores the purpose of the Local Church, Mission and Pastoral nature. Who is the flock? They are PALESTINIANS, not Greeks. The whole concept of NEEDING to go get a bishop from Greece is completely absurd unless there simply isn't any local viable candidates (and then I suppose it would be understandable, but still weird). Now, if there aren't any because the current Greek controlled synod prevents local PALESTINIAN church members from being eligible (not saying this is necessarily the case, although it wouldn't surprise me if it is so), then there is a huge problem.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2005, 01:47:59 PM by Elisha » Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,462


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #20 on: April 26, 2005, 01:50:55 PM »

Elisha, you make some good points as well.

I think the whole situation is much more complex than a simple Arab vs. Greek thing as some have tried to make it.  That's why I get riled up at times when people say "see look at those racist Greeks, don't want to let Arabs in!"  That may be partially true (and such hierarchs will answer to God for any phyletism or racism they have sponsored) but it's not the whole picture.
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.
lpap
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 228

I stopped participating in this forum.


WWW
« Reply #21 on: April 26, 2005, 04:19:17 PM »

Brothers, let me give you another point of view.

Do you know that there is a "task force" founded in 1994 with the leadership of Dr. George Madanat that has as its mission to take over the Patriarchate from Greeks ? The Spiritual Father of this movement was the Patriarch of Antioch Ignatius Hazim who was indoctrinated into these positions by his Russian professors at the Theological School of St. Sergius, Paris.

Take a look in this link dated from August 1999 : http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0799/9907121.html (in the middle of the page with the title Orthodox Christians’ Task Force Opposes Sale of Church Land). This same "task force" has worked for years and it is actually today working in succeding in their cause and has support from Israel and Antiochians. Just do some search on Mr. George Madanat and you may find things that looks strange: "...He also updated his audience on the current situation in the Jerusalem Patriarchate following the death of Patriarch Diodoros I. Mr. Madanat clearly expressed dismay at the apathy of Arab Orthodox organizations within the Jerusalem Patriarchate at the election of yet another Greek Patriarch, an apathy that only hinders the cause of reform in the Patriarchate". That statement is incredible: the same people that today are talking "in the name of frantic Arab Orthodox", they had "expressed dismay at the apathy of Arab Orthodox".

Most people - self defined as Christian Arabs in Jerusalem against Greek Patriarch - are puppets of Patriarch of Antioch.

There is much that is happening behind closed curtains.

Now let’s look at this history with another perspective:

Many people that came to Israel from USSR (that is good old soviet union), in the past decades, they pretended to be Israelites according to Judaic faith. Most of these people were Orthodox Christians. But in these days in order to succeed in leaving the communist regime they choose to pretend that they were Jew. The total number of Jews from Soviet Union was about 800.000, and the crypto-Christians were about 100.000 -200.000.

But now these people are actually free to become the "flock" of the Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem, because as they are Orthodox, this is their natural place to be.

These people are now citizens of the state of Israel. You may know that in Israel there are religion parties that participate in the state political system, and they have members elected in the parliament (the “Knesset”) .

If you read the results of last elections and then you read the analysis it is easy to understand that the government in Israel has to be supported (directly or indirectly) by small religion parties because they hold enough votes in parliament - and for that they are needed in forming a stable government coalition.

Imagine what MAJOR PROBLEM would be for Israel if a new religion party with the blessings of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate with Russian immigrants voters ever comes to life! A small party like that which would have not direct interest in Israel-Arab conflict may have enough votes to control the political system! This is absolutely not wanted neither from Arabs nor the Israelites.

Now imagine the same political scene with a non-Greek but with an Arab Patriarchate. Then the Russian orthodox "folk" would have to vote for an Arab party that would has as a spiritual leader the Arab Patriarchate! There would be no place for Russians in such a party of course. Such a party would have Arab political priorities and would alienate the Russians voters who would rather choose a secular political party. Bingo !! mission accomplished. That way the Christian Orthodox political party in Israel is avoided.

President of Russia Mr. Putin has a plan to visit in Israel . Watch out for his comment regarding the Patriarchate because I think he would try to promote the Russian Patriarchate interests in the region (inasmuch the Christian Orthodox "flock" are Russian emigrants). Remember what I said earlier : "The Spiritual Father of the Arab task force movement was the Patriarch of Antioch Ignatius Hazim who was indoctrinated into these positions by his Russian professors at the Theological School of St. Sergius, Paris."


My point is that the issue is not about theological - canonical order in the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, but a political issue covered by religion excuses.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2005, 04:47:18 PM by lpap » Logged

Life is to live the life of others.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,462


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #22 on: April 26, 2005, 04:50:11 PM »

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/diodoros_ant.aspx (emphasis mine)

Letter of Patriarch Diodoros I to the Patriarch of Antioch


Letter from the Patriarch of Jerusalem, Diodoros I,
to the Patriarch of Antioch, Ignatios IV

May 17, 1997

Note: the following is taken from the unofficial English translation from the Greek, a translation that has been circulating among a number of Orthodox in America. In many places the text has been edited in order to reflect more proper English grammar and wording. Attempts to secure the original Greek text have been unfruitful. Thus, the exact wording cannot be verified at this time.

