PDA

View Full Version : Canonical churches


Robbie_James_Francis
5th September 2005, 04:43 PM
Could anyone direct me to a list of canonical Eastern Orthodox churches? May I ask, how would one know which churches are canonical and which are in schism? :scratch: Thanks!!

Rob :hug:

Michael the Iconographer
5th September 2005, 04:45 PM
This page will help you:

http://aggreen.net/autocephaly/autoceph.html

Robbie_James_Francis
5th September 2005, 04:49 PM
Thanks!! So how do people ascertain which churches are canonical and which are not? Obviously, there is a list there, but how was that compiled to begin with? :scratch:

Philip
5th September 2005, 07:53 PM
Obviously, there is a list there, but how was that compiled to begin with? :scratch:

Each patriarch maintains a list of the bishops in his jurisdiction as well as a list of the patriarchs in communion with him.

Xpycoctomos
5th September 2005, 08:21 PM
Orthodox Canonicity... as clear as mud. Not really, but you gotta get used to it. We're still not good with the whole "list" thing (although they are out there... but that's only because they've managed to convert some Westernites like us who have actually taken the time to compile and organize these things!). LOL

Michael the Iconographer
5th September 2005, 08:47 PM
Orthodox Canonicity... as clear as mud. Not really, but you gotta get used to it. We're still not good with the whole "list" thing (although they are out there... but that's only because they've managed to convert some Westernites like us who have actually taken the time to compile and organize these things!). LOL

Why don't we just admit that whether or not your Orthodox jurisdiction is canonical or not has more to do with the ability of your primate to grow a really cool looking beard than anything else? I guess that makes the OCA uncanonical because Metropolitan Herman has a very very limited beard-but then the rest of the OCA bishops all have really good beards so that might save our canonical stature! :D

Xpycoctomos
5th September 2005, 08:48 PM
Why don't we just admit that whether or not your Orthodox jurisdiction is canonical or not has more to do with the ability of your primate to grow a really cool looking beard than anything else? I guess that makes the OCA uncanonical because Metropolitan Herman has a very very limited beard-but then the rest of the OCA bishops all have really good beards so that might save our canonical stature! :D

Well, now you've let the cat out of the bag! Yes yes, this is actually why Constantinople has not said anything official reagarding the OCA... I believe there is an ekonomia set forth for Japanese Orthodox :)

Michael the Iconographer
5th September 2005, 08:50 PM
Well, now you've let the cat out of the bag! Yes yes, this is actually why Constantinople has not said anything official reagarding the OCA... I believe there is an ekonomia set forth for Japanese Orthodox :)

Does that mean if I can stage a coup d'etat and get any of the other OCA bishops elected Metropolitan then Constantinople would officially recognize us?

Xpycoctomos
5th September 2005, 08:59 PM
As long as they have good beards... or they are Japanese as they ahve the ekonomia to lean on :)

Michael the Iconographer
5th September 2005, 09:09 PM
As long as they have good beards... or they are Japanese as they ahve the ekonomia to lean on :)

Having a good beard is also a qualification to have an icon written of you as a saint!

xristos.anesti
5th September 2005, 10:24 PM
The old canon is:

If a bishop does not touch his beard on the down movement whilst making the sing of the cross, let him be deposed!


Ancient epitomes of this canon:

If a bishop eats his soup (or other liquified dishes) without worry to have half of its content stuck in the bottom of his beard, let him be deposed.

Thus we declare that together with the signs and articles of the office (bishop), a standard Orthodox Comb (40x15 mm) shall be issued (and those who do not have need of using one, let them be deposed).

Michael the Iconographer
5th September 2005, 11:10 PM
The old canon is:

If a bishop does not touch his beard on the down movement whilst making the sing of the cross, let him be deposed!


Ancient epitomes of this canon:

If a bishop eats his soup (or other liquified dishes) without worry to have half of its content stuck in the bottom of his beard, let him be deposed.

Thus we declare that together with the signs and articles of the office (bishop), a standard Orthodox Comb (40x15 mm) shall be issued (and those who do not have need of using one, let them be deposed).

