+Philip Silences His Bishops

Let the evidence speak for itself ... the despot has spoken

#1 Sean O'Clare on 2010-10-25 06:57

Never have the words "unity and brotherly love" been so often repeated to such chilling effect.

#2 Rebecca Matovic on 2010-10-25 07:01

So this was not a vindictive act???? Do you think we are that stupid to believe, after reading this newly posted news article, that you are not seeking revenge, not punishing, not desiring total dictatorship over our entire Archdiocese? How could you be so cold and hard hearted? How could you treat your "Brother" Bishops this way? How could you call yourself the "Chief Shepherd" of this faith? You are chasing away people who have worked hard all these years, and for what, so you can continue to conceal the illegal acts you have involved yourself in?

Your interview was a joke, but it revealed so many things about you. I'm very saddened that we are losing Bishop MARK, but our loss will be a great gain for the OCA. They are not ethnic in the sense that only Arabs count. They are opening their eyes more and more to the contributions that ALL ORTHODOX CLERGY AND LAITY, regardless of their culture, can make to build up the body. You have once again, torn it down, and if you think we will stand for this, you are very wrong.

I am so disgusted right now, but I will save more comments for later. If you think getting rid of Bishop MARK will solve the problems, you have only made it worse. ANAXIOS, ANAXIOS, ANAXIOS, and shame on you the unholy synod of Antioch for allowing this to happen.

STOP SENDING ANY MONEY TO ENGLEWOOD - they will only waste it where it should not be used.

#3 It's Raining Tears of Sorrow Today (Link) on 2010-10-25 07:02

What else can one expect from an aging despot desperately clinging to his meager earthly 'power'? ....

As for the spineless 'synod' - if even one of them had an ounce of decency they would have stood in solidarity with +Mark and sought release to the OCA as well.

Anaxios to Philip & Co. as I depart ....

#4 Jerry Paul Sanders on 2010-10-25 07:05

Well,well the West now has two Popes,a real one in Rome and one in Englewood-Philip Saliba !Abuna Habib

#5 Abuna Habib on 2010-10-25 07:06

Bringing "America to Holy Orthodoxy: means imposing Stalinism?

#6 Antionymous on 2010-10-25 07:10

We are finally rid of this monostrosity of a bishop mark in the midwest and metropolitan philip finally did what he needed to do to preserve the integrity of this archdiocese. bishop basil for too long has treated witchita as a separate entity....NOT ANY MORE! Thank God for metropolitan philip and his keen wisdom! May God Grant him many, many, many, years.

#7 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 07:12

The word that immediately comes to mind is “bizarre.” Is +Philip going to have these nailed to the door of every cathedral? There’s no question this is not Orthodox but protestant with Latin inspiration.
How any bishop in good conscience can submit to this is beyond reason. Only +Mark has “walked the talk” of acting with integrity. +Basil is delusional if he thinks the NA Episcopal Assembly is going to make things right. +Alexander would do well to seek asylum elsewhere before +Philip lowers the boom on him. As for the rest they have shown themselves to be co-conspirators of crime against Orthodoxy.
How any conscionable lay-person can support this archdiocese in any way, shape or form is inconceivable.

#8 A former Philipian on 2010-10-25 07:19

can this document be any more wonderful? I am thrilled at this news! Thank you Mark for making my morning with this news. It is about time that mark is removed. he has plagued our archdiocese. rather than to serve the archdiocese in a way that the metropolitan defines, he has chosen to go and ruin the oca. our gain, your loss.

Also, bishop basil finally has been curt-tailed. we all know that his sister-relation with hauran archdiocese was only to funnel money to them so that he would have a voice on the synod in damascus. his political ploys can now come to an end as well as that joke of a presbyters council. I am so happy that the mtropploitan finally put things in order. this is one archdiocese, the most successful archdiocese in all north america, and it will remain that way with PHILIP can the helm.

#9 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 07:20

This thread could have been even more accurately entitled, "Philip Silences His Church." Make no mistake, this is unadulterated autocracy..... Just in time for Halloween!

Heretofore, I have had little to say on the Antiochian meltdown, since I had previously, in a different time and universe, actually promoted Metropolitan Philip as a possible leader of a unified American Orthodox Church. But my time of penitence and quiet reflection is over.

In another thread, I have called on the laity and courageous clergy to just say no. Now, more than ever, this is the imperative for anyone in the AAOC who wishes to witness to Christ and not to mammon. This ugly and hamfisted attempt by Philip to assert dictatorial control is, as I said above, ...... It can not stand, it must not stand if the Church is to thrive and remain loyal to its only Lord and Savior--not some puffed-up, self important effigy.

KRT

#10 Kenneth R. Tobin on 2010-10-25 07:21

Lord have mercy!

#11 Alex Haig on 2010-10-25 07:34

I shall never forget the kindness, love and patience Bishop Mark showed me, my family, and those who followed when I resigned as a Lutheran minister; and the unspeakable joy first when His Grace chrismated us and then when His Grace ordained me and thereafter every time His Grace visited our little parish or took a moment to speak with me.

#12 Fr John W Fenton on 2010-10-25 07:47

Mark,

What is your relationship to Bishop Mark? As I recall you went to college with him?

(Editor's note: No, I did not. Actually, I have never really met the man - I saw him across the room once at a parish gathering 5-6 years ago. Should he transfer to the OCA I imagine our paths may cross more often. And in case you are wondering, I last spoke with Bishop Basil at a Syndesmos meeting in Finland in 1980; I last saw Metropolitan Philip at my SVS graduation in 1981; and I last spoke with +Antoun in Dayton in 1992 when he visited our little OCA mission and spoke wonderful words of encouragement to us after Liturgy. I have never, to my knowledge, met or seen any of the others. I travel in much less exalted circles.

)

#13 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 07:54

It will be interesting what will happen to the parishes in the Antiochian Archdiocese. Will they rise up and go with Bishop Mark to the OCA? Metropolitan Philip is certainly acting like a Roman Pope yet he criticizes how other Orthodox "jurisidictions" are runned; ex, OCA is "loose" in structure. From what I read, I come to the conclusion that Metropolitan Philip is trying to control his archdiocese as a tyrant. He talks about "unity" but unity under his demands, certainly not concilliar, nor moving in the direction of an "American" Orthodox Church in the US and/or North America. If I were to evaluate this situation, Philip would want an Orthodox Church under Him as Pope. I certainly would not want to follow his lead. Thankfully, I am not in the Antiochian Archdiocese, if I were, I would leave.

#14 anonymous on 2010-10-25 08:07

Wow. A "Metropolitan" of a continent. Metropolitan Philip might want to change his title to "Cosmopolitan" -- oh wait, that title is already held by Someone Else.

#15 Anonymous Coward on 2010-10-25 08:21

This action on the part of Met. Philip may turn out to be yet another paradox in the life of the Church. As the Holy Spirit withdraws from the proud and arrogant, He is drawn to the humble.

If the OCA can maintain the lessons of humility learned so painfully over the last few years, a level of growth may be experienced that confirms how the Holy Spirt desires the unity of the Church here in North America to be manifested.

(Editor's note: Well, paraphrasing Churchill, "the OCA is indeed humble these days. But then, the OCA has much to be humble about."

#16 Marc Trolinger on 2010-10-25 08:46

"For the Good of the Archdiocese" - NOT !!!

Good for PHILIP.

If the Synod, the Council of Presbyters, Board of Trustees cannot stand up to him then we must wait for his death.

Very sad day for our Archdiocese!!
....
FOLLOW THE MONEY!

#17 Delegate #1 on 2010-10-25 08:46

Herod has spoken let it be written so let it be. O wait...wasn't that actually Yule Brenner in The King and I?

What a spectacle for all right confessing Orthodox Christians as they ponder the arrogance of medieval papism rearing it's ugly head in the midst of our Archdiocese.

What's next the Office of The Inquistion headed by Cardinal Antoun?

Seriously how should we react to the contemptibility of a Metropolitan engaged in such assaults on Orthodox ecclessiology and character assasination of a fellow Bishop, while at the same time demanding subservience and obedience from all including brother Bishops? If he's not a 16th century wannabe pope I don't know who is.

And shame on The Holy Synod for it's own special complicity in enabling this despot. If their aquiesence was in any way purchased I hope they are enjoying the very temporary benefits of their own betrayal.

#18 Kevin Kirwan on 2010-10-25 08:53

I am wondering what this means for the OCA? Will Bishop Mark serve as Bishop of the South? Could the Midwest Diocese finally be split geographically to allow for better pastoral care? Will he be added to the longish list of non-active Bishops?

#19 Ignatius on 2010-10-25 08:58

For the sake of Archdiocese's unity and brotherly love WE need to FORCE +Philip's RETIREMENT.

SHAME on you +Phlip!!!!! ANAXIOS!!!!!

#20 Ted P on 2010-10-25 08:58

Who knows Kool and The Gang? "Celebrate Good Times, Come on...!" I am celebrating this joyous news!!! Celebrate good times everyone!!!

#21 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 08:59

Thank Go! Bishop MARK is out, a fresh start is the best thing for the Diocese of Toledo and His Grace.

Since this doccument is not on the Antiochian archdiocese websiude how do we know if it is 100% accurate?

I think we should wait till some official word from the archdiocese.

#22 Member of the Antiochian Archdiocese on 2010-10-25 09:17

Philip shows his dictatorial side. Frankly with +Mark the OCA could fill an episcopal vacancy.

I fear that North America will not see an administratively united Church until Philip has either been removed or died.

Anaxios to "Metropolitan" Philip.

#23 Anon. on 2010-10-25 09:26

Very much in keeping with the Spirit of Antioch's well regarded sensitivity to differing cultures, learned from centuries of experience in the Levant. We're so blessed to have them.

#24 Steve Knowlton on 2010-10-25 09:40

Welcome to Nineteen Eighty-four

Big Brother loves you.

The Ministry of Truth ensures all communication communicates brotherly love and concord.

The Ministry of Plenty doles out pensions and seminary scholarships to all those who love Big Brother and do not contravene the one communication from Big Brother.

The Ministry of Peace ensures that all those who contradict Big Brother are reassigned and their own ministries terminated.

The Ministry of Love ensures that dissidents are punished in the Room 101 of their worst fears, until they give up and leave.

ANAXIOS!

#25 Benedict-Seraphim Healy (Link) on 2010-10-25 09:41

OMG!! I read it and read it. I still cannot believe what it says. Has anything like this EVER happened in the history of the Orthodox church? I think not.

As a member of the OCA, I welcome Bishop Mark with open arms but it does create one problem - The diocese of the midwest has led the way in getting back to the REAL way in wich bishops are chosen. What to do with +Mark? He is going to have to win our hearts if +Jonah wishes him to go to the DOS.

Actually, it is time to split up the DOS anyway. We need a Doicese of the SW and a Diocese of the SE.

I still cannot get over this. I wonder how many people will walk out of the AOCNA over this. Come to think of it, there were a LOT of people at DL yesterday that were new. Has the escape started?

Steve

(Editor's note: It is up to the people of the Diocese of the South to nominate a candidate for election by the Synod. WPA and the Midwest did it one way; New York another. Alaska seems to prefer an "arranged" marriage. If the South wants to nominate a candidate, well, do it!

#26 Steve on 2010-10-25 09:46

1. Does this changing of how votes are going to be cast from individual choices into 'blocs' now transform the Episcopal Assemblies defacto into 'foriegn approved' SCOBA?

2. The Joys of Multiple Overlapping Jurisdictions play out again-- here we see a bishop jurisdiction hopping much as so many priests have done when the 'fatherly' relationship with 'their bishop' hits the rocks. Seems 'Orthodox Divorce' is not an oxymoron. Clearly this represents a failure to reconcile among those who are supposed to be better at it than everyone else. Yet this is what those involved thought best. What of all the parishes/priests 'under' +Mark?

3. Is it possible for a synod to make a promise donors can trust? Handed-down charters, elected diocesan bishops cheered today and now gone in a stroke, 'transparency' in a 'new coke' sort of way. I'm sorry to say it, but can a person watching all this be rightly faulted for asking?

Wondrous are the ways of the ordained young never married bishops. Parish life is the best thing we have, probably the best thing we've ever had. If only a few of them in a town could get together and do coordinated good local things. We'd be impressive I think.

#27 Harry Coin on 2010-10-25 10:05

It's official, Met. Philip considers himself Pope of the Antioch Church in America with absolute authority over all other bishops, all finances, and every dioceses. He is adopting a Roman Catholic model of complete control over the entire Antiochian Church. Worse still, he himself refuses to be accountable before anyone in the Church and is claiming full and complete power over all the other bishops. It is clear that he will not allow any kind of true Orthodox conciliar approach to hierarchial leadership in America while he is in power.

What a tragedy is now unfolding before our very eyes. A formerly true and loving shepherd has now transformed into a devouring wolf. Lord have mercy!

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or certainty of corruption by full authority. There is no worse heresy than the fact that the office sanctifies the holder of it." – Lord Acton

#28 Chris Banescu, Esq. (Link) on 2010-10-25 10:22

Cause me to hear Thy mercy in the morning, for in Thee have I put my hope.

Cause me to know, O Lord, the way wherein I should walk, for unto Thee have I lifted up my soul.

Rescue me from mine enemies, O Lord. Unto Thee have I fled for refuge.

Teach me to do Thy will, for Thou art my God.

#29 Peter on 2010-10-25 10:22

I will post again...

Finally this mistake has been corrected!

God grant His Eminence and our Auxiliary Bishops many years of service and good health. Let's move on to the next subject like spreading the Gospel!

Thank God this is finished, what a blessing!

#30 Happy on 2010-10-25 10:28

"Whatever he orders, now or in the future, as “... there may be additional policy changes and directives that are needed which have not yet become apparent", are not only to be acccepted and obeyed, but presented to the world with " a positive tone and attitude."

Such is the new policy."......... Lotsa luck with that one!

#31 Sophia Weisheit on 2010-10-25 10:51

As a member of the OCA, I should not be involved in a sister jurisdiction's affairs. Yet, what is happening has much broader implications. So, I must speak out. I join others who have criticized Metropolitan Philip for his Popish pretensions. I too condemn the unorthodox and anti-Orthodox ways of the Antiochian Church in letting this canonical and ecclesiastic monstrosity happen. I am extremely disappointed and saddened by the utterly self-serving and unchristian responses from some anonymous supporters of +Philip. Shame on them; shame on Metropolitan Philip; shame on the Holy Synod of Antioch; and shame on those bishops who did not rise with Bishops Alexander and Basil in opposing this travesty.

#32 Carl Kraeff on 2010-10-25 10:55

I cannot help but be struck at the absolute extreme difference between what appear to be the two types of posters on this thread.

To take this as an example -- "I am thrilled at this news! Thank you Mark for making my morning with this news. It is about time that mark is removed. he has plagued our archdiocese. rather than to serve the archdiocese in a way that the metropolitan defines, he has chosen to go and ruin the oca. our gain, your loss."

I ask this question as genuinely and honestly as I can -- what is it that those of us who have only had positive interactions with Bp. MARK do not understand about where you are coming from? What did Bp. MARK do wrong? I really am trying to understand why there is such a gap between understandings.

Thank you.

Richard

#33 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-25 11:03

Finished? Unfortunately, this is just the beginning of the end.

#34 Chris Banescu, Esq. (Link) on 2010-10-25 11:05

I guess my references, which Mark has so neatly exorcised, come under the category of "the devil made me do it!"

KRT

#35 Kenneth R. Tobin on 2010-10-25 11:28

buildings owned by archdiocese, parishioners can leave if they want....free will. Finally midwest and mid america will be normal. Mdwest will get a real bishop and Basil will stop being a little god.

#36 Hip Hip Horray, Freedom at last! on 2010-10-25 11:28

Thanks. I appreciate your reply.

#37 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 11:46

It was Yul Brynner in The Ten Commandments as Rameses II; and also whoever it was (Ralph Richardson???) who played his predecessor.

(Editor's note: Yes, Ralph, and don't forget the ever-memorable Anne Baxter. Moses! Moses! Moses!

#38 Fr. Dennis Buck on 2010-10-25 12:14

While I love Bp Mark and am outraged at how he has been mistreated, I do regret that he saw fit to flee when we need his leadership the most. I don't know how it is to walk in his shoes, but Sayedna, consider your children....

(Editor's note: Given the circumstances, I think it unfair to characterize the Bishop's choice as "fleeing". He was transfered against his will. If he was not permitted to "lead" in the Midwest, what makes you think he would be allowed to do so in the NW? Therefore, he made the only choice available - exile, which is not the same as "fleeing".

#39 antionymous on 2010-10-25 12:21

He is not trying to be a pope or even pope-like. You people just dont understand anything. WE MUST HAVE ORDER!!! The establishments of these dioceses and these bishops have rendered non-uniformity across the archdiocese with peoples doing things their own way. It cant be the case. And for those wishing death to the metropolitan, you better be careful.

If you think a new metropolitan will change these things, you are off your rocker. there is a reason why bishop joseph went to the middle east with metropolitan philip. he is the hand picked successor to metropolitan philip and the stamp of approval sits with the holy synod. for all you converts that dont like, join the OCA like bishop mark.

(Editor's note: No one is wishing anyone dead. I think the references are to the Metropolitan's humorous remark at the convention that he will decide when he wants to pass on....)

#40 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 12:33

Good point!

In 1998 The Church of Ben Lomond, California try to leave the Archdiocese and take the Church and its assets a California court ruled the assets and Church property belongs to the Archdiocese, which is also int he archdiocese and Parish Constitutions.

However, Individual parishioneers are free to go to what ever Church they want to, Clergy must ahve the permission fo there Metropolitan to be released.

#41 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 12:37

Is there any news of the trustee's meeting?
Has the audit been done?
I have heard that several members of the board of trustees have resigned over this fiasco. Is there any truth to that?