+ + +
No. 361

His Beatitude
Mgr. Ignatios IV
Patriarch d' Antioche et de tout l'Orient
B.P. No. 9
Damascus, Syria

Your Beatitude, Your Divinity and Holiness, Patriarch of the God-City of Antioch, and All the East,

Dear Brother and Concelebrant of Our Mediocrity, in Christ, the God, Mgr. Ignatios, Your desirably respected to Us Beatitude,

Embracing You with the Sacred Kiss, gladly We address You.

We have earnestly tried in fasting and prayer to purify Our Souls in order to welcome the Divine Passion of Our Lord, God and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who willingly ascended the Cross to reconcile the Creature with the Creator, and through this Unity to accomplish Salvation for the whole of Mankind. We have also been worthy to celebrate His Glorious and Light-Giving Resurrection and live once more with the Joy of Forgiveness which sprung up from the Tomb, and upon which is founded the Communion of the Saints of Christ's Church. While We have, during these days, undergone such spiritual exercise, being surrounded by many inconveniences and tribulations which are pried up by the political circumstances prevailing in the Holy Land; and facing the well-known antagonism from other denominations here in the Holy Land, as well as in other Orthodox countries, We were surprised to read the copy of the letter which Your Beatitude addressed, in the French language, to His All Holiness, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople and Our Brother in Christ, Msgr. Bartholomeos, in which are exposed, according to Your opinion, serious matters which preoccupy Our Orthodox Church.

So, in the Session of the Holy and Sacred Synod of Our Holy Church of Jerusalem, We have considered, lengthily and thoroughly, the issues contained in that letter. We found them to be very serious, controversial, and in many parts alien to the Tradition that We have always held, of the Eastern Orthodox One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church; and We unanimously resolved to address to Your Beatitude and to the Members of the Holy Synod of the Church of Antioch, the following:

The content of Your letter shocked Us and has been cause for serious worry. It is full of daring proposals and displays a spirit of innovation; the ease with which Your Beatitude and the Holy Synod of the Holy Church of Antioch proceed to judgments and introductions that may harm Orthodox Unity, and alter—God forbid!—Our immaculate Faith and Tradition, surprises us. It is amazing that it has come forth from a Church which in the past, and until very recently, has been decorated with pedestals of Our Orthodox Faith.

For this reason Our God-Established Church of Jerusalem, having deep consciousness of the high spiritual mission of the whole Orthodox Church, follows with great concern the evolutions that take place in the Universal Society at large and in the Christian Family in particular. She is aware of the many radical changes made, especially in this present Century, in almost all sections of the life of the people, thereby dictating the establishment of the "new order" often preached even from the ecclesiastical pulpit. Our Church is troubled about this inclination towards a spirit of modernism which is constantly increasing, and at times even tends to dominate, in the Orthodox Church. That is why, in all Her official statements, She expresses the fears and justifiable concerns which preoccupy Her for the present status and the future of Orthodoxy. These sentiments, Our Church reiterates—especially after receiving this letter—are unacceptable in many of its parts [Ed.—meaning unclear].

We are without knowledge, of course, of what has been discussed between Your Beatitude and His Holiness Bartholomeos, the Patriarch of Constantinople, during Your meeting in Constantinople on August, 1996. We also have no cognizance of the dynamic ideas, 'idees-force', which, as You mention in Your letter, You have made known by Your previous letter of June, 1992, to Patriarch Bartholomeos. And if through both actions Your Beatitude bravely defends the Orthodox Faith, it is worthy and just to praise You and declare our association with this; but if something strange is suggested or introduced to the centuries-long life of Orthodoxy, We do not approve. From all that we have read in Your letter—which you divide in four Chapters—we have to comment on the following:

I. AGREEMENT WITH THE NON-CHALCEDONIANS

First, it becomes clear that no acceptance of the results of the dialogue with the non-Chalcedonians has been declared by all of the Orthodox Churches; therefore, We cannot speak approvingly of a "preparation for the next point and a beginning of the implementation of the Pastoral, Sacramental, and Canonical stage."

The document produced from the theological dialogue on the Christological Doctrine, which has been forwarded to the Orthodox Churches with the relevant introduction of the bilateral commission, was sharply criticized in many of the Churches by Their Holy Synods. It has even been subjected to criticism by Monastic Communities, such as the one on the Holy Mt. Athos. The memorandum issued by this Community was circulated to all of Us. Although this document of the dialogue was not accepted by the totality of the Orthodox Church, We did not observe willingness from the side of the Commission to modify it in order to reflect the Orthodox position and Holy Tradition. According to Holy Tradition, the Non-Chalcedonians ought to accept absolutely and completely all the Terms and Canons of the Fourth Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon, in its entirety, as well as the following Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Ecumenical Councils, also in their entirety. Therefore, no matter what decision could be adopted by the Orthodox Churches in favor of accepting the introductions made, it should be considered as a challenge of the Orthodox conscience of the Faithful and as an insult to the Tradition of the Fathers of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

We were justly surprised by the indirect threat implied by your statement that You do "not want to precipitate unilaterally in a procedure which binds the entirety of the Orthodox Churches." In this expression, We discern a lack of respect for the Pan-Orthodox adopted principle [i.e., Holy Tradition] which states that the Orthodox Church in Her Entirety must unanimously co-advance in actions that are related to the acceptance and implementation of results emanating from theological dialogues. You unjustly express indignation "that some of the Orthodox hold a double language and continue to blame the Non-Chalcedonians for monophysitism." What modifications were made in the relevant text of Chambessy or in the documents that followed, and what change has the Orthodox Church observed in the thoughts and position of the Non-Chalcedonians, that justify the abolishment of the characteristics of the Monophysites given to the Non-Chalcedonians by the Fathers?

