5534Re: Digest 841/Do we need a new Diocese?
- May 29, 2003--- In IndianOrthodox@yahoogroups.com, "George Mathew" wrote:
> Do We need a new Diocese?churches
>We are part of a high sounding
> Diocese called Canada, UK and Europe. But basically there are two
> and five smaller congregations in Canada. God knows how many arethere in UK
> or Europe .When this Diocese was created with the stroke of a pen fromMetropolitan
> Kottayam,no one thought about its viabilty.How in the world a
> can function with three churches.Dear George, Apostle Thomas started with just seven and a half (say 8)
> Thanks and regards
> George Mathew Panicker
churches in India. He also ordained more than one bishop for these
Churches (canonical evidence in Coptic Synaxis, our own local heritage
as well as the tradition of the East Syrian Church).
Given this historic truth, why a bishop need more than four churches
to begin with?
Let us count people and the growth of church in a specific region, not
the number of parishes. There are about 1000 families in Southern
states and 20-25 parishes. Presence of a bishop will make a difference
Having a bishop will only help the growth, history teaches us this.
Otherwise why Apostle Thomas ordained a bishop for few parishes. H.G.
Paulos Mar Gregorios was the first bishop of North India with very few
parishes. Now see, we have churches in all major cities of North
India, even up to the borders of Pakistan. H.G. Mar Makarios is a
highly talented bishop. But people are not cooperating with bishops.
In many dioceses, they form politics not allowing bishops to function.
Even at parish level people want the priest to be under their control.
This is like in Hindu temples where pujari is a Brahmin under the
control of temple "kaikkaran" who keeps the temple keys.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>