#42 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 12:50

Over? You who think this is a great day of celebration are kidding yourselves. Pasha Philip may be able to silence the bishops. He may silence the priests. But he cannot silence the laity. It is past time for us to raise our voices in protest, to refuse to financially support Englewood, to rally around OUR DIOCESAN BISHOPS. Because that is what they still are, Pasha Philip or no Pasha Philip. He can call them auxiliaries. He can call them PEPPERONI PIZZA if he wants to...it doesn't change the reality that they are DIOCESAN bishops! God have mercy on them all.

To Pasha Philip: ANAXIOS, ANAXIOS, ANAXIOS!!!

#43 Mary Brigid on 2010-10-25 12:50

Richard,

That is because it is not about Bp Mark as a person, but about power, money and control, simple as that.

#44 Delegate #1 on 2010-10-25 13:20

"You people just dont understand anything. WE MUST HAVE ORDER!!! ... And for those wishing death to the metropolitan, you better be careful. "

I do remember such pronouncements and threats from the no-defunct blog site operated by Metropolitan Philip devotees. The first part, "WE MUST HAVE ORDER," sadly reminds me of Colonel Klink of Hogan's Heroes fame. The send part, "you better be careful..." reminds me of the fulminations of a honorary Diocesan trustee and a man with a police record, who also made threats to Bishop Mark himself....

#45 Carl Kraeff on 2010-10-25 13:33

I agree,+ Bp Mark should not have requested to leave so quickly and given Met Philip an out by going to the OCA - now there is one less voice on the so called "synod". And shame if the OCA receives him - we have to work out our own problems- a transfer will ensure that we do not work things out.

#46 Delegate #1 on 2010-10-25 13:33

"WE MUST HAVE ORDER!!! The establishments of these dioceses and these bishops have rendered non-uniformity across the archdiocese with peoples doing things their own way."

Curious...as I recall Pope Victor also wanted "ORDER!!!" when he condemned the Christian communities of Asia Minor for celebrating Pascha at the wrong time.

Sounds like Pope Phillip needs a St. Irenaios to set him straight.

Yeah you need "ORDER!!!" Such as an external audit.

#47 JF on 2010-10-25 13:36

It has been said that "the mill of God grinds slow but exceedingly fine." Time will tell, the tale is not finished, and in the end the story may be very different from the experience of this moment. Not one of us is hidden before God.

Fr John Chagnon
St. Paul, MN

#48 Fr John Chagnon (Link) on 2010-10-25 13:42

How, exactly, does a transfer do that??

#49 A Midwest Observer on 2010-10-25 13:52

This is true Orthodoxy...preserving the archdiocese and it's order throughout the country...no more fragmentation, disciples of individual bishops who think they are captains of their own ships, and no more separation.

MP cleaned house, did what any protector of the faith would do in their right mind, as painful as it is for him, but he did it for the Love of the Archdiocese.

I'm sure he, just as I and the rest would have loved to see these Diocesan bishops be successful, but with too much power, division and miniature archdiocese it can only get much worse down the road.

Come on...bishops really need someone to type an email or drive them 30 feet literally just to rub it in their face because they are a bishop and god-forbid walk the 30 steps?

If you leave than you are not really seeking out the facts except for on this website and on the internet...

Obviously he is willing to have those cast ill will on him in order to protect the church...much like the saints. MP will be a Saint. I know it. He is protecting this by putting his reputation as well as life on the line.

However I do not blame those who are upset at this and don't know the facts except based on internet posts.

Let me tell you something...Internet posts from others, some who know the facts (but can not say them), others who don't and only post theological canons etc...those aren't the facts to the reason why.

Those who know, know...those who don't I am truly sorry but eventually it will become apparent over time when peace and uniformity and respect is brought back into this Archdiocese.

Axios to the Auxiliaries and Our Father Metropolitan PHILIP!

#50 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 13:56

to Philip: ANAXIOS! ANAXIOS! ANAXIOS!

#51 George Michalopulos (Link) on 2010-10-25 13:59

"You converts", eh? Don't be a snob.

Tell me, were you born already baptized? You were born a pagan just like everyone else. Your cradle Orthodoxy does not entitle you to some lofty position. You cannot boast about something you did nothing to earn.

As a member of Bishop Mark's former diocese, I am saddened by this turn of events. He did much good for the people here, and everyone I know loves him (both cradle and "convert", both Arabs and Americans). Sadly the folks in the Detroit country clubs have the Metropolitan's ear more than everyone else.

#52 Michigander on 2010-10-25 14:06

Dear Anonymous --What are you defining as ORDER (your caps, not mine) and uniformity?? MP is a dictator pure and simple. He has actively subverted every Canon of the Church, save the ones that say one is to be obedient to him. It is a complete breach of ecclesiology and for a lawfully installed ordinary of a diocese to be removed for ANY reason WITHOUT either a.) his consent, or b.) a canonical trial and to make them ordinaries of the diocese and then pull it back violates the code of ethic of the sandbox --we used to call that "indian giving".

MP's actions are an affront and a usurpation of his office as a hierarch. canonical order and the good witness of the Orthodox Faith. There is actually an ecclesiastical term for him:

An Adulterer-usurper bishop. Anaxios to the adulterer-usurper

#53 John Peter Presson on 2010-10-25 14:15

Brothers! Sisters! Let us stop all of this unchristian rejoicing and "anaxios" business! Maybe this is a sign of the times that we are judging +Philip and everyone else when we ought not. He may be right. He may be wrong. But he is Another's servant and we are not suppose to judge anyone, much less a bishop. Let the Lord sort this out as He surely will. We keep posting comments on Orthodox ecclesiology but this whole affair is more Gospel-oriented than Canons-oriented. If this Church is under the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit, stop worrying and lamenting! Let everyone search their conscious and do that the Lord leads, but let us do it with out mouths respectfully and humbly closed. The Lord will do with +Philip and +Mark as He chooses and in His time. Let us all be patient.

#54 George Osborne on 2010-10-25 14:27

Father Fenton speaks for many of us.

#55 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 14:28

It is not lost on me that no one has seen fit to answer my question. Again I ask, what did Bp. MARK do wrong that we who had positive interactions with him don't understand?

#56 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-25 14:38

Father Chagnon speaks for many of us.

#57 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 14:38

Are you thanking the same 'Go' that Fr. Rahal dedicated his first edition of the Holy Week Service to?

Don't forget that Met. Philip sent Fr. Rahal a letter for a book he did not review. We can expect more of this kind of 'visionary leadership.'

#58 Anonymous Non-Go Worshipper on 2010-10-25 14:49

Adulterer-Usurper Bishops
Has anyone ever heard of an adulterer-usurper bishop? What is an adulterer-usurper [in Greek,
mihepivátis] bishop? First of all, The Rudder has many holy canons that deal with such bishops.
An adulterer-usurper bishop is a bishop who tries to take over another diocese in addition to his
own. Or, he seeks to take over a diocese that is bigger and/or more important than his own
original diocese.
Why do the holy canons forbid this?
Because once a bishop becomes a ruling bishop of a certain diocese, he is, literally, wedded to it
forever. It’s a marriage with no divorce; it’s “for better or for worse”, as the saying goes. That’s
why, when bishops [including, of course, metropolitans, archbishops or patriarchs] die, their
dioceses are called “widowed” dioceses. Also, if such a bishop tries to take over another diocese,
he becomes an “adulterer” [because he’s married already]!
Adulterer-usurper bishops are the bane of so-called World-Orthodoxy — but also, alas, of many
old calendarist jurisdictions in Greece and elsewhere. The basic problem is human ambition, or
greed, or both. As the Church writings say again and again, such bishops love chrysón [gold]
more than Christón [Christ]. Believe it or not, sometimes such bishops will try to get a bigger or
more important diocese by campaigning openly for it, as though it were a political office!
The Greek people have a saying: “Authority shows the man.” That is to say, when a person
receives a position of authority that’s when you’ll see what kind of person he really is. This
happens with bishops too, some of whom, alas, are quite ambitious.
Surprisingly, these men can often be detected. In the Lives of the Saints and in the holy canons,
they are very often described as “tyrannical” [or, as we say in America, “control freaks”] and
greedy. In the secular world, with the CEO’s of big corporations, for example, this type of person
is almost the norm. But in the Church of God, they are disasters. As the Church Fathers tell us
time and again, these men are not true shepherds.
It was mentioned earlier that this type of bishop is one of the banes of “World Orthodoxy”.
“World Orthodoxy” bishops are not Orthodox, of course, so you would expect to see this type of
CEO bishop among them. In a way, though, adulterer-usurper bishops are worse than non-
Orthodox bishops. Non-Orthodox bishops are, after all, outside of the Church, but adultererusurper
bishops are often inside the Church. They are like foxes inside the chicken-coop!
May God preserve us from such bishops. As the holy canons teach us again and again, we must
be on our guard and reject such “shepherds” and not accept them, or commemorate them. Their
actions, say the holy canons, make them liable to deposition [i.e., defrockment]. “Stand fast and
hold the traditions ye have received” [II Thess. 2:15]! Be on your watch!
2
Some Canons About “Adulterer-Usurper” Bishops
CANON 15 of the First Ecumenical Council (A.D. 325)
ON account of the great disturbance and discords that occur, it is decreed that the custom
prevailing in certain places contrary to the Canon, must wholly be done away; so that neither
bishop, presbyter, nor deacon shall pass from city to city. And if any one, after this decree of the
holy and great Synod, shall attempt any such thing, or continue in any such course, his
proceedings shall be utterly void, and he shall be restored to the Church for which he was
ordained bishop or presbyter.
ANCIENT EPITOME OF CANON 15.
Neither bishop, presbyter, nor deacon shall pass from city to city. But they shall be sent back,
should they attempt to do so, to the Churches in which they were ordained.
CANON 21 of Antioch (A.D. 341)
A BISHOP may not be translated from one parish to another, either intruding himself of his own
suggestion, or under compulsion by the people, or by constraint of the bishops; but he shall
remain in the Church to which he was allotted by God from the beginning, and shall not be
translated from it, according to the decree formerly passed on the subject.
ANCIENT EPITOME OF CANON 21.
A bishop even if compelled by the people, and compelled by the bishops, must not be translated
to another diocese.
CANON 1 of Sardica (A.D. 347)
HOSIUS, bishop of the city of Corduba, said: A prevalent evil, or rather most mischievous
corruption must be done away with from its very foundations. Let no bishop be allowed to
remove from a small city to a different one: as there is an obvious reason for this fault,
accounting for such attempts; since no bishop could ever yet be found who endeavoured to be
translated from a larger city to a smaller one. It is therefore evident that such persons are
inflamed with excessive covetousness and are only serving ambition in order to have the repute
of possessing greater authority. Is it then the pleasure of all that so grave an abuse be punished
with great severity? For I think that men of this sort should not be admitted even to lay
communion. All the bishops said: It is the pleasure of all.
ANCIENT EPITOME OF CANON 1.
NO bishop is to be found passing from a smaller to a greater city. If anyone should move from an
humble to a more important see, he shall be excommunicated through his whole life as proud and
grasping.
CANON 2 of Sardica (A.D. 347)
3
BISHOP HOSIUS said: But if any such person should be found so mad or audacious as to think
to advance by way of excuse an affirmation that he had brought letters from the people [laity], it
is plain that some few persons, corrupted by bribes and rewards, could have got up an uproar in
the church, demanding, forsooth, the said man for bishop. I think then that practices and devices
of such sort absolutely must be punished, so that a man of this kind be deemed unworthy even of
lay communion in extremis. Do ye therefore make answer whether this sentence is approved by
you. They [the bishops] answered: We approve.
ANCIENT EPITOME OF CANON 2.
If anyone shall pass from one city to another, and shall raise up seditions, tickling the people and
be assisted by them in raising a disturbance, he shall not be allowed communion even when
dying.
CANON 48 of Carthage (Nicene Series)
Of re-baptisms, re-ordinations, and translations of bishops.
BUT we suggest that we decree what was set forth by the wisdom of the plenary synod at Capua,
that no re-baptizing, nor re-ordinations should take place, and that bishops should not be
translated. For Cresconius, bishop of Villa Regis, left his own people and invaded the Church of
Tubinia and having been admonished down to this very day, to leave, according to the decree,
the diocese he had invaded, he treated the admonition with disdain. We have heard that the
sentence pronounced against him has been confirmed; but we seek, according to our decree, that
ye deign to grant that being driven thereto by necessity, it be free to us to address the rector of
the province against him, according to the statutes of the most glorious princes, so that whoever
is not willing to acquiesce in the mild admonition of your holiness and to amend his lawlessness,
shall be immediately cast out by judicial authority. Aurelius the bishop said: By the observance
of the constituted form, let him not be judged to be a member of the synod, if he has been asked
by you, dear brethren, to depart and has refused: for out of his own contempt and contumacy he
has fallen to the power of the secular magistrate. Honoratus and Urban the bishops said: This
pleases us all, does it not? And all the bishops answered: It is just, it pleases us.
ANCIENT EPITOME OF CANON 48.
Let there be no re-baptisms, nor re-ordinations nor translations of bishops. Therefore let
Cresconius be forbidden by judicial authority, for he has left his own people, and has taken
possession of the diocese of Ceneum, although ecclesiastically admonished that he was not to
change.

(Editor's note: If you are serious that such canons prevent bishops from ever being moved, under any circumstances, how then does one elect a bishop of one see to be a Patriarch or Metropolitan of another? The principle seems sound, but in actual practice untenable. )

#59 John Peter Presson on 2010-10-25 14:51

Michigander,

I am sorry you feel this way and you are correct in terms of cradle born doesn't mean anything different. I was a cradle born but did not know the church until i was around 40.

The cradle born term holds no merit to me except those that were born into it (last 40 years or even 10) and grew up in it knew the way it was before in regards to unity and one voice, likewise does those active above a parish level before the last 10 years.

I am personally happy this happened, I am also sorry it affected you and many others in this manor.

I am sure Bishop MARK did great things and touched many lives, but that is not the issue. The issue again is power and individuality amongst these dioceses that finally is resolved.

One voice, One Archdiocese, One, not slivers of the Archdiocese customized to individual laws and rules as minor as they may be...little things add up.

Anyways, again, I pray you will find peace in the Lord Jesus Christ because He does allow these things to happen, for good or not so good...let's just say for good today because obviously the bad was yesterday.

#60 Happy on 2010-10-25 14:56

For all the comments of pope-like or acting like a bishop of rome -- maybe a medieval Medici pope. This decree gives the Metropolitan more authority than the pope has over bishops in the Catholic Church. Website control, control of finances and communication, control of any outside communication or the manner / tone of communication? Wow – Benedict should be so lucky. I am deeply sorry for the trials you are enduring and prayerfully support you all.

#61 From A Roman Catholic on 2010-10-25 15:00

Did you just start reading about the canons and the church in the last 5-10 years, not join, but read?

Do you know what your talking about, you probably know more than i do about specific canons in this area because I did not waste my time researching canon law and focused more on the reasoning behind this event and why.

You may be able to throw out your canon laws but I guarantee you until you understand the REASON for why he did this you will always be upset. Until you understand that REASON I hope you pray about learning about that REASON.

God bless MP because the Lord knows what's going on and this blessed man is protecting this Archdiocese from falling to pieces on OUR watch..he is taking beatings from people like you for preserving this archdiocese.

It's probably worth losing a few pieces (i.e. people) rather than the entire archdiocese by making this decision. I would do the same except 4 years ago!

#62 Happy on 2010-10-25 15:08

The OCA also has many blessings to be thankful for Mark.

#63 Marc Trolinger on 2010-10-25 15:13

If the Antiochian Archdiocese is wont to undo its bishops, I look forward to the reception of all of them in the OCA; we can certainly use (appreciate) them here.

More and more, the OCA is seeming like the only sound and vibrant Orthodox Church on this continent. The others are ethnic charades. I don't mind being doctrinaire: the road to Orthodox unity will be through the OCA - there will be no other way.

(Editor's note: That is not doctrinaire - just arrogant in the ears of our brothers. Say rather that the road to Orthodox unity must include the OCA as it is, not as others would have it be, and that there is no other way to achieve our common goal of unity except together. )

#64 Rdr. Nilus on 2010-10-25 15:15

It NEEDED to be stressed, because "Brotherly Love" has been lacking under Bishop Mark and other priests in the midwest anyway. Praise the Lord! I have been praying for this for 7 years. "THY WILL BE DONE ON EARTH AS IT IS IN HEAVEN".

#65 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 15:20

one would presume that provisions for lawful elevations are in other canons. The thrust of these is the arbitrary and unwarranted intrusion of one bishop to the diocese of another.

(Editor's note: Thanks for the clarification.)

#66 John Peter Presson on 2010-10-25 15:21

It was Sir Cedric Hardwicke that played Seti 1st in that epoch Father.
However the weight of all the current evidence seems to indicate that the Exodus took place about 200 years earlier.

(Editor's note: You are right! It was Cedric Hardwicke, not Ralph Richardson. )

#67 Marc Trolinger on 2010-10-25 15:24

This is ecclesiological heresy pure and simple. The plain meaning of this diktat is incompatible with +BASIL serving as Secretary to the Episcopal Assembly, or for that matter for any American Antiochian bishop other than Pope Philip participating fully in the Episcopal Assembly, since every sentence uttered to the other bishops would have to be cleared with the self-proclaimed Pontiff. I am disappointed that +MARK asked to be transferred to the OCA, rather than standing his ground and appealing to Constantinople. I fervently hope +BASIL and +ALEXANDER will appeal to Constantinople.

St. Ignatius of Antioch weeps for his children in the New World.

#68 DNY (Link) on 2010-10-25 15:39

"Happy" -MP is not a king and these are not feudal lords. These are bishops -priests of the most high. They are all subject to canon. MP's decrees may fly in feudal Europe, but this is the Holy Orthodox Church. We have rule of canon precisely for similar reason that we have rule of law. From what I have read, the bishops were established all as diocesan ordinaries, which makes MP and the bishops equals -in a normal canonically ordered Synod, MP is not pope, or boss, kingpin, or as Fr Peter Gilquist somewhat prophetically termed -Christian Executive --he is a first among equals. This is the normal canonical order.