The text of Your Beatitude speaks of "one particular responsibility of the Antiochians and Alexandrians"—a responsibility which, as We understand it, emanates from the geographical location of these Churches. But in the same geographical area there is located also Our Patriarchate of Jerusalem. You state that "the practical implications of the Unity within the re-found Faith with Our Non-Chalcedonian Brothers are not the same for all the Churches." But even in this point, We have observed a declination of the Orthodox position by You as there are not only "practical implications of the Unity," but radical disagreements if indeed Unity of Faith was 're-found' with the Non-Chalcedonians. In the compromising Unity which You propose "through a decision of the Synods of the Orthodox Churches" and through resolution "of the practical problems which intervene obstacles," We do express once again the opposition of Our Holy Church.

Where do We further proceed, in the restoration of Communion between two "Family Churches" as You propose, and in union with the Non-Chalcedonians who refuse to denounce the error and their un-Orthodox founders? How can this compromise stand? For one, We firmly believe in the Presence of the Holy Spirit within, and the Illumination of, the Holy Fathers and Defenders of the Orthodox Dogmas who gathered in the Ecumenical Synods. Furthermore, We maintain that these God-inspired Fathers, because of their holiness and struggle for the Soul and Body of the Orthodox Faith, were worthy to be honored in the Conscience of the Church. Thus are we to believe that they did not correctly understand those present in the Synods with whom they communicated in a common language and education?

How else does Your Beatitude explain the fact that the Fathers of Our Orthodox Church condemned those who thought and accepted principles different from theirs as falling into the heresies of Monophysitism, naming them and their followers 'heretics'. What comfort will Our Soul find when on Our path toward this Unity, We end up abandoning the Faithful People of God—who have been devoted to Our teachings until today—in the waste of confusion, pushing them into a new soul-destroying schism and apostasy, all under the pretext of guarding Orthodox Truth?

The points contained in this Chapter incited Our serious worry over the daring encyclical letter which the Holy Church of Antioch issued some time ago. Because of it (as We have been informed), in violation of the Holy Canons and with disregard for ecclesiastical order, there was allowed Common Prayer of Orthodox Hierarchs and Clergy with the Non-Chalcedonians. Moreover, there are reports that changes in the orders of the Church Services were made for such occasions as a result of this encyclical. These activities are dangerous in that they dull the consciences of the Faithful. They are not only contrary to the Holy Canons, but clearly are condemned by Them. Those who are decide in favor of or commit these activities are [Ed.—according to the Canons] to be severely punished and expelled from the Church Vineyard, as "every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire." (Matthew 3:10).

II. RELATIONS WITH THE ROMAN CATHOLICS

Our Eastern Orthodox Church has undergone many and painful experiences in Her history with the Roman Catholics, especially in the first half of the 15th Century. During that period, the Orthodox Church was severely wounded through the formation of the soul-destroying "Unia," which is active until Our own days. Although the situation that occurred gave these experiences into oblivion and unanimously, but silently, there was given consent for the lifting of the imposed anathemas from both sides [Ed.—this statement is unclear]. Afterwards, Our Church again proceeded to search ,with the Roman Catholics, for a new basis for rapprochement and reconciliation in fulfillment of the Divine Commandment which says "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." (John 13:35).

We did not disregard this new opportunity for dialogue, which We considered as having its beginning from God. Thus, We walked together with the entire Orthodox Church [Ed.—not all Orthodox churches have been involved] in the Theological Dialogue with the Roman Catholics. We were then in hope that the time was "ripe for a plan of reunion" and that We had to "overcome passive reactions" to which Your Beatitude again refers [Ed.—unclear]. The dialogues were filled with hope that as time passed the insurmountable obstacles between Us and them, among which are the problems of the "Unia" and proselytism, would finally be laid aside and that the dialogue would continue undistracted. It was even expected that the dialogue—by placing all problems under the light of a sincere desire for union—would lead to the restoration of Unity on the basis of the principles held during the period prior to the Schism. Thus, for some people officially, the Theological Dialogue was going well and was presented as preparing the unity. During that period, however, in certain areas there was gradually observed a revival of proselytism against the Orthodox believers. This fact We denounced in the meeting which took place in Crete in 1984, in the context of Orthodox-Roman Catholic Dialogue. Thereafter, these proselytistic activities continued, joined with deplorable atrocities in the Ukraine—activities which were denounced to the Orthodox Churches by His Beatitude, Alexei, Patriarch of Moscow in 1990; these activities continued in other parts (e.g., Croatia, Serbia, Czechia and Slovakia), and were also denounced by Their Beatitudes, Pavle, Patriarch of Serbia, and Metropolitan Dorothej, respectively.

During that period an exhortation for the "re-evangelization" of the Countries of the then dissolved Soviet Union was proclaimed from the Center of Roman Catholics [Ed.—unclear]. By this act, the exploitation of the spiritual needs of the Orthodox population after the collapse of the Communist Regime—which oppressed the activities of the Orthodox Churches and dynamically promoted Atheism—became clear.

