Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [orthodox-synod] AN UKAZ CONCERNING THE BANNING OF THE CLERGY OF THE WESTERN-EUROPEAN EPARCHY

Expand Messages
  • Vladimir Kozyreff
    Christ is risen! As I understand it, before Vl Ambrose s nomination, the priests in question knew that Vl Ambrose was a candidate. They were not favourable to
    Message 1 of 38 , May 3, 2001
      Christ is risen!

      As I understand it, before Vl Ambrose's nomination, the priests in question
      knew that Vl Ambrose was a candidate. They were not favourable to this,
      being of the opinion that the policy of Vl Ambrose concerning the
      relationship with the MP was dangerous and not in line with what had been
      the ROCOR's attitude so far.

      They addressed a document to the Synod in this line, asking not to have Vl
      Ambrose as their bishop, in agreement with Canon 18 of Antioch (at least so
      they say). Accordingly, they expected the question to be resolved by the
      Synod, or to be discussed before Vl Ambrose was appointed.

      In fact, the Synod did apparently not react to the priests' objections. It
      appointed Vl Ambrose as a bishop, without explanation. The priests
      considered that this was in contradiction with the Canon. They and feel, as
      I understand it, that the Synod should have had a dialogue with them.
      Apparently, they wanted to meet Vl Lavr who was travelling to Germany to
      discuss the matter, but instead of the meeting taking place, the ukaz that
      suspended them was delivered.

      This is an answer to the question: "But what was the Synod to do when faced
      with a refusal by these clergy to obey and commemorate their lawful bishop?"

      Maybe the priests are in error and the Synod is right, but I do not
      understand why the argument about Canon 18 is not addressed, discussed and
      refuted explicitly. It is the heart of the matter. Maybe the Canon does not
      apply here, maybe the clergy has no saying in the appointment of their
      bishop, but this should then be clearly stated.

      Why do so many people think the refusal to commemorate has no explanation,
      or no origin that can be understood, and why has the origin of it not been
      addressed? Let us at least admit that the "rebellious" clergy think they are
      defending the Truth, even if it should appear that they are in error. From
      what I heard, the only message the Synod passed to them through its
      emissaries was that they should submit, but no response was given concerning
      the Canon.

      In Christ,

      VK





      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Father Maximos" <mga@...>
      To: <orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 11:59 PM
      Subject: Re: [orthodox-synod] AN UKAZ CONCERNING THE BANNING OF THE CLERGY
      OF THE WESTERN-EUROPEAN EPARCHY


      > >Another very sad day in the Church Abroad, into which
      > >it seems a new spirit has entered, like a chilling
      > >wind.
      >
      > I agree with Father Anthony, it is very sad that it has come to this.
      > But what was the Synod to do when faced with a refusal by these
      > clergy to obey and commemorate their lawful bishop? The Council of
      > Bishops appointed Vladyka Ambrose 7 months ago, it is not as if they
      > rushed to take this action.
      >
      > The Eastern Diocese clergy sent the clergy of the French Vicariate
      > begging them to submit to their lawful hierarch, and it is very sad
      > that they did not heed the advice of their brother clergy. We can
      > only pray that the Holy Spirit heals this division before it becomes
      > more serious.
      >
      >
      > Rev.Hieromonk Maximos
      > Ascension Monastery
      > Russian Orthodox Church
      > Outside of Russia (ROCOR)
      > 706-277-9442 ( voice)
      > 775-640-2325 ( fax)
      > http://www.monastery.org
      > http://shop.monasteryproducts.org
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      > Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
    • catherine elaine sullivan
      Elizabeth- I m with you there. Sometimes Orthodox people (especially in this country) behave as if we were a Congregational church, where everything is up for
      Message 38 of 38 , May 7, 2001
        Elizabeth- I'm with you there. Sometimes Orthodox people (especially in this
        country) behave as if we were a Congregational church, where everything is up
        for majority vote!
        --- "Dr. Elizabeth W. Riggs" <ewriggs@...> wrote:
        > On 2 May 01, at 17:53, rsjmil wrote:
        >
        >
        > > What is missing from this situation is any information regarding their
        > > disagreement with their appointed Bishop. Could it be they have a
        > > factual case? If they do, there are better, more Canonical ways of
        > > dealing with it. There must be some reason why they are so opposed to
        > > Bishop Ambroise (spelling from the Directory.) What are the facts? And
        > > is he Bishop or Archbishop now?
        > >
        > > Jos M
        >
        > As Aslan would say, "that is not your story." This is a matter that
        > should not affect any except those directly involved - the clergy and
        > some of the laity in France and the Synod of Bishops. No one else is
        > involved. It is none of our business. The Synod of Bishops has spoken
        > and that's it.
        >
        > All this nosing around and looking for reasons for dissention is NOT
        > Orthodox. It is more like a bunch of American Protestants.
        >
        > How many Protestant churches are there in a town? One more than the
        > number of Protestants.
        >
        > If we don't take care our Orthodox Churches will end up with as many
        > splinter groups as the Protestants. Again, this is NOT Orthodox.
        >
        > We all need to grow up, get a life and involve ourselves in our OWN
        > parishes and not everyone else's parishes. If we work to build up the
        > Body of Christ at our own local level and avoid pointing fingers at
        > others, if we work on obedience to our Bishop and avoid looking for
        > reasons to dissent, we are more likely to see Orthodoxy thrive.
        >
        > The Synod of Bishops is not a body elected by "the peepul." They are
        > appointed by the rest of the Bishops through the grace of the Holy
        > Spirit. Could it be possible that the Bishops know some things that
        > "wee the peepul" don't know? Could it be possible that God is working
        > through our hierarchy to further His Kingdom? Absolutely.
        >
        > It's time to let all this stuff go and get on with helping each other
        > develop spiritually in an Orthodox manner.
        >
        > Just my $0.02 worth.
        >
        >
        > Yours in Christ,
        > Elizabeth Riggs, a sinner
        > and Perennial Student
        > **********************************************************
        > http://www.angelfire.com/ga/riggs/index.html
        > **********************************************************
        > Our Lady, the Joy of All Who Sorrow Church (ROCOR)
        > Cumming, GA USA (Atlanta, GA area)
        > http://www.churchabroad.org
        > **********************************************************
        > Glory to Jesus Christ! Glory Forever!
        > **********************************************************
        >


        =====
        Catherine
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.