:clap:

The Prokeimenon!
6th September 2005, 09:01 AM
I guess that makes the OCA uncanonical because Metropolitan Herman has a very very limited beard-but then the rest of the OCA bishops all have really good beards so that might save our canonical stature! :D

If beards are the measure of a Bishop, than I guess Metropolitan HERMAN is more canonical than Metroplitan PHILIP - unless canonicity is measured by the size of a Metropolitan's glasses :D

Moses

Michael the Iconographer
6th September 2005, 09:22 AM
If beards are the measure of a Bishop, than I guess Metropolitan HERMAN is more canonical than Metroplitan PHILIP - unless canonicity is measured by the size of a Metropolitan's glasses :D

Moses

Bishop BASIL has a good healthy beard on him, so maybe he makes up for Metropolitan PHILIP. :P

pravoslavno
6th September 2005, 07:34 PM
If beards are the measure of a Bishop, than I guess Metropolitan HERMAN is more canonical than Metroplitan PHILIP - unless canonicity is measured by the size of a Metropolitan's glasses :D

Moses

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/praxis/clergy_hair.aspx

xristos.anesti
6th September 2005, 09:07 PM
Thanks for that article Pravoslavno!

I have found so many new things on that site.

As a result of me reading the information provided, I will act in my Church and by the power of my automatic rifle implement following changes:

- Fr. Lukijan Maximilianovitch will immediatelly purchase one of those Santa beards and wear it as his beard is just not long enough.

- We will extradict all those who are not Orthodox (the people who do not have beard), starting with Mother Irene (Fr. Lukijan's wife), their daughters and all people -without a beard following in order, including babies.

- We will stop talking to all our heathen friends (for IS OUTRAGE to even talk to heathen).

I realise that we have all become so intrinsically ecumenical, that I will write a letter to Ecum... Contantinopolian Patriarch requesting from him to drop the word Ecumenical from his title.

I will, also, sent a letter to Office of Saints (located at the new location at Golden Angel Street 102, Building 23 of the Heavenly Church HQ, New Jerusalem 1000, Heavenly Kingdom) asking them to conduct a complete audit on the length of beard of all Saints.

I will ask our iconographers to, as of this moment, start changing all icons in the Church and present Theotokos and Christ (child) with beards.


Orthodoxy or death.

ExOrienteLux
7th September 2005, 01:00 AM
Sounds good, XA.

Except that last line should be Hefeweizen ober Tod!

That's better.

-Philip.

Michael the Iconographer
7th September 2005, 01:36 AM
Sounds good, XA.

Except that last line should be Hefeweizen ober Tod!

That's better.

-Philip.

Hefeweizen oder Tot! Does that mean I have to drink Hefeweizen every day to keep alive?

Michael the Iconographer
7th September 2005, 01:37 AM
I will ask our iconographers to, as of this moment, start changing all icons in the Church and present Theotokos and Christ (child) with beards.

I guess I will never run out of work then?

choirfiend
7th September 2005, 02:00 AM
Of course, if we start to talk about the vestments of the Church and how they;re actually Turkish pagan clothing adopted/forced/accepted during Constantinoples early occupied period, there'd be chaos!! Beards are forever required and holy anathama be to the one who does not, but wearing turkish underwear (cassocks) is not a problem?!!?

Ugh, traditionalists (in the bad sense) and those who think they're "more Orthodox" for any reason scare me. But, we get to love them just the same and hope they see the error of their ways, that is, if we can see around the forest sprouting from our own eyes...

Robbie_James_Francis
7th September 2005, 04:12 PM
So does it have something to do with the recognition given by the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople? :scratch:

Rilian
7th September 2005, 04:31 PM
So does it have something to do with the recognition given by the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople? :scratch:

I think it has more to do with being in direct communion with at least one of the Autocephalous churches.

Philip
7th September 2005, 04:37 PM
So does it have something to do with the recognition given by the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople? :scratch:

No. It is not uncommon for the EP to separate from one of the Autocephalus Churches while the other Churches remain in communion with that Church.

Robbie_James_Francis
7th September 2005, 04:44 PM
No. It is not uncommon for the EP to separate from one of the Autocephalus Churches while the other Churches remain in communion with that Church.

What do you mean by seperate?

Robbie_James_Francis
7th September 2005, 04:45 PM
I think it has more to do with being in direct communion with at least one of the Autocephalous churches.