To the above issues is added another one. The document composed at Balamand contains expressions which not only are alien to Orthodox ecclesiology, but are also very dangerous for the Orthodox Faithful because the text recognizes—through the signatures of the Orthodox Hierarchs—the Uniate Bishops as "Brothers." Thus the Uniates now have the right to harmfully act against the interests of the Orthodox Church. This is the reason that the Balamand Agreement was subjected by some of the Orthodox churches to justifiably harsh criticism; and from other Orthodox churches it was denounced as improper and incompatible with Orthodox Ecclesiology; some advocated the suspension of dialogue with the Roman Catholics. As a result of all the above, We were surprised, firstly, by the persistence of Your Beatitude to continue the "renewed Theological Dialogue" while the aforementioned impediments remained, and secondly, by Your comments that "the text of the Balamand Agreement is not worthy to be an object of criticism." Furthermore, activities undertaken by Your Beatitude to unilaterally unite the Holy Church of Antioch with the Greco-Catholics of the Middle East greatly scandalized the Orthodox flock, which considered these activities as an insult to the principles of the Orthodox Church. You acted as you did for matters of commercial exchange and did not considerate it as a problem of the highest degree—of inflammable thorniness—which requires the decision of the entire Orthodox Church and the design of a common line of activity for the benefit of the Souls of the Faithful, which in the contrary case are exposed to different kinds of proselytism [Ed.—unclear].

Even if there was a possibility of unity with the Greek Catholics on the basis of cooperation, mutual recognition of the Liturgical Tradition, and the common consideration of the Church Ecclesiastical Factors [Ed.—unclear] before the Schism, would they cease the Commemoration of the name of the Pope of Rome with whom they are in Eucharistic Communion? We certainly doubt it! Consequently, there results in the fact that they (the Greek Catholics) do not intend to be united with the Orthodox Church of Antioch and become subject to It—which would be desirable—but alas, the Orthodox Church of Antioch would become subordinated to the Pope of Rome through the Greco-Catholics of the Middle East! We are certain that Your Beatitude and the hierarchy around You do not desire the fate, God forbid, of the renegade Patriarch of Constantinople, Ioann Vekhos, Who remained accursed in the history of the Eastern Orthodox Church. We think that it is unholy to try to pull into the ditch also, other Brothers tending in advance for the sake of fright, to slander these Brothers in front of the other Sister Orthodox Churches, accusing them of having "passionate reactions fed by the fear and suspicions that are repeated without discretion and alas, sometimes without foundation" [Ed.—last sentence unclear].

III. ABOUT JERUSALEM

In this Chapter Your Beatitude artistically refers to the issue of Jerusalem, criticizing in an unacceptable way the Pastoral work and general activities of Our Holy Church of Jerusalem, which according to the common belief of Orthodox and non-Orthodox assessments, plays an important role in the preservation of the Orthodox Faith and Tradition, as well as in the maintenance of Peace in the Middle East.

The unjustified malicious criticism of Your Beatitude about quarrels between hierarchy, clergy, and believers uncovers Your malevolent intentions against Our Holy Church. It justifies the reasons of the inexorable and unholy attack of Your Representative in the Americas, Metropolitan Philip, who is organizing a campaign for the defamation of Our Holy Church. He stimulates the Faithful against their Ecclesiastical Authority, and generally speaking, introduces discords and divisions among Our Orthodox Flock, fracturing It and scandalizing Its conscience. The Holy Canons of Our Orthodox Church address these actions and impose severe punishments upon Church agitators.

We obviously consider these actions alien to the Church Spirit, and for this reason We totally condemn them and denounce Your unbrotherly criticism against Our Patriarchate as untrue and baseless. Our Church in the present century, as in the past, despite multiple political changes and disputes, realized projects for the construction of Churches not by the financial contribution of the Faithful, but with the income of the immovable property which the Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre created with great labor.

Everyone who is visiting Our Holy Church remains enthusiastic in the face of the vast educational work of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, Which creates building complexes, modern school establishments, and from Its deficit provides salaries for teaching personnel. It should be taken into consideration that there have been established more than forty (40) Schools of Primary and Secondary levels of education; and in the majority of these schools attendance for many of the indigent students in Jordan, Israel, and the area administered by the Palestinian Authority is allowed "gratis." In these schools favorable circumstances are cultivated for the harmonious co-existence of Christians, Moslems, and followers of other Religions in the Areas of the Holy Places.

It seems that it has escaped from Your memory, the fact that when Your Beatitude visited Our Orthodox Church in Jordan a few years ago—at Our invitation—You and the Members of Your Entourage expressed surprise and admiration for the Pastoral Work of Our Church and for the excellent relations which govern the Spiritual Authority of the Patriarchate and the Royal Hashemite House. You observed then how much Our Holy Church is respected by the Jordanian Government and Its Officials, not to mention the honorable and good cooperation which Our Patriarchate maintains with the Israeli and Palestinian Authorities. It is also sad that Your Beatitude accuses Our Patriarchate of Jerusalem of "nationalism." But what greater example of nationalism can be mentioned than that of the Church leadership of Antioch itself, when Your Beatitude is on every occasion defending the Pastoral responsibility of Your Church for all the Arabic speaking flock—part of which is subject to the jurisdiction of Our Holy Church? In other words, through Your provocative claims, We notice an attempt to circumvent what the Holy Fathers enacted—that is, the boundaries of each Church [Ed.—referring to pastoral authority and jurisdiction].

