Post by OrthodoxBrit on Aug 13, 2012 12:54:19 GMT 2
So, I thought I would spice things up a bit and look at an inssue in Orthodox Christianity. Ethnophyletism is the replacements of united Orthodoxy with nationalistic traits and visions.
One of the major explamples is the number of Bishoprics in a single Diocese. My city of london, for example, contains Bishops from tens of Orthodox communities which goes against the Apostolic Canons and Ecumenical Councils by seperating the Church into seperate entities and causing them to hold multiple national Bishops in the same juristiction. in places such as Greece or Russia this is not as large a problem (From what I have heard) but in places such as here in the uk or the US which is canonically under the Ecumenical Patriarch (as a non Imperial and thus barbarian land) there seem to be many completely seperate Orthodox juristictions all claiming to be Bishop of that land.
Canon 6 of the First Ecumenial Council states specifically that Patriarchal juristiction is not based on language, culture or nationality but Canonical territory, even listing who rules where and how those that went against this were to be deposed. This was later emphasises in other Synods.
Synod of Antioch - "Let no bishop dare to go from one province to another and ordain anyone in church... unless invited to come by letter from the metropolitan and other bishops of the territory into which he is going."
Council of Chalcedon - “Let there not be two metropolitans in the same eparchy”
Great Local Council of Constantinople 1872 - "the formation of special national Churches in the same place, which accept all those of the same race, but exclude all those of other races and which are administered solely by those of the same race, are unheard of and unprecedented"
Even more recently, the Ecumenical patriarchate stated that “Missionary work conducted outside the geographical boundaries of the canonical jurisdiction of local Churches by their members or in their name is uncanonical and ecclesiologically unacceptable.”
Traditionally a member of a Church would go to another land and recieve communion from the Bishopric whose territory this was but more commonly now people are creating seperate Dioceses in that land to accomodate the national community there instead of simply attending the established one.
This has caused many issues in places such as the cut in communion between Romanian and Jerusalem over the formulation of a Romanian Monastery in Israel, the arguments over who "owns" Moldovia and the more recent issues over the Autocelphly of the OCA and cases where Larger Churches have set up missions in another Orthodox Bishop's Diocese and then accused the Bishop of undermining their authority when he uses his canonical rite to refuse this.
Also, it has led to priests and even entire communities changing patriarchates and priests who are removed from serving being welcomed to serve within another Patriarchate.
An example from personal experience is that it has happened with some of ours who were removed but now now serve in Byzantine parishes which accepted them to serve under them. In my view this canonically makes no sense as a priest or Bishop, to my knowledge, has no canonical right to swap Patriarchs to avoid being deposed by his own.
Here is a link to a piece I wrote on this issue earlier in the year:
orthodoxbrit.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/orthodoxy-and-scar-of-ethnophyletism.html
I would love to hear people's views on this issue as it is one that i find extremely important and a major problem in the Church.
One of the major explamples is the number of Bishoprics in a single Diocese. My city of london, for example, contains Bishops from tens of Orthodox communities which goes against the Apostolic Canons and Ecumenical Councils by seperating the Church into seperate entities and causing them to hold multiple national Bishops in the same juristiction. in places such as Greece or Russia this is not as large a problem (From what I have heard) but in places such as here in the uk or the US which is canonically under the Ecumenical Patriarch (as a non Imperial and thus barbarian land) there seem to be many completely seperate Orthodox juristictions all claiming to be Bishop of that land.
Canon 6 of the First Ecumenial Council states specifically that Patriarchal juristiction is not based on language, culture or nationality but Canonical territory, even listing who rules where and how those that went against this were to be deposed. This was later emphasises in other Synods.
Synod of Antioch - "Let no bishop dare to go from one province to another and ordain anyone in church... unless invited to come by letter from the metropolitan and other bishops of the territory into which he is going."
Council of Chalcedon - “Let there not be two metropolitans in the same eparchy”
Great Local Council of Constantinople 1872 - "the formation of special national Churches in the same place, which accept all those of the same race, but exclude all those of other races and which are administered solely by those of the same race, are unheard of and unprecedented"
Even more recently, the Ecumenical patriarchate stated that “Missionary work conducted outside the geographical boundaries of the canonical jurisdiction of local Churches by their members or in their name is uncanonical and ecclesiologically unacceptable.”
Traditionally a member of a Church would go to another land and recieve communion from the Bishopric whose territory this was but more commonly now people are creating seperate Dioceses in that land to accomodate the national community there instead of simply attending the established one.
This has caused many issues in places such as the cut in communion between Romanian and Jerusalem over the formulation of a Romanian Monastery in Israel, the arguments over who "owns" Moldovia and the more recent issues over the Autocelphly of the OCA and cases where Larger Churches have set up missions in another Orthodox Bishop's Diocese and then accused the Bishop of undermining their authority when he uses his canonical rite to refuse this.
Also, it has led to priests and even entire communities changing patriarchates and priests who are removed from serving being welcomed to serve within another Patriarchate.
An example from personal experience is that it has happened with some of ours who were removed but now now serve in Byzantine parishes which accepted them to serve under them. In my view this canonically makes no sense as a priest or Bishop, to my knowledge, has no canonical right to swap Patriarchs to avoid being deposed by his own.
Here is a link to a piece I wrote on this issue earlier in the year:
orthodoxbrit.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/orthodoxy-and-scar-of-ethnophyletism.html
I would love to hear people's views on this issue as it is one that i find extremely important and a major problem in the Church.