To make what ammounts to suffragan/chorepiscopi ruling bishops and then bust them down to powerless suffragan chorepiscopi for no reason other than to preserve the 1st amongst equals' absolute vice grip on power is a sad statement on the state of so-called "canonical Orthodoxy". It is not only deeply canonically questionable --it makes about as much sense as giving communion to Moslems (another MP zinger)

#69 John Peter Presson on 2010-10-25 15:49

How dare you call our Bishop MARK a "monstrosity" and then hide behind anonymity. Do you really think that the OCA would take a bishop who is a "monster." I do hope that you are not one of those very few renegade Antiochian priests in the Midwest, or one of their supporters, who have shown nothing but disrespect for Bishop MARK from the day he was enthroned. But sadly it sounds like you are. The Midwest Diocese is losing a very fine bishop to the OCA. May God Grant Him Many Years to continue his ministry. And may God have mercy on those who are responsible for the mess that this archdiocese finds itself in. And may God have mercy on the person who called our bishop a monster and was too much a coward to identify himself. - Ron Royhab, St. Elias Antiochian Orthodox Church, Sylvania, Ohio.

#70 Ron Royhab on 2010-10-25 16:02

"We must have order"? That's the whole reason why I left Catholicism right there: too much order. "Metropolitan" Philip is not bringing order, he's bringing chaos as people will leave Orthodoxy because of his ego.

#71 Anon. on 2010-10-25 16:02

Bishop +MARK did nothing wrong. He is being exiled for doing what he was consecrated and enthroned to do--being the Orthodox Bishop of the Diocese of Toledo and the Mid-West--for demanding that parishes which had gotten negligent serve Saturday Vespers and Sunday Orthros as well as Sunday Liturgy and Feast Day Liturgies, for calling on parishes to audit their books, encouraging the faithful to keep the fasts, and taking other spiritually salutary measures.

The decree issued in Jacksonville is eccelesiological heresy.

#72 DNY on 2010-10-25 16:03

You know this addresses the heart of the problems we all have as Catholic Christians, pride verses humility. Given the problems of pride in the institution of the papacy, Benedict XVI, and John Paul II before him, have certainly shown more humility than Philip.

We Orthodox Christian should take to heart the fact that the Holy Spirit is working in a fashion that may well lead to a greater unity of the faithful before our Lord returns. The Church in Heaven is not divided.

#73 Marc Trolinger on 2010-10-25 16:11

I hope Bp.Mark comes the the Diocese of the South.he is a good man.I hope the OCA uses him well.
How many Antiochians will leave? Im glad I no longer attend an Antiochian parish..

#74 STEPHEN on 2010-10-25 16:25

Okay, as a convert, I just have to say, this is soooo un-American. But that is the problem with foreign born, raised and educated bishops. They just don't "get it". America has its own culture and ethos and you can't just stick it with something foreign and make it work. I'm a convert and the OCA in closest proximity to my vacinity, though 100% English, is still 98% Russian; the most local Antiochian parish is 75% English and 98% Arab; the local Greek parish is 75% Greek and 100% GREEK ... alas, what is a convert to do? Years ago there was both an Antiochain Priest and an OCA Priest who "got it" ... both converts, who cooperated with each other, and both of their churches prospered as a result ... to massive effect. Now they are gone ... and alas, so is their vision ... it's tough ... at times, it's very very tough.

#75 Sean O'Clare on 2010-10-25 16:29

No, we must not have "ORDER!" We must have CHRISTLIKENESS. That's all that matters, and there's a shortage of it in the Orthodox Church right now. The Church is not the Third Reich, and the reorganization of the Antiochian Archdiocese into related dioceses, a la orthodox ecclesiology, never erupted into chaos, aside from the chaos of those who can't stand orthodox ecclesiology trumping Arab nationalism.

#76 Gregory on 2010-10-25 16:41

"Unfiromity" does not = Unity. Unity is diversity in love and free will. Love cannot be coerced.

#77 Antionymous on 2010-10-25 16:43

Why bother calling them "auxiliary bishops"? Just create a new label to call them what they are now: "über-presbyters."

#78 Gregory on 2010-10-25 16:44

The Ends don't justify the means. His causing strife and contention, transfering enthroned bishops without a spiritual court just to solidify his power base, is the story of third world distators....it should not be the story of Christian bishops who are called to preside in love. MIght does not make right.

#79 Antionymous on 2010-10-25 16:49

And "falling to pieces?" He is dismantling it brick by brick while you and your cronies cheer him on!

#80 Antionymous on 2010-10-25 16:51

Patriarch Ignatius and the Holy Synod of Antioch! Deliever us from this wolf you have sent us and enabled to be our shepherd! Havn't you heard enough? How long until you act? How long?

#81 Antionymous on 2010-10-25 16:56

It needed to be done. Trust in the Lord. There is nothing wrong with Bishop Mark as a person. Unity and Brotherly Love are imperative to a healthy archdiocese. Bishop Mark knows there are problems in the midwest, and he did nothing about it. We have priests who should be called "Saul", because they are persecuting Christians. He did nothing to stop them. Metropolitan Philip is aware of everything. Bishop Mark needs to be moved. Those who are humbled will be great. If he learns the lesson, he may do great somewhere else; but he needed to be humbled first. Let it be. +

#82 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 16:59

Thank you Mark for your great reporting. I wonder what we would do without you. As to +Phillip's latest tightening of the choke chain, it's kind of hard to know where, exactly, this is all going to lead. As someone who has attended an Antiochian parish for several years, I truly love and appreciate the unity in the Antiochian Archdiocese. There is consistency in the themes for the annual conventions, bible bowls, oratorical festivals, liturgical services, etc. Children from our parishes can come together and pray services together at our summer camps with the same music and texts. Clergy can concelebrate with relative ease because there is consistency in practices.

Can the same things be said of the OCA? No. Each diocese uses their own materials, their own rubrics, (sometimes even different calendars), different languages, etc. There are no real annual equivalent conferences for people to attend and no consistent annual themes or bible bowls. No disrepect but there is almost no consistency in the OCA other than on the local diocesan level.

What you have with Metropolitan Phillip's actions, is a genuine attempt to stop the Antiochian Archdiocese from becoming like the OCA. Time will tell which is a better system. I wish that there had been a better way for Metropolitan Phillip to pull this off but there probably wasn't. With + Basil and +Mark off doing their own things, the potential was that others like +Alexander and +Joseph would start to follow suit.

Say what you want it is the consistency in the Antiochian Archdiocese that has held it together throughout all of +Phillip's tenure. People often refer to the home as a little church. The opposite is also true. A church is like a little home. The homes where people sit down and eat a meal together have beeen proven to be much healthier physically, emotionally and mentally. Families where the parents are never home and no one eats together are often very scattered, physically, emotionally and mentally.

Was what +Philip did heavy handed? Yes, of course it was. Was it ideal to basically push +Mark out of the diocese? Of course not? But what was the alternative? To let the diocese suffer and decline just for the sake of a few people's ideas that he was doing a great job? Some commentators said that +Mark should have stuck it out. Why? So that he can continue to make himself miserable and be a source of friction between himself, the metropolitan and the flock in the diocese?

Again, what +Phillip did was without a doubt heavy handed but it was certainly necessary. I hope and pray that God's will be done.

(Editor's note: Fascinating comment, for which I thank you. I find it equally fascinating that everything you see as a problem in the OCA, I see as a virtue. I have no problem with local variations, but then I prefer local restuarants to chains. Are Walmart and Lowes better than my local hardware store? Cheaper, perhaps - but it all depends on the shopping experience and products one desires as to which is better. I know which is better for America, and which is better for my small town. And again: the OCA lacks much of what you state as virtuous - and yet our dioceses and governing bodies are real, authentic, and increasingly conciliar, rather than hand-picked, rubber stamps that are to speak with "One Voice". I agree the future will decide which "model" is best suited to witness to a multi-cultural, diverse and an increasingly fragmented country. I have a guess, which is both, depending on who and where you are. I would suggest your Archdiocese is less united or uniform than you think; Garden Grove and Brooklyn come to mind; or even Troy and Bloomington in teh same diocese. Likewise, the OCA is not as framented as we sometimes appear. Yes, we have two calendars - so does the entire Orthodox world ( three actuallly, with Finland and the Czech church...) and 11 languages in Sunday liturgy across our 5 time zones. In the parish, and the deanery, and to a great extent dioceses, such differences enliven us, rather than divide us. Or so we intend.

In the end, we, meaning the OCA and the Archdiocese are ever so much more alike than lack of Bible bowls and lack of Haflis would suggest - and we should never forget that, my anonymous Antiochian friend.)

#83 Anonymous Antiochian on 2010-10-25 17:08

You know, + Philip has been harping about the unity of the Orthodox in N. Am. for years. Everyone just thought his bluster was talking out of both sides of his mouth. HOWEVER, with this current episode, his actions could lead bishops, priests and laity into the OCA. The result: a diminished AOCA and a growing OCA! The Antiochians will diminish into an ethnic Arab clan resembling 1950. The OCA will flourish as more and more finally realize the OCA is the ONLY solution for North America!

(Editor's note: Get a grip. Just like all tha parishes that left the OCA for the Archdiocese during our recent turmoil. Right, that would be none. Let no one take comfort or joy in the distress and discomfort of our brothers and sisters. Saying the OCA the only solution for NOrth America is like saying Vanilla is the only flavor of ice cream. Open a vanilla ice cream store and see how long you stay in business, friend. Last time I looked 32 flavors was the standard. We've only got 21 jurisdictions, and too many people still can't find a home to be comfortable in!)

#84 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 17:12

Thrilled in Toledo!!!

#85 Thrilled in Toledo!!!!! on 2010-10-25 17:19

I'll just point out that the Greeks are larger than everybody else combined. If that's a "charade," I'd hate to see the circus.

#86 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-25 17:24

What I meant to add to that was: by virtue of being larger than everybody else combined, the road to unity will also necessarily include the Greeks as they are, not as others would wish them to be.

(Editor's note: Which is a great segue into "Stokoe's Plan for Orthodox Unity". Just disband the OCA and the AOCNA, ROCOR and the Serbs and have all their bishops, priests, parishes and people petition to join the their local Greek Dioceses en masse. The Greek bishops would be outnumbered on the Archdiocesan Synod, as would the priests, and the parishes in the Clergy-Laity. Think it could ever happen? You'd hear the screams of "OXI" all the way to Constantbul! And the current charade of Orthodox unity that is the EA would be revealed for what it truly is - just an attempt to maintain the status quo - which is what most bishops want - under the aegis of Istanbul - which is what the Greeks most earnestly desire. Stokoe's Plan for Orthodox unity is a way of calling their bluff - and why it would never happen.)

#87 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-25 17:25

I grew up RC and, having seen this stuff before, all I can say is enough! Coercing the conscience of godly leaders proves that Christian unity is not understood by the one demanding it; this is not trust, nor is it love. This is micro-managing of money, of administrations, of clergy and the faithful. It is harmful.

Lord have mercy.

#88 MichaelPatrick on 2010-10-25 17:30

I believe the term is "serf"

#89 John Peter Presson on 2010-10-25 17:57

"We give thanks to You, invisible King. By Your infinite power You created all things and by Your great mercy You brought everything from nothing into being. Master, look down from heaven upon those who have bowed their heads before You; they have bowed not before flesh and blood but before You the awesome God. Therefore, Master, guide the course of our life for our benefit according to the need of each of us. Sail with those who sail; travel with those who travel; and heal the sick, Physician of our souls and bodies". from the text of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom

"It is a very great mistake to imagine that the object of loyalty is the authority and interest of one individual man, however dignified by the applause or enriched by the success of popular actions". Samuel Adams, American Patriot

#90 MWP on 2010-10-25 18:09

"There is consistency in the themes for the annual conventions, bible bowls, oratorical festivals, liturgical services, etc. Children from our parishes can come together and pray services together at our summer camps with the same music and texts. Clergy can concelebrate with relative ease because there is consistency in practices."

So, this is very interesting to me, because so far as I can tell, if somebody refers to "Antiochian Tradition," it could refer to one of four things:

1) Genuine traditional practice of the Patriarchate of Antioch.
2) Custom of ethnic Arab-American AOCANA parishes.
3) EOC practice imported into AOCANA parishes.
4) Antiochian Village Camp practice.

#1 appears to be more or less reflected in the Liturgikon, but if you point out something in the Liturgikon (which we're told is the authoritative guide) as being at variance with resources like the Liturgical Guide or what the Kazan service books say, you're told, "Well, the Liturgikon's not wrong, but nobody ACTUALLY does that."

#2 appears to include a wide variety of things including Slavified rubrics that have nothing to do with #1.

#3 appears to include a wide variety of things that have nothing to do with nos. 1 or 2, like certain of the priest's "silent" prayers being adopted by the congregation, singing things congregationally that are to be read by a reader, and so on.

#4 is whatever the Camp liturgy book says, and appears to include characteristics of nos. 2 and 3.

So, I'm sorry, where's the consistency again?

#91 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-25 18:15

Why, yes, it is very much in keeping with the Spirit of Antioch's well regarded sensitivity to differing cultures: +Philip has completely assimilated to the culture of turn of the 21st century America, where the "elites" take oaths, be it to uphold the Holy Canons or support and defend the Constitution of the United States, lightly, where those with fiduciary responsibility order finances for their own benefit, rather than that of those who have entrusted their goods to them, be it donors to a hunger relief program or stockholders, where "elites" try to control access to information in support of their own interests. Unfortunately that culture is even less compatible with Holy Orthodoxy than the American culture of individualism and plain-dealing idealized out here in "fly over country".

#92 DNY on 2010-10-25 18:16

I mean, if +Mark transfers to the OCA our "synod" looses one more voice of reason. If he stays then the synod will have to work this out. If he leaves +Philip has won, then we could expect even the reinstatement of +Dimitri. Right now the Synod is split three-three. (Haven't you seen the TV show Survivor?)

(Editor's note: I suggest you re-read the Resolution of August 19th and the Implementation again. There is no voting on the local Synod, as it is composed of 1 Metropolitan-Archbishop and his auxiliaries - not his peers. Whether one agrees with it our not, the issue is decided, and having another auxiliary will not make any difference. If the Metropolitan wishes to re-instate Bishop Demetri, he will, and the local Synod has nothing to say about it now other than personal objection. I am not suggesting he will, only that as it now stands, he can. If someone has another understanding of the Resolution, or the Implementation, I am open to correction.)

#93 Delegate #1 on 2010-10-25 18:20

Look, the AOCA is now doomed! They've already chosen + Joseph over + Basil as their next leader - mass exodus. Too bad; all of this could have been avoided if the AOCA would have merged with the OCA in the 70's. What goes around, comes around!

(Editor's note: Get a grip. While things do seem to come around, all that means is that the OCA will be in turmoil again too sometime in the future! Joining with the OCA in the 70's was an option, a missed opportunity for both to avoid the problems of the past decade and present. Let's hope we can grow together in the future though. )

#94 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 18:35

Dear Editor,

Voting or not, our synod was able to stop the reinstatement of Dimitri before. Now if +Mark jumps ship there is less of a chance to curtail +Philip. In an appeal to Antioch/Constantinople every voice counts. I know this may sounds harsh, but what kind of Bishop or priest for that matter abandons their pastoral duty just because some megalomaniac wants them out!! HE WAS ENTHRONED FOR GOD'S SAKE!!!! Yes it is unpleasant and down right wrong what +Philip has done- but if they persecuted our Lord - should we expect anything else?

Lord please give Bishop Mark the strength to weather the storm!!

(Editor's note: Clearly, you missed the memo. He was not enthroned, according to the unanimous decision of the Synod of Antioch, in their current understanding of what occured. Video or no video. There is no storm to weather, because he is no longer a member of the crew, having been transferred to another ark. )

#95 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 18:50

Of course my mistake. Wrong movie and wrong despot. But, we can still say it was Yul Brynner in The King and I when he expands his imperious edicts in a lovely sonorous voice and flip of his imperial wrist, dismissively proclaiming, "et cetera et cetera et cetera"

#96 Kevin Kirwan on 2010-10-25 19:15

YES, a Triumphant ANAXIOS! (3X) to a true Despot Metropolitan.
Hear any voices (evere?) of thye former EOC ... NO! They were scared off permanently after the Joe Allen affair. Mighty Fr Gillquist paid off with a huge salary as their former "head Bishop"! He who never even had a parish teaching us of Missions! Now confirming from his hdgtrs as to Met. P.'s decision for Antiochian Unity. Ha! A disgrace and oh how the dollars silence (and the positions) of the "followers" of Englewood. Anaxios! Godspeed Bp Mark. He deserved better all agree.

#97 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 19:33

You know Mark, you don't have to be so apologetic to the Antiochians. I realize they gave you a hard time for your posts, but com'on, you're not an official arm of the OCA. Don't be bullied by bullies! It's over for + Philip. They have decided to destroy themselves - you don't have to play a balance card for them!

(Editor's note: ROTFL! Please send this post to Metropolitan Philip! I am sure he'll be surprised to hear I am an apologist for the Archdiocese.
No one is bullying anybody, except a few bishops doing it to each other. THe fact remains the Archdiocese is not destroying "themselves", rather, a series of poor decisions by a handful, here and abroad, are causing them private and public woe. They will endure, because to think otherwise is to ignore history. No religious body is ever "destroyed" in America - the Shakers, who were totally celibate, were "destroyed" by the Civil War, and yet, their communities survived until 1959 - and there are "New Shakers" even today. So, get a grip. The question is not whether this or any instituion will be "destroyed", but who will choose to participate, and at what level. The danger to the Archdiocese, as with the OCA earlier, is not "destruction", but loss of morale, internal exile, withdrawal, nominalism, and diminuation of faith as long held beliefs, true or false, are challenged by those held to be "leaders.")

#98 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 19:37

I think it's a little extreme to say that Bishop MARK did nothing to the "Saul(s)" of his diocese (there are more than one)...it's more that PHILIP prevented any movement on his part because in this case, the Sauls of the Midwest are in the "good old boys" club of the Antiochian Archdiocese.

Do you think nothing of the effect this will have on the Antiochian Archdiocese? PHILIP singling out his only convert bishop? It'll have more repercussions than PHILIP can foresee.

#99 Anonymous on 2010-10-25 19:56

What is importance is oneness of faith, not absolute oneness of practice. There has never been universal practice in the Church, never. We are one Church—Russia, Georgia, Antioch, Greece, all of us. Yet we do things differently, from the patriarchal level down to the parish level. It has always been this way.

Every bishop is equal, that is the teaching of the Church. That is what separates us from Rome. Metropolitan Philip is the Bishop of New York. "Metropolitan Archbishop" is an honorific title which gives him power to coordinate among the American dioceses. It does not make him their despot, and it certainly does not give him universal jurisdiction like the Bishop of Rome claims.

Metropolitan Philip is married to the Diocese of New York. He is not married to the diocese of North America, because no such diocese exists. Bishop Mark is married to the Diocese of Toledo. Bishop Antoun is married to the Diocese of Miami. Bishop Basil is married to the Diocese of Wichita. Etc. Etc. Etc.

The innovations coming from people who should know better is astounding.

#100 Michigander on 2010-10-25 19:59

Where was all this friction in the Diocese of the Midwest? I have friends at a number of Antiochian parishes, and never heard a single bad word about Bishop Mark. This was true for both cradle and "convert" parishes. My own parish is almost entirely Lebanese, and everyone loves Bishop Mark. So does the mission parish down the road, composed of former Lutherans.

The only friction was with the corrupt parishes in Detroit, which could not bear to have a convert bishop ruling over them and forcing them to do things like hold Vespers and Matins! (Oh the horror!) And financial accountability! We can't have that!

#101 Michigander on 2010-10-25 20:13

The irony: insisting on rubrics from the Typicon regarding the commemoration of Auxiliary Bishops with one hand while tossing out the holy canons of the Church with the other. This is not Orthodox ecclesiology.

#102 Fr. Justin Frederick on 2010-10-25 20:13

LOL. I am (at least at this point) blessed to have +BASIL as my bishop and, although I've heard many rumors about him as the next metropolitan, I think I can safely and accurately say that he'd sooner do the Texas Two-Step in a pile of fire ants.

Remarkable, really, that some of the responders here seem to have forgotten to what extent it was your jurisdiction on the "hot seat" not so long ago. Wasn't much fun, was it? So stop gloating over our pain.

(Editor's note: Exactly, Mary. "Schadenfreude" is a wonderful word, but a nasty business. On the other hand, such posters are just expressing a frustration so many have with our Church these days. The real issues are not about power, money, politics ( ecclesiastical or otherwise), hierarchy, clericalism, democracy or much else; it is about authenticity, transparency and accountability - or rather, the lack of same.)

#103 Mary Brigid on 2010-10-25 20:19

Here are three meanings of "auxiliary" from Wiktionary:

1. Helping; giving assistance or support.
2. Supplementary or subsidiary.
3. Held in reserve for exceptional circumstances.

How this adjective can be paired with the word "bishop" is beyond me. What exactly are these "bishops" going to be doing? It seems to me that as far as responsibilities they've been lowered to below deacons. Are they to be just glorified altar servers?

#104 Stu on 2010-10-25 20:31

Just what kind of "order" are you referring to? The Antiochian Archdiocese would have a lot more true order if the Archbishop of New York and New Jersey would quit meddling in the dioceses of his fellow bishops. The kind of order we need to see comes not from enforced administrative uniformity; it comes from the Holy Spirit, as evidenced, for example, in the unity among the several Patriarchates, all independent in their own right, yet one in doctrine.

Philip's actions, and those of his friends, have been responsbile for the lion's share of the discord. The members of this Archdiocese were all getting along tolerably well until he began stirring up the waters.

I'm afraid a large number of members are ultimately going to vote with their feet, turning Philip and his friends into big frogs in an ever-dwindling puddle.

#105 Edmund on 2010-10-25 20:35

My goodness! Can you imagine what the situation would be like today if the Antiochians and the OCA had merged!?! Let's see a history of +Theodosius, +Herman and +Philip at the same table with the 1970's, 80s and 90s Chanceries of both jurisdictions handling the money? Wow! Thank God that whatever motivation was the reason, it didn't happen!

#106 George Osborne on 2010-10-25 20:58

It is neither fair nor accurate to say Bishop Mark did nothing. His attempt at doing something about the corruption in Troy was stifled by Metropolitan Philip (Cf. the articles on this site from 11.20.09 and 12.07.09.).

#107 Gabriel Stewart on 2010-10-25 22:51

You're on the right track, but you stop short. Who do these so-called "Metropolitans" and "Patriarchs" think they are? Don't they realize we have an ECUMENICAL Patriarch? Why doesn't Patriarch Bartholomew do what Metropolitan Philip did- that way we will have "no more fragmentation, disciples of individual bishops who think they are captains of their own ships, and no more separation."

Why doesn't the EP "[clean] house, [do] what any protector of the faith would do in their right mind, as painful as it [would be] for him, but [do] it for the Love of the Archdiocese"?

Why not? Well, because this simply isn't Orthodox ecclesiology. In your eyes, actual Bishops of dioceses of regions create fragmentation. However, historically each CITY had its own bishop. You think this recent decision creates unity and separation; it seems to me it will create (and is creating) just the opposite.

#108 Gabriel Stewart on 2010-10-25 23:18

I don't think Bishop Basil will "express, either verbally or in writing, his unequivocal obedience" to the Resolution. I'd like to think Bishop Alexander wouldn't either. They may be the next Bishops to go. We lost our former Chancellors under similar circumstances so it wouldn't surprise me.

When Metropolitan Philip says, "the Archdiocese shall continue to be responsible for funding the approved budgets of each Auxiliary Bishop and chancery subject to budget approval," what he really means to say is that he'll put the squeeze on any Bishop whose diocese shuts off funds to the Archdiocese.

#109 Gail Sheppard on 2010-10-25 23:47

After the first round of this fiasco, I was left with a question that was seldom addressed and never answered: Which acts of the Church really mean something and which are merely ritual form? Now it seems that in the Church of Antioch that the consecration and enthronement of bishops are only ritual forms without real meaning. How far does this go? Is priestly ordination also merely an empty ritual? Are the divine services only a form? What about the rite of repentance? Without real meaning, all that is left is empty form and platitudes.

I had a long talk with my family tonight about our continued membership in our Antiochian parish. If there is no meaning in the acts of the church, why continue? If these edicts are imposed on the archdiocese to maintain order but serious questions remain about appearances of misdeeds, can we continue to be members.

We are going to try to get together for a serious talk with our parish priest. I don't know where this will lead.

#110 L Wayne on 2010-10-26 01:58

three cheers for metropolitan philip for finally restoring order into this archdiocese. for too long things have been running amuck, especially here in our beloved midwest region.
I find bishop mark to be a nice man; however, I dont think he knew the formula for success in this region. He tended to brush aside the arabs and never tried to endeer himself to them. He surrounded himself with those that misguided him leading him to take positions against those clergy and laity of arab decent. He couldv'e helped solve many issues (many for which I will not name on this site that I was personally involved with); however, would not listen. It appears he wanted to establish an "archdiocese within the archdiocese" and that does not work. Perhaps he can find what he is looking for in the OCA, and finally the midwest region can once again flourish under Sayidna Philip.

#111 Anonymous on 2010-10-26 03:47

it was only a matter of time before something like this happened. while there are those that will criticize the way in which metropolitan philip did this, it was time to do it. our archdiocese cannot function as separate entities the way in which it was happening. that is the beauty of the antiochian church, the consistency and shared celebratory manner in which litugical services are conducted, etc. we applaud the metropolitan's efforts to return things to the way they once were. thank you sayidna. although there are those that attempt to crucify your efforts and quick to condemn, God alone is judge. May He continue to inspire you to lead this flock in north america.

#112 John P on 2010-10-26 04:02

It's worth noting well that what has been posted here is a DRAFT document prepared by the chancellor.

What's sad is that posting it may well now spur Englewood to commit to it as is (to save face) rather than the substantially revised version that was to be released.

I wonder whether this website has the Church's good in mind or simply wishes to raise as much ire as possible.

(Editor's note: Nice attempt at spin. Assuming you have the original, you will see that the word "Draft" appears nowhere on any page - either on the the legal opinion, nor on the actual letter. No, this was a finished product. You can argue it was poorly drafted, you can argue it was not throught out, but label it ex post facto as a "draft" is simply an attempt to mitigate the damage it has done. Moreover, to suggest the Metropolitan cannot now change his mind should a better way come forward is rather insulting to him most of all. As for your final point, I am afraid you reveal that your value is not transparency, or accountability, or truth - but spin. It speaks to authenticity. Church communication is only for good news, what you define as "progress" - not the reality of church life. Thus your values are more akin to Pravda than the Gospel - that only the news that fits is worthy to be covered. You can do better, friend. You must do better if trust is to be restored.)

#113 A Reader on 2010-10-26 04:33

Consistent AOCA tradition is a bad joke; you have obviously not been to many (any?) other AOCA churches. The former EOC parishes are all totally different and the churches with priests from the old country are different. I was at one where a younger priest (seminarian from this country) corrected many of the errors in 'traditional' practice that had been in use for many years by his older predecessor. The services were supposed to be all English but that ended when we later got a priest from Syria who changed from a few passages were repeated in Arabic to many passages being in Arabic only.

The one consistent tradition in the AOCA is that the 'tribe' rules and trumps everything else. 'Thrilled in Toledo' and similar others posting here are thrilled because the 'tribe' has ruled and all others can go along or leave. I left many years ago and it is sad to see this trainwreck.

#114 Former Antiochian on 2010-10-26 05:08

George: It was discussed. + Philip would have become Met. The archdiocese hdqtrs would have been in Englewood and pretty much, the Antiochians would have added a strong sense of control. By now, the OCA would have been a dynamic, vibrant church with most of the Orthodox included - exceptions would prob. be the Greeks & Serbs.

(Editor's note: Friend, the OCA is a dynamic and vibrant Church - its just messy for those who love "order". But then, life often is "messy".)

#115 Anonymous on 2010-10-26 05:50

"that is the beauty of the antiochian church, the consistency and shared celebratory manner in which litugical services are conducted, etc."

Quoting myself from an above post:

So, this is very interesting to me, because so far as I can tell, if somebody refers to "Antiochian Tradition," it could refer to one of four things:

1) Genuine traditional practice of the Patriarchate of Antioch.
2) Custom of ethnic Arab-American AOCANA parishes.
3) EOC practice imported into AOCANA parishes.
4) Antiochian Village Camp practice.

#1 appears to be more or less reflected in the Liturgikon, but if you point out something in the Liturgikon (which we're told is the authoritative guide) as being at variance with resources like the Liturgical Guide or what the Kazan service books say, you're told, "Well, the Liturgikon's not wrong, but nobody ACTUALLY does that."

#2 appears to include a wide variety of things including Slavified rubrics that have nothing to do with #1.

#3 appears to include a wide variety of things that have nothing to do with nos. 1 or 2, like certain of the priest's "silent" prayers being adopted by the congregation, singing things congregationally that are to be read by a reader, and so on.

#4 is whatever the Camp liturgy book says, and appears to include characteristics of nos. 2 and 3.

So, I'm sorry, where's the consistency again?

And still, nobody has answered my question. What, specifically, did Bp. MARK do wrong that we in parishes who have had positive relations with him do not understand? I'm going to keep asking until somebody gives me an answer that is substantive.

#116 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-26 05:54

Uh Mark, The Shakers believed in CELIBACY! That's what destroyed them - they didn't have progeny!

(Editor's note: That was my point: no church in America can ever really die, look at the Shakers. They were celibate, had no progeny, and yet, even they are still around in some form. Lord have mercy.)

#117 Anonymous on 2010-10-26 05:54

That never happened as to the communion rumor. Good day.

#118 Happy on 2010-10-26 06:48

"God alone is judge"

Indeed He is - and Philip will one day very soon find himself prostrate before his Judge and Master giving an account for these actions he had undertaken.

#119 Heracleides on 2010-10-26 06:56

What upsets me is that before priests were free to jump jurisdictions back and forth. I know of many that have done it 3-4x. Now it seems bishops can jump too. Without passing judgment on +Mark or His Eminence, it is wrong and a real bad idea, to allow this practice to continue or spread to the episcopacy. Dance with the one that brung ya!

(Editor's note: This is hardly a first: let's see, Metropolita bishops joining ROCOR and ROCOR bishops joining Moscow, Russian bishops joining the EP, and Greek bishops joining Old Calendrists; do I need to go on? The good thing about this is that it is being done in good order, not with mutual anathemas being hurled around, as was so often the case in the aforementioned cases. That alone is a step forward....)

#120 no name on 2010-10-26 07:01

the above is right. this was a draft. this was given at the meeting to the bishops; however, there are changes that are going to be made that you mark dont know of it. trust me. they will appear on the antiochian website for all to see at that time. i know of this.

(Editor's note: I think everyone would welcome changes, but that does not make this a "draft". I think it makes the subsequent version a "reaction". But let's not quibble about words.
Let's see what the published version on Antiochian.org appears like, and how it differs, and what, if anything is changed, besides the requirements for a "positive attitude". I am guessing that part will be changed.

)

#121 Anonymous on 2010-10-26 07:06

I would like to underscore the word "corrupt" in the post above. What Philip has just done is truly extraordinary in 21st century America. Who else would even dare, much less succeed, at such an absolute grab of personal power?

What can explain it?

It can't be a sincere concern for liturgical consistency or administrative order. That's just laughable.

It can't be megalomania alone. How many megalomaniacs completely reverse course and spend their last years undoing everything they've accomplished, with no concern for how they'll be remembered?

It might be senility: Philip's just gone bonkers and can't see how much harm he's doing. But that doesn't explain the determined conspiracy in America and in Syria that has made it possible for Philip to succeed against all resistance.

..... Philip is acting like a mafia don at war with his enemies.

.... I hope I'm wrong, but I wouldn't bet on it.

#122 Caveat Lector on 2010-10-26 07:28

You know, some of you are talking about not gloating. I don't think people are gloating - they are upset and concerned about Orthodoxy in America. And comparing the OCA scandal to this? There is one BIG difference currently between the two. Herman is gone. The OCA scandal has been brought to light and that boil lanced - certainly not healed fully but diagnosed and treatment well under way. In the AOCNA the boil remains, the infection apparently triumphant.

#123 JF on 2010-10-26 07:45

"He tended to brush aside the arabs and never tried to endeer himself to them."

Are you serious? All the Arabs I know love the man. The only ones who didn't like him were the ones who were caught redhanded in their corruption. I wish he had done more to crack down on corruption in this diocese.

#124 Michigander on 2010-10-26 07:49

Richard: It's simple; he required an accounting of missing funds under the watchful eye of the priest in Detroit. These people ...didn't like being called upon for an accounting. They made trouble for + Mark with + Philip ..... + Mark was only trying to enforce transparency and if there was theft, authorities should have been contacted. + Mark's leaving is their crown & glory....

#125 Anonymous on 2010-10-26 07:50

Please re-read your comment and tell me if you are expecting the Church to conform to your desires. This has nothing to do with ethnicity, the Church came to us here via the immigrants. The only thing that should change is language, not rules and laws, etc.

#126 Happy on 2010-10-26 07:56

That there are 18 directives in this document, and that 18 is the sum of 666 seems appropriate.

#127 Marc Trolinger on 2010-10-26 08:14

Overheard at the Antiochian synod of bishops: "Thank you sir, may I have another!" (Translation from Arabic approximate)

#128 Bob KOch on 2010-10-26 08:17

It's even worse than that, Chris. Current RC practice gives the local bishops MORE freedom of action than the esteemed and honorable Metropolitan Philip grants his so-called auxiliary bishops.
Sickening.

#129 Scott Walker on 2010-10-26 08:20

To His Self-Appointed Beatitude Philip, Pope of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America, ANAXIOS! ANAXIOS! ANAXIOS!

For this Wolf in Sheep's clothing to call himself the Chief Shepard of "His" Archdiocese, recalls the words of the Prayer of Saint Ephraim, To wit. . . "O lord Take from me the Lust of Power!"

For all the back patting that +Philip engaged in following the receipt of the now-suppressed Self Rule (Autonomy?), we now see his true Legacy.

If He truly believed, (which he doesn't), that having diocesan bishops (and autonomy) was a step toward Autocephaly for the Archdiocese, and a step toward the creation of a truly united Orthodox Church In America, then why the power grab?

If he truly desired unity in this country under anyone other than himself, (which he doesn't), then why has he unilaterally seized episcopal authority in "His" Archdiocese?

If as he believes that having diocesan bishops will cause disunity within "His" Archdiocese, (which he does), then why did he bother creating regional diocese, and installing Diocesan Bishops in "His" Archdiocese, and then requesting and receiving Autonomy? (Excuse my mistake, Self -Rule).

Legacy, Legacy, Legacy!!! As soon as I read his statements from the Clergy assembly where he praised himself for founding all of the Archdiocesan Auxiliary Organizations, I knew instantly who he was, and what he was about.

And remember how many times in recent years he has reminded the faithful of the great legacy they received when the Archdiocese of New York and the Archdiocese of Toledo united in 1975.

While that was an important event that paved the way to the present, He has obviously forgotten that if His Eminence Metropolitan Michael of Toledo hadn't agreed to the union, then It WOULDN'T have happened.

He is nearly 80 years old, and DRUNK with POWER! I understand that he was the sole ruling Archbishop for most of his episcopal service.

That still doesn't give him the privilege to "Own" the Archdiocese as he believes he does.

The repeated use of the words Auxiliary Bishops in the directives only proves that he believes he MUST retain his "fatherly" stranglehold of authority over "His" Archdiocese, rather than sharing episcopal authority, (as is normal), with his brother bishops.

Although it probably won't happen, the Faithful of the Archdiocese need to stand up and express their opinions about his disgraceful actions.

First, each parish should convene an extraordinary assembly, (unreported to H.H. Pope Philip), where a single question should be asked.

Should we request the "Local" Synod to retire Metropolitan Philip?

Next, votes should be tallied, sealed, and submitted to the regional dean. After compiling the results, he should convene an extraordinary Deanery Assembly, at which the decision of each parish assembly is read, and then the same question should be repeated.

Once the results of that Deanery Assemblies vote have been counted, and sealed, they should be delivered in person the their respective Bishop.

After the Bishop, (not auxiliary Bishop) examines the results, he should convene an extraordinary Diocesan Assembly, (unreported to +Philip), at which the results of each Deanery's vote are read, and then the question is asked for the third and final time.

Once the Diocesan Assemblies vote has been compiled, then the Bishop, (Not Auxiliary Bishop), should contact his brother bishops, and request an extraordinary meeting of the Local Synod, (Minus+Philip), at which they make the final decision regarding +Philip's retirement.

This three tiered approach will guarantee that the vote is unanimous throughout the Archdiocese.

And to ensure transparency in this procedure, different delegates should be elected to attend the Deanery and Diocesan assemblies.

Once that decision is made, then the Holy Synod of the Archdiocese should visit the Papal Chancery, and present +Philip with their decision, and a time table for his departure from his residence should be provided.

Naturally, during the previous extraordinary Synod Meeting, a temporary administrator would be appointed, and the present directives would be permanently rescinded.

Then, the Patriarch and Holy Synod in Damascus would be apprised of the situation, and a time could be set for the election of their next Metropolitan.

Are these solutions radical? YES! Would they be considered by some to be completely unorthodox? YES!!

Do I personally believe that these actions are necessary to restore order within the Archdiocese? YES! YES!! YES!!!
.....

And is it likely to happen? Sadly, the answer is NO! NO!! NO!!! Unless the people unite to make it happen.

All we can truly do is pray that God will resolve the problem in a way that pleases him.

Mark Sudia

#130 Mark Sudia on 2010-10-26 09:02

This is absolutely incredible! Our Roman Catholic friend who posted is right, even the Pope doesn't have THIS much control over his Bishops.

All this talk about ORDER and conformity is a bit ironic coming from the Antiochian tradition, or should I say the Church that USED to have an Antiochian tradition that was stamped out systematically by the long dead Byzantine Empire. Yeah, they got to maintain some vestiges of their ancient tradition and Liturgy, but make no mistake the Byzantines called for ORDER and conformity and that's why the Antiochians use the same Liturgy as the Greeks, when at one time they used a more ancient Liturgical rite. Some people see this as a good thing because it gives us a warm fuzzy feeling that we are all "one".

ORDER? This is order? No! This is chaos in the guise of order. Power in the guise of "brotherly love". I don't even know what to say at this point in history. With all due respect to the views expressed by some that the Church will simply work all these problems out over time, I disagree. The Church is not like a magical organization. The Church didn't "automatically" overcome Arianism, or Iconoclasm, but people, Bishops, monks had to struggle against these heresies. Ecclesiological heresies are no different. We cannot do it without God, but God will not do it without our participation. Each individual must decide what is best for them in how to "fight" against a perceived wrong, but sitting idly by waiting for the Holy Spirit to fix it all is simply not Christian. If St. Athanasius had done that we'd all be Arians today. The Holy Spirit works THROUGH humanity, not as a despot from heaven barking out orders. Too bad our own Church leaders don't see that.

All this talk of ORDER reminds of what Jeremiah the prophet protested on the steps of the temple where the priests, scribes and theologians thought they could supplant God's Torah, let the widows and orphans starve, treat the stranger as second class citizens and keep their power in tact by any means necessary; and this was all justified because they had the proper "ORDER" and worship, and rituals and because they were in the Temple of the Lord, "This is the temple of the Lord, the temple of the lord, the temple of the Lord"...they claimed "we are safe!" because of course God would not abandon God's temple or people because He promised not to. Well, we all know how THAT turned out, don't we?

I see the same thing going on in the Church today, "we are the Church, we are the Church, we are the Church", we have bragging rights and are living off our history and reputation but don't seem to be following Christ very well at all.

Met. Phillip, Patriarch Bart. and others are attempting to, or apparently have taken absolute control and we just aren't noticing it like the proverbial frog slowing boiling to death. We will take this too because, this is "The Church of God" and where else shall we go? I don't know the answer to that, maybe the OCA is the best choice, but talking about will do nothing. We must take action. For some it might be prayer, for others it might be writing, for others it might be taking a long walk to the OCA, or who knows, even elsewhere? Short of Jesus coming back and turning over some more tables as He quotes Jeremiah the prophet, we have to do something. I do not know what that is, but such theocratic language from ANY Bishop is simply unacceptable in my opinion.

#131 Chuck Shingledecker on 2010-10-26 09:03

You American Caucasians are really funny...as if your "tribe" doesn't already rule HUGE swathes of the Church (and the World for that matter)...give me a break.

#132 Moses on 2010-10-26 09:48

And still, nobody has answered my question. What, specifically, did Bp. MARK do wrong that we in parishes who have had positive relations with him do not understand? I'm going to keep asking until somebody gives me an answer that is substantive.
#62.1 Richard Barrett

He vexed and disturbed the newly proclaimed North American Vicar of Christ. An offense we are told that ominously threatened the very fabric of unity, conformity and the arabic way. Besides he ticked off a few of the old cronies in D-town.

It is now best that you heed the words of Achmed the Dead Terrorist a Jeff Dunham ventrioquist dummy: "Silence...I Kill You!"

#133 Kevin Kirwan on 2010-10-26 09:58

DANG!
Next question: he was Seti, right?

(Editor's note: I know, I could sworn it was Ralph, no Sir Cedric. And yes, he was Seti.)

#134 Fr. Dennis Buck on 2010-10-26 10:21

Yes, well, Gabriel, not all Orthodox understand Orthodoxy. One can be born of a certain ethnicity and still be quite ignorant of the Tradition. Apparently, one can even be a metropolitan and be so ignorant. Sad.

#135 A Midwest Observer on 2010-10-26 10:30

Regardless of who is to blame, Phillip has earned the right to be the head of our archdiocese. If Bishop Mark doesn't want to follow the direction of Phillip, he should move on and it sounds like he will be welcomed and happier in the OCA.

This will benefit Terre Haute in the end since Mark's policies have not been too well received by many here. Most think he is a nice guy with beliefs that are different than some of ours. It is possible that Mark and Phillip are right but there can only be one chief and if Mark doesn't recognize that the chief is, and should be, Phillip, leaving is the correct response.

Now, let the parishes and their Priests unify like it once was.

#136 Michael Thomas Ellis on 2010-10-26 10:36

I struggle with the issues many raise here. But I also wonder what obedience and submission to God-given hierarchical authority looks like. I am sure someone can - and maybe will - post a thesis on the appropriate role of laity in standing against "corrupt" hierarchs in the history of the church (not presuming anyone is corrupt). But the fact is, I am not really in submission to authority when I agree with my hierarch. I am in true submission when I disagree with my hierarch, but am willing to work against myself and accept a decision(s) that I disagree with for the sake of my humility and self-abnegation. Obviously I do not mean when it involves heresy or apostasy. But what is really important here, in all of this? Is my ability to stand before my icons and pray being obstructed? Is my ability to feed the poor and show kindness to the stranger or the homeless being negated? Can I no longer worship at my parish? None of these are being affected. What IS being affected are issues that my self-will finds problematic and/or distasteful with regard to church governace. I fear I am still in many ways a "congregational Protestant" at heart. I am willing to go along with my hierarchy so long as they do what I think they should! When I disagree, I am up in arms and willing to consider walking away, publicly criticising, or otherwise rationalizing my protestation. Perhaps now is the time for me to say "God's will be done" and truly allow the All-Holy Spirit to act and work?

(Editor's note: Great questions, Kevin. But continuing your line of reasoning, is there no space between individual passivity versus protestantism? I mean, continuing your theme, what difference does a heretical bishop make to your giving alms or praying before your icons? When he forbids you from doing both, or when forbids your parish, (or pseudo-diocese) from doing the former unless he approves first? These are serious questions you raise, and finding authentic answers no easy task.)

#137 Kevin Allen on 2010-10-26 10:36

Mr Royhab speaks here for many of us.

In my own parish, the news of Bishop Mark's removal is met with---literal---tears.

About half of my parish has never had another bishop, so this news has been devastating.

#138 Patrick Henry Reardon on 2010-10-26 10:50

Kevin--what we really, truly need at this juncture is "Lover of Metropolitan Philip."

#139 Carl Kraeff on 2010-10-26 10:53

I find all this chatter about Bishop Mark coming to the OCA and de facto going to the Diocese of the South rather humorous. First of all, Bishop Mark has not even been released from the Pat. of Antioch. We know that Met. Philip is wiling to get rid of him but it has not taken place. So, first things first. Being invited to the OCA Synod Meeting as a guest of His Beatitude makes not an OCA bishop.

However if he is released, it would seem very premature to put a man in a diocese, even as an Auxiliary Bishop, who has gone through what he has gone through. Maybe it is worth considering that he might wish to go to a monastery for 6 months and decompress, spiritually refocus, before emerging again as a diocesan bishop candidate. This assumes, I admit, that he would need such time, but I would think it something to consider.

Right now, to be fair, Alaska and the Bulgarian dioceses have been without a bishop longer than the South. The assumption that Bishop Mark is “slated” for the South may be the preference of the Metropolitan or others on the Holy Synod, but at this point, no diocese in the OCA that is vacant knows who Bishop Mark is or how he might “fit” as a bishop in the OCA.

Let us see if he is actually released from Damascus. Then let us see what emotional condition he is in given the challenging times he has gone through. If he is released and accepted by the OCA Holy Synod, let us give him all the time he needs to adjust to his new surroundings. And while all of this may be happening, a prudent and sober examination of his gifts and talents and which diocese he may be best suited for can take place.

In the meantime, he sounds like a man under siege, almost a “man without a country” and one who we should pray for and his soon to be orphaned flock.

(Editor's note: I agree. Moreover, the diocese of the south should not accept any bishop as their diocesan bishop, or vicar, until and unless he is nominated to be such by the diocesan assembly in a free, open vote of clergy and duly elected laity. Such is the OCA tradition according to our Statute, which should be followed.)

#140 Anonymous on 2010-10-26 10:53

Hello from All Saints in Bloomington. To what policies and beliefs do you refer?

#141 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-26 11:10

These two scriptures come to mind:

Col. 1:18 (KJV)
And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

3 John 1:9 (KJV)
I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not.

#142 Terry Wilkinson on 2010-10-26 11:13

Can you elaborate on these "Sauls" as you call them? Do you have direct knowledge of priests being abusive and persecuting?
I would be interested in hearing why you are so angry.

(Editor's note: Be careful what you ask for...)

#143 concerned on 2010-10-26 11:26

Mark: I take your point, I still don't like it. Time for at least the bishops to rise above all this. Hah!

(Editor's note: If the bishops could rise above this, we wouldn't be where we are. That's harsh, I know, but then, to those who much has been given, much is expected....)

#144 no name on 2010-10-26 11:37

I totally agree that the Statute of the OCA should be followed and know that it will be. The South does not need an Auxiliary bishop now. It needs a ruling bishop and the route to a ruling bishop runs through a Diocesan Assembly nomination process.

#145 Anonymous on 2010-10-26 11:46

I think there is clearly space between "individual passivity" (as you call it) versus protestantism. Our human wills are always free as Orthodox and it is solely on this basis that we will be judged by God. But you equate - or derogate - obedience with (or to) "inidividual passivity" (implying failure to act when one should or must). I think our Tradition raises obedience (which is not "passivity" and requires an act of will) to God-given leaders to the level of spiritual virtue (except when they ask us to abandon clear scriptural commandments). So when one is directed by a hierarch -- as I believe is the case with recent decisions by Antioch -- to accept decisions that are not immoral or heretical, then the question is: whose job is it to make decisions on behalf of the administration of the church and how are we to react when these decisions appear to (or actually do) rub against our predilections as Americans for "democracy" and "self governance" and the like? Or are we really "congregational Protestants" in Orthodox clothing? Isn't this where the tire meets the road: when we disagree with our hierach and how we respond? Do we raelly want hierarchs who answer to God (as they will do, believe it or not); or do we REALLY want hierarchs who follow what laity wants in a democratic process? Is there a balance to be worked out in this? I think there is, and clearly we are trying (all of us) to sort this out.

(Editor's note: Fascinating that the presumption among almost all Orthodox is that "democracy" inevitably leads to evil. It certainly can - look at a sister Church that votes on dogma. But on the other hand the Bishops voted in Ecumenical Councils so that the will of the Spirit might be made more fully manifest. Would it really be a catastrophe for a Bishop to agree to do something his faithful, his fellow CHristians - "voted" to do? Or have we adopted an Ayn Rand view of episcopacy: the truth can only be manifest through my will! What happened to conciliarity? Working together in a hierarchical fashion, minus the oppression? What is wrong with establishing real conciliar structures - as opposed to pseudo-boards and fake commissions of the hand-picked? The charge of syncophancy then becomes so easy - and almost inevitable. We do not live in a state church situation, but a free church situation; neither the government, nor the church can compel anything. Even if the bishop "orders", execution relies on voluntary agreement. In this case, do the Nuremburg decisions apply to the Church as we claim they apply to the military? Are we free not to follow an illegal/immoral decision - or just a heretical one? Does asking this question make me a defacto Protestant - or more fully Orthodox by seeking to inculturate our ethos in this society, as did our Fathers and Mothers in the faith? In seeking balance, I will err on the side of freedom, since God created us with free will. ( and if anybody starts with St. Maximus, and gnomic will, I will scream.... BTW, a French team found his body/relics in an ancient monastery in Georgia today!) People must not "just submit", like a muslim; but choose their path, as God intends us to do, in humility and with care, knowing that we will be judged worthy, as in the parable, not for burying the talents given to us, but for using them! Feel free to disagree.)

#146 Kevin Allen on 2010-10-26 11:57

What policies? Financial transparency? Conducting the divine services properly?

I think we need to go back to Ecclesiology 101. Met. Philip is the Bishop of New York, not the Bishop of North America. "Metropolitan" is an honorific, administrative title, no more, no less. He certainly does not have personal jurisdiction in every diocese under him, any more than the Patriarch does.

St Mark of Ephesus and St Ignatius of Antioch are probably beating their heads against a wall somewhere.

#147 Michigander on 2010-10-26 12:05

What you call freedom, brother, is really bondage to the devil. So sad to see such delusion persist . . .

#148 Karen on 2010-10-26 12:19

Oh yes, now I UNDERSTAND PERFECTLY! Order only exists when the head honcho dictates it from the TOP!

I guess you don't give ....about the dream of your ever memorable Metropolitan Anthony Bashir, who one founder of S.C.O.B.A., and envisioned the day that all Orthodox Christians in America would be members of a single Orthodox Church In America.

I guess you also agree that you shouldn't have diocesan bishops, because each would oversee his own diocese, and the Metropolitan Archbishop's power over financial and other affairs wouldn't stretch beyond his own diocese.

I guess you agree that financial mismanagement by the Top Dog, is acceptable, compared to a Diocesan Bishop being entrusted with the guidance of his diocese.

I guess you believe that financial transparency between individual parishes and their Bishop, the Diocesan Administration and the Church Administration is unnecessary.

In short, I guess you believe that +Philip and his successors should be ALL POWERFUL.

Then be careful what you ask for fellow Orthodox Christian, for you've got it now, and you'll get it again.

Open your eyes, and recognize the mitreitis from which +Philip is suffering.

Remember the +Herman Syndrome that gripped the O.C.A.? How priests, monks, and laymen, and even "junior" Bishops were afraid to speak out, for fear of incurring +Herman's wrath?

Read the new directives again, and see if that isn't what will happen until +Philip is removed.

And then when it happens, (and it will), post your response, and try, Try, TRY to deny the results after they've happened.

In a recent post, I proposed a three tiered approach that would guarantee an Archdiocese-Wide vote to remove His Eminence Pope Philip the Terrible from office.

The final choice is up to the people, regardless of what +Philip 1st decrees.

And now, feel free to disregard this with the a healthy etcetrera. . . etcetera. . . etcetera. . .

#149 Mark Sudia on 2010-10-26 12:36

Having personally encountered +Mark, I found him to be a true and humble servant of Christ. God grant him many years! I have found my OCA parish to be a haven of spiritual sanity and normalcy. I trust he, too, may find the same under +Jonah.

I find the suggestion that he take time in a monastery to regroup and refuel before taking responsibility for a new diocese to be a good one. Any spiritually sensitive person placed in his position would be traumatized by what has transpired in the AOCNA.

Lord, have mercy on Met. Philip!....

#150 Karen on 2010-10-26 12:45

I am glad to know that we are no longer to pay for our bishop’s visits to our parishes as it is stated in #6 stating:

6. An Auxiliary Bishop does not administer his dioceses as an independent entity, but rather, he administers his dioceses as part and parcel of the Archdiocese as a whole. The Archdiocese shall continue to be responsible for funding the approved budgets of each Auxiliary Bishop and chancery and to accommodate the reasonable needs of each chancery, subject to budget approval.

Looking at the Archdiocese budget, Met. Philip makes $80,000 while the ‘diocesan’ bishops divide $424,845 between 6 bishops which when divided evenly comes to $70,807.50 each.

According to Bp. Thomas, all parishes are to give him a stipend of $500-1000 per visit (not including hotel, flight, meals, and driver if driven). He has for the year of 2010, 36 pastoral visits to parishes (quite a few speaking gigs too). If each paid the minimum, he would bring in another $18,000 per year.

If the Metropolitan wants everything to be centralized under him, and payments to diocese from his office, this will sure save our parishes A LOT of money. When our bishop comes, it costs our parish around $2000 total. That is a lot of money for giving to the poor and needy.

If there is a silver lining for our parishes to this 18 point decree, this is it (and this only)!

#151 Anonymous on 2010-10-26 12:55

“God-given hierarchical authority” presumes that the hierarch to whom one submits is in submission to his own hierarch! Not too long ago, +Philip defied the Patriarch and posted erroneous material on our website. You are subjugating yourself to a man who has shown that he is unwilling to subjugate himself.

Your ability to “feed the poor” will indeed be impacted, because henceforth, “all fund raising activities and/or solicitations must be conducted through the Archdiocese.”

I am less concerned with whether or not my ability to “stand before my icons and pray is obstructed“ than I am with standing before Christ and having to explain why I did nothing when His Church was under siege. “God’s will” is not being done, because what + Philip is doing flies in the face of Orthodox ecclesiology. To do nothing is to be complicit.

One’s humility and self-abnegation are delusions, if one perpetuates OR IN ANY WAY BENEFITS from that which is harmful to the Church.

#152 Reflections on 2010-10-26 13:12

The Shakers diminished for many reasons, but one of the most important was a legal change that had nothing to do with their beliefs. Many Shaker communities took in substantial numbers of orphans, many of whom (although not most) ended up joining the communities permanently once they reached adulthood. With a shift from a private to a state system of orphanages, no more orphans were sent to be raised by the Shakers, thus depriving them of both income and a source of converts.

#153 John Congdon on 2010-10-26 13:42

I think we've really underestimated the powers of PHILIP. All those one liners about Chuck Norris have actually been about the metropolitan; it is he who doesn't do pushups, he pushes the earth away. It is PHILIP who can divide by zero, who can slam a revolving door, who can make ANTOUN into a bishop. He who can make a diocese with a pen, and make it disappear. He can make a Syrian into an Antiochian. He can make Arabic read any way he wants. He can make a bishop into an auxilliary --- and make the definition of auxilliary in the process. Psalm 104 was written about HIM. He who makes seminarians cringe and keep them cringing once ordained --- by HIM.

#154 Bob Koch on 2010-10-26 13:43

Kevin,

"I am in true submission when I disagree with my hierarch, but am willing to work against myself and accept a decision(s) that I disagree with for the sake of my humility and self-abnegation."

You say that you have an "out" to this model of obedience in cases of apostasy and heresy. But I suggest that there would be disciplinary cases where you would "disobey." If the bishop gave a blessing to your priest to sexually molest your 8 year old (a drastic hypothetical, but for the sake of argument...) would you still act as you describe above for the sake of your humility and self-abnegation? I should hope not.

The nature of convert AOANA being what it is, I suspect that a whole host of people spiritualizing now about how we must humbly and obediently stick through all of this would be running all over each other on the way out the door if the issue were the ordination of a openly homosexual bishop or a woman priest, issues which would also not stop your prayers before an icon or your giving to the poor, and issues which are no more important in Orthodox canonical traditions than the abuses we have before us in the AOANA today.

It is interesting that this language of all dissent being that of "self-will" has been seen before by some in the AOANA, such as those exEOCers who back in the day were taught (some of them anyway) by their leadership to be obedient as if their leadership were God himself, to the point of them being told that they should obey their spiritual leadership even when those leaders called them to sin. Those who broke from the leadership were shunned, as Gillquist himself describes of Ray Nethery in Becoming Orthodox. There is a spirit of spiritual masochism at work in the AOANA which reminds me quite a bit of Ron Hansen's haunting novel Mariette in Ecstasy, which describes a nun who in visions is spiritually raped by Jesus. At a certain point, one has to stop drinking the kool-aid. God simply did not create human beings for such an end. An interesting study in my mind would analyze the relationship between this cult of spiritual masochism and its facilitation of systemic corruption and perversion in a small Orthodox body.

#155 ochlophobist (Link) on 2010-10-26 13:56

I have to ask what circumstances you are referring to. I have a feeling that your view is very one-sided here.
If it is the situation that I am personally aware of, +Mark did dawdle and did not make clear and concise decisions. Due to that dawdling the self-proclaimed and divisive "persecuted" reported it all to +Met. Philip because +Mark didn't take care of things in the manner they thought he should.
This is not an Orthodox problem, these are human problems and as long as the Church is comprised of humans we will continue to have issues such as these.

#156 Concerned on 2010-10-26 14:00

With apologies to another despot, President Porfirio Diaz of Mexico, "Pity the self ruled Antiochian Archdiocese of North America, so close to Philip, so far from God." Those who like the "order" of the current regime would have loved the way Mussolini kept the trains running on time.

#157 Diogenes on 2010-10-26 14:25

Having had the privilege to worship and fellowship with Bp. Mark since the fiasco in Damascus, my sense is that he is at peace within himself and is fully able to take on any responsibilities that Met. Jonah and the Holy Synod of the OCA may have in mind.

If he is to become a true auxiliary to Met. Jonah, then Met. Johah can assign him to become Locum tenens in any diocese without a bishop, or give him special instructions to serve the OCA in a way that will be of benefit to the Church.

#158 Marc Trolinger on 2010-10-26 14:55

Then why have our enthroned diocesan bishops have to change to auxiliaries?

#159 Antionymous on 2010-10-26 15:22

Is this Fr. Patrick? If.so please know you and your parish are in my prayers. I and others who see this as a possitive move do notenjoy the pains which have been given. I personally an sorry for that, but I'm just a layman and all I can offer is my prayers for all touched by this. But I still have my opinion. If this is Father, please use Fr. because that hurt to see just your name. Christs love

#160 Happy on 2010-10-26 15:34

Mr Editor,

One small correction to your statement. An Auxiliary bishop does not need the approval of a Diocesan Assembly. He only need the approval of a Diocesan Council to be accepted as an Auxiliary. Nonetheless, other candidates should be considered if the Auxiliary comes forward as a candidate to an Assembly.

Personally I believe one of the best candidates out there is Hieromonk Calinic (Berger). Sadly, Archbishop Nathaniel is blocking any attempt for this man to even be vetted.

#161 Anonymous on 2010-10-26 15:36

It is interesting to me to read about the required stipends and donations for Antiochian bishops when they vist a parish. When I was a Deacon, I served with Archbishop Dimitri of the Diocese of the South many times. I picked him up at the airport, hauled him around, took him to his nice but inexpensive motel, etc. If anything, it was humbling how little fuss was made over him. The only problem I or anyone else I know of ever had with him was a certain sticharion he used to bring along just to spite me when a Sub-deacon that had little-bitty buttons on thread loops. When you were nervous and trying to get those stupid buttons done....ugh! He would joke with me when I picked him up that he had brought along his favorite sticharion! Vadiko never demanded a banquet (in fact he hated them), never fundraised, never demanded a nice meal at fine restaurant, never asked for a driver in a big car...never. I can see him now trudging along an airport corridor lugging his staff and hatbox with his mitre. Or what about the late Partriarch Pavel of Blessed Memory who repaired his own shoes and took public transportation. Oh for humble monks in the episcopate!

#162 george osborne on 2010-10-26 15:51

Is our ecclesiology not really important? Or is it ICONIC, reflecting what we believe about God and humanity?

If its NOT important, than of course, lets get back to the important stuff that goes on in our parishes. But if it IS important.....what is our excuse for inaction?

#163 antionymous on 2010-10-26 15:54

Dear Ochlophobist,

You write hyperbolically of rape and sin, homosexual bishops and marriage, as if that is what the AOCANA is dealing with. Frankly such comparisons weaken any legitimate arguments you are trying to make about what is actually going on, in my opinion.

I submit that what we are dealing with is the unilateral termination of Synodal "self rule" in our archdiocese, which was hard-won and approved by the majority of our clergy and laity in North America in 2003. We are also dealing with the over-turning of archdiocese constitutional definitions (like "Diocesan Bishops"), by a Holy Synod that is apparently insensitve to and equally unconcerned about the emergence of an active laity (which they are not used to). Heavy handed, insensitive and even troublesome? Yes. Rape and sin and other hyperbole? Off the mark, by a long-shot.

There are issues in all this and things for clergy and laity to be concerned about, no doubt. But let's call "spades" spades and not over-state the case.

#164 Kevin Allen on 2010-10-26 16:06

Hey Bob Koch.....God Bless and keep Metropolitan Philip for many many many more years as leader of this archdiocese. I hope that this makes you cringe even more. Go bark at the moon or the ocean, it doesn't matter. We will support him unto all ages of ages Amen.

#165 Anonymous on 2010-10-26 16:23

"Regardless of who is to blame, Phillip has earned the right to be the head of our archdiocese. If Bishop Mark doesn't want to follow the direction of Phillip, he should move on and it sounds like he will be welcomed and happier in the OCA. "

The problem is that this not about whether or not MP has earned the right to anything. The a bishop is to govern in accordance to and in obedience to the canons of the Church. A good bishop would know this and be humbled by it. Like Marcia Brady --this all seems to be about MP, and his solipsistic vice grip on power.

Could this be the "Spirit of Antioch". Lord keep me far away,

#166 John Peter Presson on 2010-10-26 16:35

At least the new hierarchical manual should be short and sweet:

1. Call me before you think about relieving yourself

2. Give me all the money

3. Shut up

I wonder if they have to give Met. Philip drafts of all their homilies prior to delivering them?

Seems as if they have less authority than the average parish priest.

#167 Michael Bauman on 2010-10-26 16:55

Question to All!

In the OCA currently which Diocese has as opening for a Bishop?

(Editor's note: Alaska, South, Bulgarians.)

#168 Anonymous on 2010-10-26 17:08

It is now best that you heed the words of Achmed the Dead Terrorist a Jeff Dunham ventrioquist dummy: "Silence...I Kill You!"
#69 Kevin Kirwan on 2010-10-26 09:58 (Reply)

I want to thank Mark for editing and deleting certain inappropiate comments submitted by me. I had originally put in the above referenced quotation something about Achmed's character being based upon an unnamed Antiochian Metropolitan. That of course was merely artistic license gone awry and can not be verified by an independent source.

Any similarities to the fictional Achmed the Dead Terrorist and any living Metropolitan of the Antiochian Archdiocese is merely coincidental and should not be understood to be based on an actual person no matter how eerie the similarities.

Thank you for allowing me to recant.

#169 Kevin Kirwan on 2010-10-26 17:19

A Byzantine Fable

The great and aging bishop has longed for one final, glorious campaign against those who would stand in the way of his vision of pure unity, without discord or question. He knows that he does not have much time left and he will not enter into the promised land of his own vision. He sees the phalanx of the Greek invaders coming, cunningly disguised as a brotherly assembly to work toward unity, to achieve the same end as the wise one has always hoped, but not in the same way. He girds himself for battle and devises an intricate, finely tuned plan--undetectable by the enemy until it is too late.

He forges his weapon, the unity of his bishops completely obedient to his will and purpose, even though they do not know what he is doing. There are those (bishops, priests and faithful), he willingly dispatches to the rear for the moment, knowing they will reappear later and complete his plan. After a few meaningless, but flowery skirmishes, he has his battering ram ready. He charges at the Trojan Horse and engages in earnest. The antagonists enter into a titanic struggle from which both know neither will emerge whole or fully alive, but fight they must. Fire, noise and clamor abounds, the casualties begin to mount as more and more of those still living huddle together in the rear seeking succor, healing and comfort.

Eventually both warriors collapse-spent, as the mighty one knew they must, fused together in an ethno-centric dwarf star of sorts, wasted, impotent and dying. But wait, from the rear trumpets are heard as the now healthy reserves take the field alone and triumphant with a united and shinning army full of joy and hope. A new flag is planted and the final victory over the forces of the scattering horde is proclaimed. Many new struggles await, but the long awaited outcome has arrived. In one last heroic effort, the vision has been accomplished and the old one can finally allow himself to pass on to his reward, confident he has given his all.

#170 Michael Bauman on 2010-10-26 17:33

With the bishop as the ostensible spiritual father of a diocese or as the bridegroom of his diocese, will any of the priests or parishes of the midwest follow their beloved bishop?

Is our loyalty supposed to be:
• to the faithful local bishop?
• to the head of the local synod (+P)?
• to the Patriarch?
• to the organizational church (the "jurisdiction" regardless of the personalities running it or their character),
• to complacency ("too bad for +Mark, we're sad about it" and, aside from some private prayers and commiseration with friends, and maybe posting on the Internet, that's the sum total of our reaction)?

I've tried to put it in simple categories and regrettably that means it is over simplified. Surely there are other bullet points as options, too. We're dealing with real people and real lives, not theoreticals here and I know that. But, when dealing with the real situation, with real lives, including our hierarch(s), parish priest, and fellow parishioners, where are we supposed to place our loyalties? To Christ, obviously. But, how to act out that loyalty in the current mess? Our loyalty must also be to particular persons: love God is not enough, we need to love our neighbor, too. The question is which neighbor gets shown our love and is supported and validated in concrete action, regardless of our feelings.

#171 Irrelevant on 2010-10-26 17:36

Bingo. It's curious that so many here are reaching to take a swipe at MP and refer to him as "pope" (translated, "papa") whereas I don't see any comparison whatsoever. When did Benedict or JPII behave like this?

#172 Rob Stevenson on 2010-10-26 18:21

+Phillip had a golden opportunity to exercise his renewed authority with humility and grace. Knowing fully the power he possessed, he could have stooped to conquer and thereby demonstrated that admiration and love are earned by those who are among us “as one who serves” in the image of the True Shepherd.

Instead of girding himself with a towel and shocking us all into willing submission by his humility, he produced a document assuring us that we are not friends who freely obey out of love, but slaves who must cower in fear before the master.

#173 Brian Van Sickle on 2010-10-26 18:37

We are possibly not seeing the forest because of the trees. This series of directives from metropolitan PHILIP are the latest of his attempts to block the EA. The EA as conceived at Chambessy was the thing that triggered the move back to auxiliaries in Feb. 09. He knows that some of the Antiochian bishops are aboard with the EA, and does not back it himself. Thus we have the directive for the Bishops not to communicate with other Bishops on their own. This is why he is willing to sacrifice his reputation by reversing the diocesan bishops back to auxiliaries. He honestly believes that the end justifies the means. He does not want a take over by the Ecumenical Patriarch.

And that is where we as an Orthodox community stand and wonder. How is it that those of us who are for and against this transfer turned bad are on opposite sides of the fence on the question of the EA? Many who are rejoicing over this move are oddly united with a good number of those who are weeping, in a common belief that the EA is to be suspect, that the OCA must retain its autocephaly no matter what. On the other hand, the reverse is true as well. Supporters of the EA are surely found on both sides of this latest dispute regarding bishop MARK.

Just a couple weeks ago, bishop BASIL journeyed to Istanbul with other American bishops to converse with the ecumenical patriarch. Surely this anticipated move was a huge part of the discussion. Notice once again that this latest directive will forbid such independant conversations unless cleared by Englewood. That is quite possibly what this is all about, the personality clashes are just an opportune situation to bring about a greater good. And both sides of the EA issue at work here.

Finally, let us remember that the EA is not an "American" thing; it has been directed for the entire world. Many are wondering whether any help is coming in clarifying all of this "mess" which is multi-jurisdictionalism". The answer is, yes. Whether we like it or not, we have Patriarchs who have met and decided that there will be a Great and Holy Ecumenical Council in the near future. We Orthodox Americans (no matter which side we stand on these issues) are about to see Concliarity at work. Now this process has been, is, and will be messy at times; but in the end we trust that the Holy Spirit will guide His Church. He has not "left us as orphans", we are not alone. Who is the Head of the Church? Christ. Who guides us? The Holy Spirit. Who loves us? The Father.

(Editor's note: Having a meeting does make conciliarity. Not is it a guarantee the Spirit is present, or the outcome positive. Be careful what you ask for.)

#174 Abouna on 2010-10-26 18:41

Buildings are not the Church. People are the Church. Church buildings without people in them are just empty shells with mortgages that cannot be paid and ministries that go unperformed.

#175 Gregory on 2010-10-26 18:53

The bottom line is this: the AOCA has been hijacked by a self-absorbed tyrant with the complicity of the pathetic members of the AOCA's so-called Board of Trustees. The best thing that we can do is to reduce our contributions to the church, and elect people to our parish councils who will withhold future payments of archdiocese assessments.
Money created the monster, and denying the monster any more money is the best way to get things back on track. It is hard to believe that anyone who acts like this actually believes in what the Church teaches.

#176 Disallusioned life-long member of the AOCA on 2010-10-26 19:08

Is this of the same vein that makes a Moslem into a Christian to give him Communion without benefit of catechism, baptism or chrismation

#177 John Peter Presson on 2010-10-26 19:12

Is it Abp. Nathaniel, or does the problem lie elsewhere? They went through this a few years ago with Archimandrite Joseph (Morris), and my impression was that it had nothing to do with Abp. Nathaniel and everything to do with other matters.

(Editor's note: In this instance, as in an earlier one of which I speak from experience, the Archbishop withheld his blessing for Fr. Calinic's name to be put forward. As for Fr. Morris, the Archishop did allow him to proceed in an earlier election. Another was chosen, however, in the end.)

#178 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-26 19:21

Oh my gosh, Mark! God bless you for your patience! I can't believe how many have read the resolution and/or your footnotes and not grasped the full meaning. No bishops under Pope Phillip have any authority, real or otherwise. They can no longer object to any of his wishes. Synod? What ever is that under Pope Phillip's new resolution? His synod no longer has any real standing! If they even meet at all anymore it will be to simply hear Pope Phillip's most recent edicts. Even the Roman Pope will meet w/the College of Bishops to hear their opinions. Pope Phillip is longer interested in the Synod's opinions or their input on matters. He will be calling all the shots. Get it? All the shots! One-Man-Rule! He TRANSFERRED Bishop Mark. Bishop Mark no longer had any authority or power to lead his diocese. People get a clue. Read the resolution again and Mark's footnotes/editor's notes. Pope Phillip has taken over total, absolute control of you - clergy and faithful. Good luck with that! I'm glad to be in the OCA.

(Editor's note: Ah, friend, it wasn't so long ago that a certain Metropolitan in the OCA ran his diocese in the same fashion. Fortunately, the Church overcame him. So too we can hope the Church will rise up and right herself on this matter as well. And least that must be our prayer. )

#179 annon on 2010-10-26 19:26

Thats the sad thing, Saidna Demetri was a great bishop (auxiliary). He cannot and should not serve again in that capactiy, but he was a great model of humility....

#180 Antionymous on 2010-10-26 19:27

The "Greek enemy"?

Where is it written that an Anglo convert is morally obligated to see the Greeks as enemies? I must have missed that in catechism...

(Editor's note: It's in St. Homer's Epistle to the Illians: " Beware of Greeks bearing gifts". Like Episcopal Assemblies, free trips to Istanbul, etc., etc., etc., I guess.

)

#181 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-26 19:35

Everyone here is overreacting. I don't think this will change much in real life. Tjose that were serving the archdiocese from their hearts will continue to do. Tjose that were in it for their own selfishness will leave. In the end we have a cleaner archdiocese wihtout all the turmoil and trash that was ere before.

#182 Anonymous on 2010-10-26 19:42

God bless and keep Metropolitain Philip.......far away from me......

(Editor's note: You see, Russification has already set in. Isn't that the Russian Rabbi's prayer from Fiddler?)

#183 Antionymous on 2010-10-26 19:44

The tone of some of the postings in this discussion is quite disturbing.

I suppose it could be interpreted as refreshing (bracing?) honesty. I suppose a call for more civility and charity in the tone could be considered encouraging hypocrisy.

At the risk of sounding like a prudish elderly aunt, I don't believe that making the effort to speak and write politely, even when we're not having particularly soft and fuzzy feelings about a person or topic, is hypocrisy. Some restraint in our style of expression demonstrates that we know what appropriate Christian converse should sound like and are willing at least to make the effort to conform to a better version of ourselves. It shows we're at least trying rather than wallowing in negativity and sin.

#184 Rebecca Matovic on 2010-10-26 19:47

Though I stand by this decision, I will say in a good way I liked the way you write. It kept me reading, especially the tone of try, Try, TRY. That was classic.

#185 Happy on 2010-10-26 20:15

All in good fun, Mark, but the other side of that is that I've had some very positive experiences with the Greeks. When I hear what comes across as reflexive demonizing of Greeks, it is not the Greek church as I have experienced it, nor do I believe it reflects well on the person doing it.

Take that as you will. From my perspective, ethnocentrism can have as its object "American-ness" every bit as much as "Greek-ness" or "Arab-ness" or "Russian-ness".

(Editor's note: Whew, I am glad you saw that as tongue in cheek! Yes, I am sure we have all had good experiences with our Greek brothers; but at times many of us have not. But I really do, seriously, have to disagree with you that ethnicities are in any way ( american, greek or russian) the problem here. Insularity, dare I say "xenophobia" are. When the Greek church 2 miles away refuses to acknowledge our parish's existence for 25 years, even while asking members to work at their Festival - that's the problem. When the Russian parish refuses to celebrate with us because they are old calendar and we are new - that's the problem. When the ethnic American Church refuses to even sing "Mnogaya Leta" lest English be questioned ( and sadly, it is questioned in many parishes) that's the problem. No the blame for Orthodoxy's divisions and disputes is not ethnic - that is the symptom not the disease. The disease is hypocrisy and inauthenticity: it is refusing to administer our churches according to our own fundamental structures and beliefs, even as we trumpet to the world that such have
" established the universe". Until we resolve that, we deserve to be ignored by our neighbors, and thank God, we mostly are.)

#186 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-26 20:21

Well said,but please clarify for me,do you mean spread the gospel according to +Philip or the one by Matthew,Mark,Luke and John.For one preaches the Gospel of Life and the other ....You choose!!!!!!!! Abuna Habib

#187 Abuna Habib on 2010-10-26 21:01

(Editor's note: Having a meeting does make conciliarity. Not is it a guarantee the Spirit is present, or the outcome positive. Be careful what you ask for.)

Agreed. But if a such meeting is transpires, we must hope for the best. Yet, it is after such a meeting that the discernment of the
clergy, laity, monks and others will help to either accept or reject the directives. For now though we must trust that in the midst of all this "God is working for the good".

(Editor's note: Ah, there's the key word: If. If this meeting transpires, if the clergy and laity discern, if, if, if. There is not doubt that God is working for the God in the midst of all this - but not necessarily in this particular instance. )

#188 Abouna on 2010-10-26 21:23

Metropolitan Philip wears sunglasses to protect the sun from his eyes.
Metropolitan Philip can do a wheelie on a unicycle.
Death once had a near-Metropolitan Philip experience.

#189 Bob Koch on 2010-10-26 22:16

The main problem in the Romanian OCA Diocese is that after ABp. Nathaniel were to retire tomorrow the one elected in his place would be Bp. Irineu.

There are two pathways to avoid this outcome - either unite with the Romanians under Bucharest (who have two very competent bishops, at least by Romanian standards), or stay in the present framework and push for somebody else to be elected auxiliary bishop, and give people a (hopefully) obvious choice when the election comes.

This is why Abp. Nathaniel tried to push Archimandrite Joseph (Morris) for auxiliary bishop (only to be thwarted by priests in Bp. Irineu's club), and this is why he will be trying to push Hieromonk Calinic for auxiliary bishop in the future. So do not be saddened if you do not get him for the South and get somebody a bit less ideal - the Romanians are facing a much more dire alternative.

#190 Anonimus per Scorillo on 2010-10-27 00:42

Interesting you assumed the poster was Caucasian...

As for "American Caucasian's 'already rule HUGE swathes of the Church' -- what Church are you referring to??? The Orthodox Church worldwide? The Orthodox Church in the US? The Antiochian Archdiocese? Are you implying that MP is being manipulated by these "American Caucasians" since they rule HUGE swathes of the Church?

>>"and the World for that matter)"
Oh, yeah that explains our rousing success in our overseas diplomacy. Yessir, we have a regular little empire going on here -- the world is the oyster of the USofA. Give me a break.

#191 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 01:38

Kevin,

I'm not crazy about all of this commotion in the Antiochian Archdiocese now any more than 12 years ago. When we went to "self-rule", I didn't think anything much of it because it wasn't terribly real and I questioned how real "self-rule" would be when MP had to be replaced.

I understand your perspective and, having read alot of perhaps the same books you have concerning obedience and simply doing what one is supposed to do, I get the message. As I read through these posts, I wonder, "how much of this is my fight"? "Do I want to go to war for this?" I don't know Bp Mark, I'm in another dioce---- uh ----- region. Does "my bishop" being a "real" bishop matter much to me? I guess not -- that's the way it was when I got here. Whether MP is being heavy-handed or not doesn't really affect me much. Granted --- if my parish was the cathedral at which the auxiliary bishops presided it might make a difference but in my daily struggles, I have alot of other bigger headaches.

On the other hand, I get tired of this stuff. I get tired of travelling and making a point of not going to an Antiochian parish. I already avoid "diocese-wide" events. Parish Life Conferences? --- please -- I've made a point of avoiding them. I know I know that all periods of Church history have these things going on and that any so-called "golden age" is subject to the same problems. And that was emphasized by, for me, a much respected priest and teacher.

So I have a certain stasis in this -- be obedient in where I can be obedient and not worry about things above me. And do what all those books say.

However -- and here's the problem in our wonderful American marketplace -- I have an ace in my pocket. If it gets bad enough, I can leave and be Orthodox and go somewhere else. I haven't used it under some very trying circumstances, but that option is still there. I've seriously thought about leaving during the many years, but I never had a call or a strong reason.

In any case, I'm happy that you have come to some terms over the leadership within the archdiocese.

#192 Understandably Anonymous on 2010-10-27 02:12

A question arises in everything that has happened and is happening in the life of the Antiochian Archdiocese. Is this of Christ? Is what’s coming down, as it were, from the top and what is coming up from below matching the example of Christ? Is how we, and I, relate to each other in all of this full of the presence of Christ? If everyone involved in all of these things were to look in the mirror and see the face they present to the world and each other would it be the face of Christ?

The Scriptures, the creeds, the canons, our polity, the sum of our Tradition, none of it is an end to itself and all exist to assist us in becoming like Christ, to being joined with Him. Outside of that purpose they can easily become grotesque caricatures. We, too, can become deformed from the image of Christ to the extent we lose touch with, and live outside of, this truth.

In the end seeking to know where our Lord is in all of this and seeking to be what and who He would have us be will be the only right path through and out of what is happening. Choose it and these events, hard as they are, will be a tough but needed step forward. Ignore this and the days, months, and years ahead will be full and overwhelming with dark potentials.

Fr John Chagnon
St. Paul, MN

#193 Fr John Chagnon (Link) on 2010-10-27 05:30

Michael it seems you have the first rough copy of the manual. The final draft #3 actually reads. 3. Silence..I Kill You!

#194 Kevin Kirwan on 2010-10-27 06:33

I didn't say "ethnicity"; I said "ethnocentrism", which I think amounts to the same thing you say.

Yes, I saw your comment as tongue-in-cheek, but I've nonetheless become very tired of the trope of the Evil and Insular-Yet-Domineering Greeks, and I'm just not able to find it funny. I think it's become an excuse and every bit as much a symptom of the problem as the other symptoms it thinks it's describing. Acknowledged that your mileage may vary and all other standard disclaimers apply, but that's how I see it.

(Editor's note: Acknowledged and appreciated.)

#195 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-27 06:39

Is there (again) confusion over the OCA's Archbishop Dmitri of the South and the Antiochian Bishop Demitri (sp?)?

#196 Fr. Dennis Buck on 2010-10-27 07:05

Michael,

What is at stake here is a foundational understanding of what it means to be a bishop. This is set forth in Apostolic Canon 34:

"The bishops of every nation must acknowledge him who is first among them and account him as their head, and do nothing of consequence without his consent but neither let him (who is the first) do anything without the consent of all; for so there will be unanimity."

That is, the "first among bishops" in a region (historically titled Metropolitan) is first and foremost the bishop of a diocese among dioceses. In addition to that function, he also has certain rights his brother bishops in neighboring dioceses in his region do not have. Specifically, his brother bishops are to "do nothing of consequence without his consent". Historically, "of consequence" did not pertain to ordinations of clergy, transfers of clergy or financial management. Note also that the Metropolitan is not allowed to "do anything without the consent of all". That is, a local Synod is a check against the unfettered, unilateral power of the "first". Orthodox episcopal ecclesiology is a two-way street where there are checks and balances against centralized power. This is essential given the temptation to corruption and abuse in mere men holding the office of monarchical bishop. The balance in Apostolic Canon 34 seeks to protect the Church from the pride of power the Orthodox see as having coalesced around the Bishop of Rome.

The Bishop of Rome refused to acknowledge any check on his power over all other bishops, archbishops, metropolitans, patriarchs and local churches. In the papal heresy, bishops must "do nothing of consequence without [the Pope's] consent", but the corollary obedience - "but neither let him (who is the first) do anything without the consent of all; for so there will be unanimity" - is ignored.

The Pope of Rome, too, claims unity as a primary argument for his consolidation of power over the church. This "strong man" view of the bishop is not Orthodox or apostolic ecclesiology.

A reason such as the bishop's "policies have not been too well received by many" is strong enough to warrant undermining 2000 years of ecclesiological precedent. Do you? At best, these actions can be construed as economia run amok in the hands of a party boss or as sadly consistent with the corrupt world of dhimmi church politics.

#197 melxiopp on 2010-10-27 07:08

Not harsh at all.

It was/is their responsibility, and they have failed. Our bishops are a mere shadow of what a real bishop is. They have robbed all america of the immediate future.

#198 no name on 2010-10-27 07:31

It is sad that Metropolitan Phillip did not meet with Bishop Mark privately with a more loving tone and that he and Bishop Mark could not find a mediator (perhaps a SCOBA Bishop Metropolitan Phillip admired or even the Antiochian Patriarch) to resolve their issues in a more reconciliatory manner.

Had they done this the following scenario may have been worked out:

Metropolitan Philip: Sayidna Mark, I am sorry that my special diocese, I loved and worked in for so long has been a thorn in your side. It has been hurting since I had to request the early retirement of Sayidna Demetri and I should have sent someone who had more experience in the Church to serve there. I would like to relieve you of this burden and send you to a diocese that has been without a father for too long, the Eagle River and the Northwest Diocese. I think it needs an auxillary bishop, like yourself, who has a good scholastic understanding of Orthodoxy, pastoral and evangelical skills to work with this growing diocese. I will take over the responsibilities of Toledo and the Midwest until I can get everything smoothed out and working correctly, so when another auxillary is called, he will not face the troubles that you have seen.

Bishop Mark: Sayidna Philip, as your Auxillary and obedient brother, I understand and I will go to the Diocese of Eagle River and the Northwest. I ask your prayers that I will be able to help it to continue to grow and be an asset to the Archdiocese and our Lord's Church.

This would have enables Metropolitan Philip and Bishop Mark to openly converse about the issue. Metropolitan Philip acknowledging Bishop Mark's scholarship, pastoral care, and zeal for evangelism. It would allow Bishop Mark to acknowledge undertsanding about the Metropolitan's connectiosn to the diocese and submit himself to the authority over him in obedience. This would have been the best scenario with no recriminations from either party against the other and perhaps even have healed the breach between them as brothers.

This scenario acknowledges the fact that Metropolitan Philip does indeed have close personal ties to the Diocese of Toledo and the Midwest dating back to his early ministry in the United States. He personally worked with many of the adversaries of Bishop Mark and has personal commitments and loyalty to them. It acknowledges that for a longer period of time after Bishop Demetri's retirement, the Diocese should have been placed under his direct administration until it could be stabilized and healed from the issues and scandal that forced Bishop Demetri's retirement. Meetings with the Clergy and some behavioral specialists like Father Morelli could resolve some of the distrusts that apparrently date back to that time between the newer convert clergy and older Lebanese/ Syrian/Palestinian Clergy.

Sadly there was no class for Bishop Mark at seminary or the St Stephens Course that prepares a native born American, with no knowledge of middle eastern culture and customs, to be a bishop to people who have very specific cultural expectations. It almost seems that Bishop Mark had been set up to fail, which is sad, for it is obvious that to some members of the Diocese, he was a great pastor and evangelist.

Perhaps, if the Archdiocese would encourage monasticism, there would be a larger pool of Archimandrites to choose from for the office of Auxillary bishop. In an Antiochian Monastic setting, I am sure that certain middle eastern traditions and cultural practices done could be helpful in prpeparing a future candidates to the Antiochian episcopacy .

#199 Gunter on 2010-10-27 07:31

Samn! has made a number of points in comments on the Ochlophobist's site relative to the claim that true Antiochian practice was Constantinoplized in the past and thus no longer exists. Summarizing:

Liturgical practice in the Melkite Patriarchates (Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria) has been very close to Constantinopolitan practice since around the 11th century. But, there are additional folk-liturgical customs and some points of language in the liturgy which are distinct from Greek practice. These churches have local identities.

In modern Lebanon, think of the devotion to St. Joseph of Damascus and St. Jacob of Hamatoura, for example. Or, think of the theology of Met. Georges Khodr, which continues the Antiochian tradition of engaging Islam in an irenic and productive way. Monasteries also play a significant role in creating local identity, as well. The Youth Movement – with figures like the late Kosti Bandali, Met. Boulos Bandali, and Fr. Ephrem Morcos – has also influenced the local expression of Orthodoxy in Syria/Lebanon.

At the same time, it is true Orthodoxy in the Church of Antioch is very closely connected to Greek-speaking Orthodoxy, but it is also, for complicated reasons, influenced by Romanian and to a lesser degree Russian and Georgian Orthodoxy. However, these close connections do not mean there is not a unique Antiochian identity that is quite strong. In fact, Antiochian Orthodoxy as a distinct local expression of the faith is defined more by shared geography and history than anything else.

It is also important to remember that at this point in history most Orthodox Churches share basically the same liturgical practices and music. One would not say that because Romanians use Byzantine chant and a basically Constantinopolitan liturgy (with a few local flourishes and Slavicisms) that Romanian Orthodoxy is not its own distinct, real Orthodox culture.

It should also be noted that the rites, hymns and typikon of the Great Church of Constantinople are heavily composed of imported practices from Antioch and Palestine, e.g., the entire Octoechos was written by St. John of Damascus, Chrysostom imported Antiochian prayers, etc. So, it isn't as if the Church of Antioch was forcibly converted to an alien rite, e.g., Roman, Sarum.

One could as easily lay the claim of 'cultural imperialism' in the Church of Antioch at the feet of the Arabs. The linguistic situation in Greater Syria has been that into the 18th Century, liturgies in the Church of Antioch were still being served in Arabic, Greek, Georgian, Syriac and Aramaic, and the Gospel was being read in Persian in patriarchal liturgies.

In terms of large-scale Arabization, this took place first-off in the 8th century in the major monasteries of Palestine, especially Mar Sabas. Within a generation after St. John of Damascus Arabic had overtaken Greek. By the 10th and 11th centuries, full-scale translations of nearly the entire patristic heritage were made in Byzantine-ruled Antioch, especially by Abdallah ibn al-Fadl.