From the above alone, it becomes clear that the practice of nationalism has unfortunately been adopted of late by the Patriarchate of Antioch. From this new stance there emanates the involvement of Your Beatitude in the Internal Affairs of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, as evidenced by the attempt to incite the national feeling of the Faithful, a few of which only, fortunately, directs against the History and the Mission of the Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre and the Holy Church of Jerusalem [Ed.—unclear]. The well-known Task Force which you formulated also attacks the national identity of the majority of the Fathers of the Brotherhood who are of Greek origin and slanders the Pastoral Work of the Hierarchy of the Patriarchate.

At the same time, Your Beatitude purposely keeps silent about the vivid concern of Our Holy Church for Her Arabic speaking Children, who are living in the Diaspora. You are indignant that Clerics of Our Patriarchate, who have not been officially appointed by Us, are serving the spiritual needs of the Orthodox believers living in the Americas, originating from Jordan and Palestine. It is indeed paradoxical that You call these acts as intervening in the Internal Affairs of Your Church and by protesting, You condemn Us as "dividing Orthodoxy." We should be the 'indignant', and We should ask You, "When and by whom was the Arabic speaking Orthodox Diaspora placed under the jurisdiction of the Church of Antioch?" Could Your Beatitude show Us which Ecumenical Synod gives the Church of Antioch the right to establish jurisdictions in the Diaspora and which Synod deprives Our Patriarchate of Jerusalem from acting in the same way? If the criticism of Your Beatitude was motivated by true and sincere concern for Orthodoxy, then You should congratulate Us for Our initiative which does not aim as You wrongly think "to obstruct [Ed.—fracture?] a few small groups of Orthodox from the Antiochian Diocese in North America," but aims to extend Our Spiritual care and affection toward Our Arabic speaking believers who are living in the Americas and who are tired of the new and unorthodox practices introduced by Metropolitan Philip. That is why they have asked the protection of their Mother Church, Who promptly and duly hastened to satisfy their just demands. The Orthodox Souls were scandalized and reacted to the new Liturgical Practice lately adopted by the Patriarchate of Antioch in the Americas, which was denounced by some Orthodox: a.) In the allowance for sprinkling in the performance of the Holy Mystery of Baptism; b.) In the distribution of Holy Communion through the use of plastic spoons designed for single use, and; c.) In the unholy act, committed by some Clergy, of pouring the remaining Holy Communion in the Crucible, instead of the traditional Abolition by the Priest.

We thought therefore, it appropriate to properly urge Your Beatitude to look into, and engage Yourself with, the arrangements needed in Your Church [Ed.—i.e., to get your own house in order] and to return to the Orthodox positions and traditions instead of wasting the valuable time which has been left to Us in the exercising of criticism against other Orthodox Churches. We ask You to refuse heretical and unorthodox introductions [to Holy Tradition], and also to deny the unholy, yea even atheistic "Liturgical practices" which with Your tolerance, if not with Your indication, were introduced into Your Diocese of the Americas.

We submit all of the above to Your Beatitude, without apologies, because We are prepared to give account only to Christ, the Just Bestower, on the Day of the Judgement. We ardently desire to maintain the true teaching of the Faith, intact and unchangeable, and warn You of the forthcoming soul-distracted tumbling [Ed.—unclear] originating from Your innovative introductions and proposals. Therefore, "Let us stand well; let us stand with fear...," because the time is at hand. The divine zeal which is holding Us to have unity of all, so that We may comply with the Lord's Command, "...that they all may be one..." (John 17:21), may become disoriented step by step, and thus lead the Orthodox Church into new and painful trials and ecclesiastical deadlock. Bitter experience of this is reflected in the historic past and in the recent painful schisms which were created from the acceptance of new reformations in the Bosom of Our Orthodox Church.

IV. PAN ORTHODOX COOPERATION

The desired and ardently wished-for Pan-Orthodox Unity and cooperation is of utmost necessity, and is also required [Ed.—by Holy Scripture], as We have stated. For its sake, We have been often subject to troubles and sacrifices. It is Our steadfast and immovable conviction that this Orthodox Unity should be established, first and foremost, in the unchangeable and inviolable preservation of Our Orthodox Faith and Holy Tradition, so that We may give to the non-Orthodox the pure image of Orthodoxy—not as a Church seeking the truth with them, but as a Church being the exact Treasury of Truth.

Since the preservation of the Orthodox Faith and Tradition comprises the central factor of the activities of Our Holy Church for the Salvation of the Souls of Her Believers; and since the unbreakable and indissoluble Unity of Her Members is preferable before every other concern of Her Life, We firmly reiterate that Our words should be in accord with the decisions and activities of the Church. Thus, We shall not recant Ourselves, and We shall not be blamed as fickle by those who are living differently from the Orthodox. We have stressed on many and different occasions that the above positions comprise the cornerstone of Our True Witness to the world, especially on the eve of the Anniversary of the Year 2000, from the Birth in the Flesh of Our Christ, the Saviour, which God Willing, We hope to celebrate in a Pan-Orthodox expression. But it is well understood that for the sake of this Unity We cannot sacrifice basic principles of Our Orthodox Faith; We cannot violate the Holy Canons which the Fathers formulated and Ecumenical Synods enacted in order to face and stigmatize every unorthodox teaching, and in order to condemn its supporters. We cannot accept soul-destroying compromises which are not in accordance with the Holy Canons. Moreover, We cannot participate in rapid and spasmodic actions which may result in a frivolous Unity with some of the non-Orthodox, no matter how large their number and or the nature of the political and social situation that is the context for that Unity. Churches who act thusly and with wrong motives are in danger of creating a new schism in the very Body of the Orthodox Church, for which We, as the Spiritual Leaders of the "Faithful entrusted to Us," shall carry full responsibility, proving Ourselves careless for their Spiritual Salvation.

For all the above, in pain of Soul, but with the hope of sobriety of all of us and compliance with the Sacred Tradition of Our Holy Orthodox Church, We beseech Our Risen and Redeeming Christ to bestow upon all of Us the Divine Illumination of the Holy Spirit in each further activity and resolution of Ours.

In Him, We embrace Your Beatitude and We remain, Your Venerable Beatitude’s beloved Brother in Christ.

[Signature]

Diodoros I

Patriarch of Jerusalem

Jerusalem, Saturday, May 17, 1997
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.
lpap
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 228

I stopped participating in this forum.


WWW
« Reply #23 on: April 26, 2005, 04:52:18 PM »


If he can't understand the concerns of his masses, then perhaps it is time to bring in someone who will.

Brother Antiochian,

The so called "masses" are puppets of task force of Jerusalem: http://www.antiochian.org/wordhtml/200111_10.html

See also my full post about this issue
« Last Edit: April 26, 2005, 04:57:04 PM by lpap » Logged

Life is to live the life of others.
Antiochian
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


« Reply #24 on: April 27, 2005, 07:08:42 AM »

Elisha,

Thank you for responding, you have taken the words from my mouth.

It is disgraceful to see Orthodox fighting with each other, and it is obvious that certain Greeks have failed to realise that the Hellenistic era finished 2000 years ago and that the Orthodox Church is not a Greek Church. Whilst you all condemn Antioch for its noble attempts to reach out to other denominations and faiths, we seem to be the only ones in the Orthodox Church to be making such an effort. We accept Protestants and the Western liturgy in the US because we want to draw them to our Church. We offer a branch to Islam because we want to draw them to our Church. We are opening our arms to the Melchites because we want to bring them to our Church. Isn't this what Christianity is about? Being hardline and hostile won't win you any support.

It would do the Patriarch of Jerusalem and his Greek supporters well to know that the flock in Jerusalem support the Antiochian call for the Arabisation of the JP, and that this change is inevitable. They weren't Antiochians protesting in Jerusalem, they were Jerusalemites.

As for what ethnicity we are, well we do trace our roots to pre-Islamic times, and mainly to the era of the Aramo-Canaanite ethnic groups who were perhaps the majority until the Arabs came late in the first millenium AD.

« Last Edit: April 27, 2005, 07:09:34 AM by Antiochian » 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 #25 on: April 27, 2005, 07:28:43 AM »

What, exactley, is meant by the "Arabization" of the Church?

Logged

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

Posts: 89


« Reply #26 on: April 27, 2005, 08:11:40 AM »

Basically the same as Antioch.

Arab Patriarchs from the local flock.



Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,462


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #27 on: April 27, 2005, 09:48:30 AM »

Quote
It would do the Patriarch of Jerusalem and his Greek supporters well to know that the flock in Jerusalem support the Antiochian call for the Arabisation of the JP, and that this change is inevitable. They weren't Antiochians protesting in Jerusalem, they were Jerusalemites.

I know there are Arabs in the patriarchate who feel this way.  And there are plenty who don't, as I mentioned before, whom I have met when visiting Jerusalem Patriarchate parishes, who could care less about Arab bishops and who see this all as an Antiochian plot to get control over their Church.  You simply can't make the sweeping statement that "the flock" supports this; certainly some do, and some don't.

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.
Antiochian
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


« Reply #28 on: April 27, 2005, 10:00:16 AM »

Time will tell.

Logged
Columba
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66

St. Columba of Iona, pray for us...


« Reply #29 on: April 27, 2005, 10:26:35 AM »

Well isn't this a sticky wicket! Now I go to an Antiochian Church and this is the first I've heard of any of this. My only thoughts are this: If the JP is right, then Antioch should desist and repent. If not, then Jerusalem should apologise and repent. As far as the Patriarch being Greek and not Arab, as long as he is true to the Holy Orthodox Faith it shouldn't matter where he's from, just that he strives for Holiness just as you and I are called to do by Our Savior, Jesus Christ.
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #30 on: April 27, 2005, 11:52:18 AM »

Ah yes, back to the phyletism we generally find on this board. Perhaps if someone would go back and look at that synod again, they would find the heresy was the belief that the Hierarchy had to reflect the ethnic make-up of their flock. Remember the problem was that Bulgaria was setting up parishes in Constantinople because they beleived that Bulgarian parishes should be under Bulgarians and not under Greeks. The belief that the Patriarchare of Jerusalem should  be Arab because the people under the Patriarchate are arab, is essentially the same heresy; the God-Appointed Bishops are the Successors of the Apostles, their ethnicity is irrelevant, if the current hierarchy believes that the best candidates for the episcopacy come from Greece, then who are we to question them? Furthermore, IF Antiochian is representative of the political posistions of the Christian-Arabs in Jerusalem, then I would say that the Patriarchate would be very wise to avoid elevating Any of them to the Episcopacy (however, I believe that he probably only represents a fringe group, and there are pleanty of more reasonable Arabs that may, someday, make decient candidates for the Episcopacy, provided the proper educational facilities exist or are developed).
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: 10,462


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #31 on: April 27, 2005, 12:18:33 PM »

Time will tell.