So what would happen if an autocephalous/autonomous church split with the rest, or if several joined together and split with the rest? :scratch:

Sorry if I'm being difficult. :sorry:

Philip
7th September 2005, 04:54 PM
So what would happen if an autocephalous/autonomous church split with the rest,

This is not hypothetical. We believe Rome did exactly this.

or if several joined together and split with the rest?

You mean something like the Nestorian Churches? Or the Non-Chalcedonian Churches?

Philip
7th September 2005, 04:54 PM
What do you mean by seperate?

Break communion.

Robbie_James_Francis
7th September 2005, 04:57 PM
Break communion.

Constantinople has broken communion with other churches, but both have remained canonical? :scratch:

Robbie_James_Francis
7th September 2005, 04:57 PM
You mean something like the Nestorian Churches? Or the Non-Chalcedonian Churches?

I guess.

Rilian
7th September 2005, 04:58 PM
Constantinople has broken communion with other churches, but both have remained canonical? :scratch:

The history of the Bulgarian Exarchate has shown that to be the case.

Philip
7th September 2005, 05:03 PM
Constantinople has broken communion with other churches, but both have remained canonical? :scratch:

At times. Are you familiar with how the Internet works (the technical aspects)?

Rilian
7th September 2005, 05:09 PM
So what would happen if an autocephalous/autonomous church split with the rest, or if several joined together and split with the rest?

There have over the life of the church between breaches between churches as well as internal schisms. It's just a fact of life.

Robbie_James_Francis
7th September 2005, 05:13 PM
Are you familiar with how the Internet works (the technical aspects)?

Not really...why?

Philip
7th September 2005, 05:21 PM
Not really...why?

It serves as a good analogy at to how two Churches can break communion yet both remain canonical.

Ioan cel Nou
8th September 2005, 03:39 AM
Not really...why?

I think Phillip is trying to use the internet as an analogy in the following way: you can lose a direct connection to a server (A), but so long as you can still connect to another server (B) which has not lost it's connection to A then you are still able to get at the data held on A via B. Phillip, please correct me if I've misunderstood you.

This is pretty close to the situation, for instance, with ROCOR (though I'm not exactly sure of what their current status is since the reunion talks with the MP). At one point they were out of communion with several autocephalous churches (including, I believe, the EP) but they remained in communion with churches such as the Serbian Church that did remain in full communion with all the others. I've heard the odd (usually relatively extreme EP apologist types) Orthodox question ROCOR's canonical status because of this, but the vast majority of Orthodox have certainly never considered them to be in schism, though their position has undeniably been a little odd.

James

The Prokeimenon!
8th September 2005, 09:33 AM
I was told that Serbia is in communion with every canonical Orthodox Church- so if you want to find out if a Church is canonical, find out if they're in communion with Serbia. Don't know if this is accurate, but sounds good to me...

Moses

Rilian
8th September 2005, 09:57 AM
I was told that Serbia is in communion with every canonical Orthodox Church- so if you want to find out if a Church is canonical, find out if they're in communion with Serbia. Don't know if this is accurate, but sounds good to me...

Moses

Even the Serbians had a major internal schism in the 20th century I believe relating to how they dealt with the state. I believe it was completely healed however.

xristos.anesti
8th September 2005, 10:03 AM
Even the Serbians had a major internal schism in the 20th century I believe relating to how they dealt with the state. I believe it was completely healed however.

To cure that schism was the first thing Patriarch Pavle has done when he ascended onto the throne in the early 90ties of the last century.

God bless him.

Rilian
8th September 2005, 10:08 AM
Patriarch Pavle is an incredible man.

Philip
8th September 2005, 11:14 AM
I think Phillip is trying to use the internet as an analogy in the following way: you can lose a direct connection to a server (A), but so long as you can still connect to another server (B) which has not lost it's connection to A then you are still able to get at the data held on A via B. Phillip, please correct me if I've misunderstood you.

Yep, that's what I had in mind. For us Geek Orthodox, it is a handy analogy and useful for comparison to the Roman model.

Michael the Iconographer
8th September 2005, 12:25 PM
Patriarch Pavle is an incredible man.

If I remember correctly, Patriarch Pavle has one incredibly sweet beard too!

Shubunkin
8th September 2005, 12:57 PM
Okay, I know I am tired.... all of this schism over beard length? :confused: Ummm..... I have to be missing something. :scratch: