skip to main |
skip to sidebar
 |
(Basilica.ro) - The Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church held its first autumn session Friday, 28 October 2016, in the Synodal Hall of the Patriarchal Residence in Bucharest, under the chairmanship of His Beatitude Patriarch Daniel. The Holy Synod made the following important decisions for the church life of Orthodox Romanians living in the Americas:
- The Romanian Orthodox Diocese of Canada was established;
- The Romanian Orthodox Metropolis of the Americas was established. The Metropolis will be comprised of: the Romanian Orthodox Archdiocese of the United States of America, and the Romanian Orthodox Diocese of Canada;
- The Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church proceeded to the election of the diocesan bishop of the newly established Diocese of Canada. Thus, His Grace Ioan Casian was elected Romanian Orthodox Bishop of Canada;
- The Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church approved to raise His Eminence Archbishop Nicolae Condrea to the rank of Romanian Orthodox Metropolitan of the Americas. The ceremony of investiture will take place Sunday, 30 October 2016, after the Divine Liturgy, at the Patriarchal Cathedral in Bucharest. His Beatitude Patriarch Daniel will lead the ceremony, in the presence of the members of the Holy Synod of the Romanian Orthodox Church.
Posts
Seems to me, that this is not going to help Orthodox unity in North America.
ReplyDeletePlease correct me if I'm wrong, but don't these decisions to set up new churches in the "diaspora" violate the Chambesy agreement BOTH explicitly AND implicitly?
ReplyDelete"Please correct me if I'm wrong, but don't these decisions to set up new churches in the "diaspora" violate the Chambesy agreement BOTH explicitly AND implicitly?"
ReplyDeleteWell yes, but those documents, the process that created them, and the institution behind them - the Ecumenical Patriarch of Instanbul - Does not have any moral/spiritual authority. Yes, by the letter of the (cannon) Law he does, but anyone who is not but a babe in the Faith knows that this is nothing compared to *actual* moral/spiritual authority. And so we have a man and institution going around creating paperwork, calling meetings (some even called "Holy and Great"), giving "human rights" awards to bloody Caesar, etc. etc. Meanwhile, the Church continues on in the direction it has been heading and doing what it has been doing...
Jake, I agree that Patriarch Bartholomew, the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Chambesy process are not without their faults, but there is still much good there as well.
DeleteMy point was that all the Orthodox churches including Romania literally signed on to the the notion that creating more parallel "jurisdictions" needed to stop & would stop because it was contrary to the very nature of the church as a local phenomenon of all the faithful gathered around a single bishop ordained to be the conduit of the mysteries.
Now Romania has reneged on this. Do they reject traditional ecclesiology in favor of phyletism? It would seem so based upon their actions, which really do speak louder than words.
Timmy,
DeleteI would suggest that the ideal of:
" parallel "jurisdictions" needed to stop & would stop because it was contrary to the very nature of the church as a local phenomenon of all the faithful gathered around a single bishop ordained to be the conduit of the mysteries."
Is just that, an ideal that may or may not have actually ever been a reality (I would have to make a study of it). Even IF this has been a reality in the past, the current canonical structure of the Church (in practice, the Eastern Orthodox Church) is based on a single Roman Empire. That Empire has not existed for a very long time, so "the notion" of the "Chambesy process" is flawed from the very beginning because it is based on a canonical structure that no longer is in any way in alignment with Reality.
"Do they reject traditional ecclesiology in favor of phyletism?"
No more and no less than any and all Orthodox do - they are neither more or less guilty than the EP himself and his (very very) Greeky greek allies in everything he does. You might not want to hear this, but to single out the Romanians is hypocrisy. They are merely doing what ALL the Churches of the East do.
None of this is going to change in the future either, not until there is a REAL "Great and Holy" ecumenical council. The "Chambesy process" is a Spirit-less human effort by a group of men who have not authority...
Jake,
DeletePlease forgive the long delay in my reply. Work, kids & the election sidetracked me.
You made reference to the fact that the structure of the Church was historically based upon the structure of the Roman Empire, which has been called the principle of "accommodation", a termed coined by the late & great professor of history, Roman Catholic priest, Fr. Francis Dvornik. There are a few ancient canons that describe this concept that predate the great schism by centuries (canon 17 of Chalcedon 451 A.D. as well as canon 38 (36) of the council of Trullo [a.k.a. Quinisext or Penthekte] in Constantinople 692 A.D.
However, the take home point here is that these structural "accommodations" ONLY involved the administration of large clusters of local churches (i.e., bishoprics) into imperial provinces headed by a metropolitan, imperial dioceses (*civil* administrative units larger than provinces) headed by an exarch, or imperial prefectures headed by patriarchs. They never had anything to do the the reality of the local church, which is as much a dogmatic as is it is practical reality.
The fathers & the canons always reflect the reality that the catholic Church is the local church (i.e. bishopric / diocese). Therefore, by creating more parallel "jurisdictions", which is to say to overlaping / competing local bishoprics in the same place it only serves to belie the most rudimentary aspect of our Orthodox ecclesiology.
These larger grouping issues are just pragmatic & political division, but the fundamental understanding of the Church as a local phenomenon of ALL the faithful in a given geographic region assembled around a single bishop celebrating the mysteries is THE Church. Anything else literally borders on if not crosses over into the territory of heresy...literally choosing our own ecclesiology).
I think the point of this original post featuring Romania was not to degrade them in particular, but merely to highlight the fact that this problem not only persists but may be regaining momentum.
Of course, pretty much all the autocephalous Churches have contributed to this mess to a greater or lesser degree, but just because Romania or Constantinople or Moscow does it doesn't mean that it justifies the continued perpetuation of this insanity. Chambesy was a consensual agreement to both "stop the madness" as well as begin to bring things into good canonical & theological order. Romania's most recent action is just the latest example of how all of this is being undermined.
It does go against the spirit of the agreement. It's much like building a competing Subway shop across the street instead of investing in the Subway already up and running. The idea of a unified church gets more difficult with every new voice that has to be raised in agreement when 100% agreement is needed.
ReplyDeleteFather, I completely agree.
DeleteUnfortunately, I'm not surprised by this because the Romanian synod has been promoting phyletism for years, which is clearly at odds with the very nature of authentic Orthodox ecclesiology.
Fasting & prayer is needed to exorcise this demon...
"The idea of a unified church gets more difficult with every new voice that has to be raised in agreement when 100% agreement is needed."
ReplyDeleteI am not sure it can be said that it gets "more difficult" because it is not even possible (i.e. a unified Church, the "unity of the Faith") on a human level in the first place. Humanly, at best only a bit more than 50% agreement is ever possible. This is why the unity of the Church is not a human action or project, and is not achieved by human means (i.e. a meeting/dialogue of one kind or another) but is a act of the Spirit (i.e. a REAL "Holy and Great" council that is "in-Spirited"). So, what is needed is a true Ecumenical Council. The next real EC will in a sense "reform" the canonical structure to "deal with" the fact that the Roman Empire has fallen and the Church now lives in a different social/culture/ethnic/geographic milieu.
How will this be done? Not sure but surely a recognition that the current canonical EP is an anachronism (one specifically designed for the Roman Empire) and has been a failure in the age of "nation states" will be part of it. This last meeting in Crete was simply an expression of the status quo - and even that did not work as evidence by the fact that some Churches felt they could skip the whole thing altogether. In the meantime, the momentum of the "ethnic jurisdiction" will continue on the same as before and frankly, why would we expect any change in this?