Like I said, I have no problem with having Arab bishops, as long as they don't lose their firm stand against ecumenism.

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.
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,462


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #32 on: April 27, 2005, 12:24:03 PM »

Greekischristian,

I find it interesting that in ancient times we had Greek Popes of Rome, an Arab Roman Emperor (Philip), Antiochians in charge in Constantinople at some points, a Chinese Patriarch for the Nestorian Church (13th century), but now in this era of openeness and greater communication one's ethnicity is for some reason more an issue.

Now I think you would agree that if there is a deliberate attempt by the Greek bishops to keep out Arabs by virtue of their being Arabs that that would be wrong.  If the best candidates still are Greek though then there is no problem.  I would personally like to see maybe a half-half split.

As far as your comment "Ah yes, back to the phyletism we generally find on this board" I mean come on, really, that was a baseless point. There is no general trend you can find on "this board" because we are 1000 different people with many different points of view.  There are subgroups that are anti-Greek and there are sub-groups that are anti-Slav, and some people are even against converts! LOL.  So just lighten up my friend, you post a lot and the other posters listen to your points of view and you listen to theirs, and we all have a good time, etc.  No conspiracy theories please Smiley
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.
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,423


« Reply #33 on: April 27, 2005, 12:33:02 PM »

Well isn't this a sticky wicket!

That's one of the funniest statements I've read in a while! Where did you get it from?

More to the point, since you are in an Antiochian parish, try to at least quell the misinformation that I've heard from others attending Antiochian parishes that "we aren't in communion with Jerusalem", which is a bunch of nonesense. They are in communion, it is just the Met. Phillip has told the Antiochian clergy in the US to not concelebrate with Jerusalem parishes here. You, as a lay person, should be dispassionate to the whole pissing match (sorry to be derogatory, but that's what it is), but being aware is a good thing so you can at least understand.
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,423


« Reply #34 on: April 27, 2005, 12:34:26 PM »

Elisha,

Thank you for responding, you have taken the words from my mouth.

It is disgraceful to see Orthodox fighting with each other, and it is obvious that certain Greeks have failed to realise that the Hellenistic era finished 2000 years ago and that the Orthodox Church is not a Greek Church. Whilst you all condemn Antioch for its noble attempts to reach out to other denominations and faiths, we seem to be the only ones in the Orthodox Church to be making such an effort. We accept Protestants and the Western liturgy in the US because we want to draw them to our Church. We offer a branch to Islam because we want to draw them to our Church. We are opening our arms to the Melchites because we want to bring them to our Church. Isn't this what Christianity is about? Being hardline and hostile won't win you any support.

It would do the Patriarch of Jerusalem and his Greek supporters well to know that the flock in Jerusalem support the Antiochian call for the Arabisation of the JP, and that this change is inevitable. They weren't Antiochians protesting in Jerusalem, they were Jerusalemites.

As for what ethnicity we are, well we do trace our roots to pre-Islamic times, and mainly to the era of the Aramo-Canaanite ethnic groups who were perhaps the majority until the Arabs came late in the first millenium AD.



Antiochian,
You're welcome, but this is only part of them matter.

More importantly, addressing the bolded part above, the notion that the Antiochians are the only ones reaching out to Protestants is at the very least rather naive and at worst a bunch of self-serving triumphalist crap.  There may be as many predominant "convert" parishes in the OCA as the AOA.  The Serbs, Bulgarians and the OCA recently took under their Omophorions most of the former Christ the Saviour Brotherhood parishes.  There (unfortunately used to, but it is being reincarnated as an OCA mission due to an internal implosion) is a nice GOA parish of many converts and those of varying ethnicity a few hours from me and I'm sure it's not alone in the GOA.  The point is, the Antiochians made a big move in 87 with the former EOC and have grown a lot, but by no means have a monopoly.

Yes, you talk about "reaching out" and "extending an Olive Branch", but at what price?  This is something we need to be VERY careful about in order to not compromise the faith.  Here the point is that many of the other Orthodox Churches think that Damascus HAS compromised the Faith and are deeply concerned.  And this is NOT related to the ethnicity issue in any way either.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2005, 12:46:10 PM by Elisha » Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,423


« Reply #35 on: April 27, 2005, 12:49:09 PM »

As far as your comment "Ah yes, back to the phyletism we generally find on this board" I mean come on, really, that was a baseless point.

The only phyletism here is the strange reverse phyletism that you espouse.
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #36 on: April 27, 2005, 01:10:02 PM »

Anastasios,
I find it interesting that in ancient times we had Greek Popes of Rome, an Arab Roman Emperor (Philip), Antiochians in charge in Constantinople at some points, a Chinese Patriarch for the Nestorian Church (13th century), but now in this era of openeness and greater communication one's ethnicity is for some reason more an issue.

Now I think you would agree that if there is a deliberate attempt by the Greek bishops to keep out Arabs by virtue of their being Arabs that that would be wrong. If the best candidates still are Greek though then there is no problem. I would personally like to see maybe a half-half split.

I am in complete agreement, this has pretty much been my point...concerning the half-half split, I'd just like to see the best people for the posistions, if it ends up being like that, great...if not, that's great as well; their ethnicity should not be the deciding factor.

As far as your comment "Ah yes, back to the phyletism we generally find on this board" I mean come on, really, that was a baseless point. There is no general trend you can find on "this board" because we are 1000 different people with many different points of view. There are subgroups that are anti-Greek and there are sub-groups that are anti-Slav, and some people are even against converts! LOL. So just lighten up my friend, you post a lot and the other posters listen to your points of view and you listen to theirs, and we all have a good time, etc. No conspiracy theories please Smiley

Well, it was targeted at a few members of the board, with which I've had this discussion numerous times...lol. But with that said, what's wrong with conspiracy theories? I quite enjoy them, whether they're about secret international governments, ufo cover-ups, or conspiracies against me on OC.net. Wink


Elisha,
The only phyletism here is the strange reverse phyletism that you espouse.
So if phyletism is heresy, the reverse of it must be...Orthodox? I fear I have yet to come to understand this lable. Oh well, it's probably better for all concerned that I dont...lol.
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
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,423


« Reply #37 on: April 27, 2005, 01:32:28 PM »

Elisha,

So if phyletism is heresy, the reverse of it must be...Orthodox? I fear I have yet to come to understand this lable. Oh well, it's probably better for all concerned that I dont...lol.

Converse<>Contrapositve<>Inverse  Don't you have a math background?
Logged
Columba
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 66

St. Columba of Iona, pray for us...


« Reply #38 on: April 27, 2005, 02:14:34 PM »



That's one of the funniest statements I've read in a while!  Where did you get it from?

More to the point, since you are in an Antiochian parish, try to at least quell the misinformation that I've heard from others attending Antiochian parishes that "we aren't in communion with Jerusalem", which is a bunch of nonesense.  They are in communion, it is just the Met. Phillip has told the Antiochian clergy in the US to not concelebrate with Jerusalem parishes here.  You, as a lay person, should be dispassionate to the whole pissing match (sorry to be derogatory, but that's what it is), but being aware is a good thing so you can at least understand.
Actually the"sticky wicket" is something that Batman's butler, Alfred used to say when he encountered a problem. As far as being in communion with the JP is concerned, my priest hasn't uttered a word about that at all. He tends to just worry about his parish.
Logged
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,423


« Reply #39 on: April 27, 2005, 02:38:50 PM »


Actually the"sticky wicket" is something that Batman's butler, Alfred used to say when he encountered a problem. As far as being in communion with the JP is concerned, my priest hasn't uttered a word about that at all. He tends to just worry about his parish.

Good for your priest!  Good ole Alfred too!
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 #40 on: April 27, 2005, 09:49:40 PM »

The term "sticky wicket" originally comes from the game of croquet. A "sticky wicket" is a croquet wicket which you can't get your ball though no matter how hard you try.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
observer
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 546

Vivre die Raznitsa!


« Reply #41 on: April 27, 2005, 11:38:16 PM »

..especially when the flamingo bends its neck.
Logged

Thou shalt not prefer one thing to another (Law of Liberalism)
Antiochian
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


« Reply #42 on: April 28, 2005, 02:44:24 AM »

Elisha,

Well the main Church to receive condemnation of its practices on this forum is Antioch, so excuse my over-emotional defense.

Yes, many fear Antioch has compromised the faith, but I can assure you it has not, for if it did I wouldn't be apart of it.

Logged
furay
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


OC.net


« Reply #43 on: April 28, 2005, 10:41:25 AM »

Yes, many fear Antioch has compromised the faith, but I can assure you it has not, for if it did I wouldn't be apart of it.

Wouldn't everyone who is in a compromising church make this claim? Nothing against you (or the Antiochian Church for that matter) but do you expect people's fears to be assuaged just because you personally believe you haven't compromised the faith? I hope you don't take me as rude... I mean no offense.
Logged

NULL
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,423


« Reply #44 on: April 28, 2005, 11:25:02 AM »

Elisha,

Well the main Church to receive condemnation of its practices on this forum is Antioch, so excuse my over-emotional defense.

Yes, many fear Antioch has compromised the faith, but I can assure you it has not, for if it did I wouldn't be apart of it.



Hmmmm...the may require some data mining on posts to determine which jurisdiction really is #1...the GOA/EP is a heavy contender as well. Wink

More to the point, here are my impressions on why the AOA is "bashed":

1) Triumphalist/prideful attitude - Sure, the conversion of 2000+ former EOCers was great, but the AOA has by no means a monopoly on coverting Protestants.  Over the past several years, I keep reading statements by AOA hierarchs, laiety, etc. on how great the AOA is, blah blah.  This just reeks of pride IMO and seems more than would be appropriate.  I don't know; make it is an Arab (Lebanese) cultural thing.  At any rate, whenever someone speaks pridefully about something they are just asking to be criticized/put in their place/whatever.

2) Ecumenist activities - This should be self exaplantory.  See this thread, other threads here and mostly the letter posted by Anastasios.

Additionally, I get sense that many in the AOA rather idolize their hierarchs, seeing them through rose colored glasses so to speak.  They act like the hierarchs are above reproach, as if there not sinners or can't err and get ultra defensive when they are criticized.  Like I've mentioned before, just look at the Council of Trent where most of the Orthodox Hierarchs got rejected by the faithful and shamed into recanting and repenting.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 »  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 0.162 seconds with 72 queries.