However, also in Antioch, patristic works were being translated into Georgian by St. Eprem Mtsire, and probably into Armenian by the not insignificant Chalcedonian Armenian community there. We also have Greeks like Nikon of the Black Mountain, who come from Constantinople and was abbot of an important monastery outside Antioch. His Greek writings were translated immediately into Arabic (and later into Slavonic).

Of course, in 1724 the Melkite schism occurred and many young, Orthodox, Latin-educated monks became Catholic. This schism had lasting consequences, including the Constantinopolization of the Synaxarion and 176 years of ethnically Greek patriarchs - however, these Greek patriarchs often spoke both Greek and Arabic and were ‘cousined’-in with the local Arabs. Very tellingly, when the Byzantines re-took Antioch, they didn't Hellenize the locals. Instead, they embarked on a massive translation program of Orthodox texts into Arabic.

Even the Greek Patriarchs of 1724-1900 in Antioch never fully hellenized the liturgy, and these ethnically Greek hierarchs continuously allowed Arab bishops as well as Arabic-language education. A huge number of Arabic manuscripts from Orthodox sources date from this period, several of them copied by St. Joseph of Damascus (d. 1860) who was very much an Arab, not a Greek, in his churchly intellectual endeavors. The patriarchs 1900 time have been overwhelmingly Arabs or Semitic Syrians, and the bishops and lower clergy were almost all Arabs – except among the many other smaller ethnic groups I mentioned.

Antiochian identity was historically tied to the land of Greater Syria itself which has always been extremely diverse rather than to any one language or ethnicity. Of course, the Antiochian heritage has been strongly impacted by the Arabic language for more than 1200 years and the experience of usually (but not always) existing under Islamic rule. For example, the Church of Antioch has using an Arabic-language liturgy since the 9th Century and the 9th Century Orthodox bishop of Harran, Theodore Abu Qurra, wrote extensively in Arabic (as well as in Greek and probably in Syriac ) – a century before the Baptism of Rus’!

#200 melxiopp on 2010-10-27 07:36

I am a communicant member of the Greek Archdiocese and a Greek parish now, and I have to concur that my experiences have also been positive. Here in our parish, with the knowledge and blessing of Metropolitan Alexios, we use mostly English. We have quite a few converts as well as Orthodox from other national churches, and no-one is made to feel inferior because they "aren't Greek."

I am well aware that there are other places in the GOA where this is not the case... but I would offer my parish and my experience as an example of the way the GOA as a whole is going.

At the same time, I would also point out that the EP in America is very multicultural... not just Greeks, but Carpatho-Russians... Ukrainians... Palestinians... each with their own customs, local differences in worship, native languages as well as English...

Chambesy is a major step on the road to a united American Church, united under the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

With love of Christ's Holy Orthodox Church,
Rd. DC

+--------------------------------------------------+
| Reader David-Constantine Wright |
| http://constans_wright.tripod.com |
+--------------------------------------------------+
| "God became Human so that human beings |
| could become gods." (St. Athanasius the |
| Great, On the Incarnation) |

(Editor's note: Bingo. That's the problem for many, which the Reader does not even see as a problem. Dear Reader - Not all of us want a "united" American church "under Constantinople" for the simple reason such a Church would be neither be united, nor American. It would definately be under Constatinople though, and if history is a judge - for a very, very, very long time. Such is not a real way forward for Orthodoxy in this country - no matter how "multicultural" you may feel Constantinople currently is. All being "united" in seperate tribal or ethnic jurisdictions under Istanbul is a mockery of the unity the Church envisions. "One bishop, one city" means nothing if there is a Greek bishop in New York, an Antiochian bishop in Brooklyn, and a Russian bishiop in Manhattan, etc., etc., with an American bishop in Scarsdale. That is just institutionalizing our division and scandal, not resolving it. Better we stay separate and honest about it - than attempt to fool God by fulfilling the letter of the law at the expense of the Spirit.)

#201 Rd. David-Constantine Wright (Link) on 2010-10-27 07:37

Amen Mark!

This exchange with Mr. Kirwan starkly illustrates the choice we all have. Submit to Authority, except in narrowly proscribed circumstances, or allow your God-given Free Will and Conscience to dictate your course of action. Is either way infallible? Of course not! But the notion that we must surrender our judgment, opinions and actions to some kind of omnipotent and omniscient authority is specious nonsense, as is the claim that any one segment of the Church has such authority.

If this be Protestant, let us make the most of it! (to borrow a phrase.)

KRT

#202 Kenneth R. Tobin on 2010-10-27 07:45

I know that, but what i'm saying is where would these people go to worship if there is no other "building" to go to. You know what I meant I'm sure.

#203 Happy on 2010-10-27 08:11

There's no question that the ochlophobist uses hyperbole. It's standard fare over on his blog. Despite this, though, you are rejecting the thrust of his argument. If we can set aside his rape scenario and such, I think his central point is this:

There are many sins and wrongs that can occur in the Church beyond dogmatic heresy that will not prevent you from praying before icons or giving money to the poor. With respect to the latter, you need not even be Christian or a believer in anything. Atheists give to the poor.

So, what he was challenging you on, I believe, was whether your own criteria would enable you to stand against anything beyond someone saying something like "there are two persons in Christ."

I think he was also pointing out that your own criteria do not even enable you to take a stance in the case of Christological heresy, as you could still pray and give to the poor while believing a dogmatic heresy.

It's a matter of criteria and theological importance. Is there no significant theological import to the vindictive acts of Metropolitan Philip or to the fact that he will not allow an external, independent audit? Do you have any criteria that would enable you to discern when to take a stand on anything? These are the areas in which he was intending to press you.

#204 A Midwest Observer on 2010-10-27 08:12

No one in this country goes to an Orthodox church on Sunday morning to feel more American, but very many people in this country do go to Orthodox churches on Sunday morning to feel more Greek or more Russian or more Serbian or more Arab. There is a difference.

#205 Caveat Lector on 2010-10-27 08:20

Dear Antionymous,

I am not sure whether you were writing in reply to my posts, but in any rate I think you raise the $60,000 question. Should this matter and how much? Is it my job as layperson to make sure that our ecclesiology -- as I think I may understand it -- is being properly administered? Some posters on this site seem to think this is a make-or-break-issue, a standing-before-Christ-and-answering-for-one's-actions type of situation. That's okay if one feels that way. Personally I don't want to lose my peace over all this, or lose my desire to pray, or forget that I believe God is ultimately in charge. People do not live forever and things change. We have many things that need to be worked out in North America for a proper, canonical ecclesiology and it may just take more time. I am impatient by nature, so waiting does not suit me, but what are the alternatives? For me this is not the hill I want to die on, unsettling as some of the issues are.

#206 Kevin Allen on 2010-10-27 09:03

Kevin,

Where do we draw the line, considering the character of MP's leadership, to call dissent and refusing complicity with his actions "rebellion?" I am uncomfortable limiting principled refusal to cooperate with gross abuse of authority to out and out heresy and or demands to directly participate in "immoral" behavior. I submit we are not just talking about "heavy handedness" and "insensitivity" here, as others have pointed out. If what the evidence out there points to is reality, a Bishop's life has been threatened, the financial solvency and physical well-being of priests acting on spiritually virtuous principles have been threatened, and systematic financial fraud has been committed and protected under MP. A convicted felon has sat on MP's Board of Trustees, for crying out loud! If this is not immoral, I don't know what to call it. In any case, I find your definition of "obedience" unbiblical and spiritually dangerous. I'm not arguing here for a spiritual "democracy," but I find the Editor's comments to you above and also those of Reflections quite on target. Ochlophobist may overstate his case, but I think his analogies are close enough to the spiritual reality of what is transpiring in the AOC under MP's leadership that they ought to give us pause. I think a study from a sociological and biblical perspective of the nature of the abuse of authority and its remedy would be instructive for many Christians. May God deliver us from false understandings of true, biblical obedience! There is no true obedience without true freedom.

#207 Karen on 2010-10-27 09:06

Such a non-Christian statement is an insult. Bishop Irineu is a good man and good bishop. Unfortunately the Romanian Episcopate has several people who do not like him because he is "one of those people" and never pass up a chance to insult his character. (Sadly, bigotry is still alive and well among at least a few people these days.)

The situation with Fr. Morris was that Archbishop Nathaniel had him up for election as the only candidate but would not allow him to speak and address the voting assembly, even when delegates asked if he could say a few words so they could at least hear something from a man many of them had never had any contact with prior to that time. That's why his election did not pass. (Does that mentality of "do it because I tell you to do it" sound familiar?) I would bet that if Fr. Morris was brought back and the election held again, the correct way, he would be elected. But, of course, those prone to gossip for their own ends try to attribute it to Bishop Irineu (who I have personally witnessed telling people that Fr. Morris is a good man and worthy to be bishop).

I have my own opinions about other individuals mentioned by the previous poster, but this discussion has no place on a page about the Antiochian Archdiocese. I pray to stay above such cheap-shots.

As for the Diocese of the South, if they would like to elect a priest to be bishop, that priest should be allowed (assuming he meets the canonical requirements). Otherwise, again the bishops are just dictating to the clergy and laity.

#208 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 09:09

Lol - You've got your bishops mixed up friend. The Demetri you refer to was anything but humble and the Midwest is well rid of him.

#209 Heracleides on 2010-10-27 09:48

Umm.. let's see...

Perhaps to the cemetery as did the faithful in ancient Antioch?

T'would certainly be a return to authentic Antiochian tradition rather than the bootlicking that passes for such today in Damascus.

#210 Heracleides on 2010-10-27 09:58

I agree. I finally saw the light about DOWAMA's sister diocese. It looks like BASIL was using church dollars for his own escalation to trump Metropolitan PHILIP and the future Metropolitan JOSEPH with this entire EA business. Wish SCOBA did more to project us to unity rather than just agree on stances, that is why they probably fell...wasn't being proactive. But again, i am shocked if this is the real reason DOWAMA has a sister diocese...sending money to make a comfy seat for him. I guess that is no different than those that say PHILIP sends money right?

#211 Happy on 2010-10-27 10:05

Regarding the comments made about the GOA: I attend a GOA parish here in Nashville who has an interesting history of moving from the Christ the Saviour Brotherhood, to the Bulgarian Patriarchate and now to the GOA under Metropolitan Nicholas of Detroit. I have never seen such a rush to become Greek. Father got an essentially all-expense paid trip to go to Istanbul for the Synod meeting with the Metropolitan and now the clerios is rushing to learn Greek chant, Greek language lessons are offered, and a space is being reovated for, among other reasons, to hold and learn "folk dances." This reminds me of the old days in the Synod where a new convert would often take to dressing like a Ukranian peasent! I don't discourage the arguement that we have an awful lot to learn and absorb from our overseas spiritual forebearers but apeing their ethnic cultures, language, customs, etc., seems like a barnacle on the Ark of Salvation. The basic problem as I see the ethocentricism promoted by virtually every jurisdiction is that it somehow falsely links the experience of the culture with the experience of the Faith. Sure, Russian, Greek, Bulgarian, etc. cultures were influenced and partially created by Orthodoxy but this is not Russian or Greece. It is America and this nation should revel in the God-given opportunity to chrismate this culture not long for the old country. Unless we buy into the myth that Greek, Arabic or Slavonic is somehow a special, holy language, any church in this country should use English. The arguement is put forth that the recent immigrants want to hear the Liturgy in their native language. Ok, well, fine; but show me a workplace that caters to the old language. The idea of immigration is to effect an assimilation into the new culture and thereby enrich it, not to encapsulate the old into religious ghettos that meet on Sunday mornings. I am not Greek. I am not Russian. I am not anything but a mutt American and I want to worship in my language in my own cultural milleau. Sometimes I think bishops are the least of our problems!

#212 george Osborne on 2010-10-27 10:06

Happy--you may be happy to know that there are missions (even Antiochian ones) that meet in houses, rental halls, etc... I know of people who travel up to 2 hours one way to attend services. I know of people who have a regular prayer life right in their homes and who travel to the nearest Orthodox Church on feast days, even though said Church is four hours away. Regards, Carl

PS: I admire your tenacity, especially since you have succeeded in sounding sincere. Wrong, but sincere.

#213 Carl Kraeff on 2010-10-27 10:15

Dear Midwest,

You wrote:

"I think he (ohlophobist) was also pointing out that your own criteria do not even enable you to take a stance in the case of Christological heresy, as you could still pray and give to the poor while believing a dogmatic heresy."

Granted.

"Do you have any criteria that would enable you to discern when to take a stand on anything?"

My post was obviously not an exhaustive list of my criteria for discernment on when and over what to take a stand. (FYI: I was physically thrown out of the hall at the July Antiochian Archdiocese Convention for handing out petitions requesting (demanding) an audit.) There are things I feel strongly about - one of which, by the way, is signing my name on this post (although I recognize there are clergy who post here for whom signing their names might be troublesome. Frankly I can't imagine why laity would not sign their names).

The point I was making is that for me the situation within AOCANA has not risen to the level of mutiny or rebellion or schism. It may be for others.

"Is there no significant theological import to the vindictive acts of Metropolitan Philip or to the fact that he will not allow an external, independent audit?"

I know many people - posters here especially - believe the acts of Met Philip are motivated solely by the desire to employ power, or vindictiveness. I suspect there may be other/additional reasons for the recent "tightening of the reins", including concerns about the direction the EA may be going (IE Constantinople). So I am not sure whether I ascribe to the "theological import" theory. I have read "The History of the Byzantine Empire" and our history is replete with all manner of power struggles and acts that would be considered intemperate and vindictive by hierarchs. Yet the church has managed to remain steadfast and consistent in its theology and praxis throughout, despite the machinations of men. I trust this will be the case with the present "crisis".

As for an "independent audit" it would be a good idea; however an internal audit - if done properly - would be better than no audit. Maybe we just have to take this is stages.

(Editor's Note: If this is not the hill you want to die on, fair enough. If you think an internal audit done by the people under question, rather than an external audit is sufficient, fair enough. But if you think "the Byzantine church of has remained steadfast in its theology and praxis", you might want to re-read that history again. Three words: Arianism, Nestorianism, Monotheletism - and those off the top of my head in just the first three centuries. Oh, here's more - Judizing, Simony; but why bore you? You get the idea. Personally, I am not looking for a hill to die on. I am looking for a place that gives life without sucking it out of one on a regular basis...)

#214 Kevin Allen on 2010-10-27 10:15

ROTFLOL! Oh, Kevin, how could you?! ... I have to confess to having had similar thoughts. (Now it's out that I have, "Ack!," watched Achmed!)

Thank you also to the Editor for making me appear more virtuous than I am by judiciously editing one of my comments above! . . . Glad to know there's a good gatekeeper here.

#215 Karen on 2010-10-27 10:28

On our Legacy and the Reset Button: the Confessions of a Muddled Mission Priest

Glory to God!

I am a muddled mission priest. I am the least of the priests, a worker priest, in the least of the mission parishes in the Diocese of Charleston, Oakland and the Mid-Atlantic in the AOC. The last place in the line of priests was made for me, and in truth, I am overjoyed to take it. I have only a handful of families (maybe 25 or 30), in a county in which there is no other Orthodox presence in a relatively small state. The life of my congregation, however, is dynamic and intense; there is constant movement. People come and go. Catechumens are usually in the process of being taught the faith. And in the midst of it all, I am 'that' priest of 'that' parish in which God has sent a man with the gift of prophecy and healing. I am the priest of 'that' parish about which my brothers either shake their heads, whisper behind closed doors or erupt in anger with wagging tongues and fingers. He, the man with these gifts in my parish, a repentant sinner, prefers silence to talk, and he spends most of his time in the midst of great physical illness and pain directing my spiritual life, which he says is very difficult. This is unquestionably true. I am impossible. But in the time of my priesthood in the small mission parish that I serve, I have cast out demons in the name of Christ, and I have witnessed many healings and miracles of divine intervention. Sometimes I have thought that these events are unique, wondering how and why God would do such astonishing things in our little out-of-the-way place. But I know they are not unique at all. You all do the same things in your own parishes, I daresay without ever realizing the greatness of them. Yet, I have documented so many events of clairvoyance and healing and prophetic utterance at St. James, however, that I wonder how many more pages my encrypted journal can hold. I add pages to it most every week. The intensity of the spiritual life at St. James is both without question, and at least in one sense, it is entirely understandable: Where else would God do such mighty acts other than in the least of the mission parishes served by the least of the priests? This is the way He is.

I am 60 years old; a convert from the Lutheran ministry in which I served for over a decade. I was Chrismated and then made a subdeacon in the OCA, where I served for about another decade or so; then I was made a deacon in the AOC for six years and now a priest for five more. I celebrated the fifth anniversary of my ordination to the Holy Priesthood on the Feast of St. James last week, the patronal feast of my parish. The celebration of the Divine Liturgy of the Holy Apostle James is always an experience of great joy, and it has also always been a spiritually intense experience. This year the core congregation was present along with a few visitors from local parishes and about a dozen homeless people who live outside the doors of our church. A couple of them sleep literally on the mat on which the faithful wipe their feet. When I walk into the temple on Sunday morning, I must apologize to them for asking them to move so that I can open the doors; I then put on the hot water for their instant coffee, and I help them get up and get into the single bathroom that we have before even saying Kairon. This past Sunday the same group came to church again, the Sunday of the demoniac. Two of them broke into a fist fight outside the church, and one of my altar servers, a young man in his late twenties, left the subdeacon and me in the Altar to complete Proskomedia as he went out to break up the fight. The police siren in our burglar alarm was jostled as one of the weak homeless people fell against it, and it screamed out the siren as the faithful came to church. After everything calmed down, and we were able to turn our minds and our hearts to prayer, I was able to celebrate the Divine Liturgy. The homeless people remained. As I preached on the release of the demoniac from the horrific power of legion, one of the homeless people screamed from the back of the temple: "Drive them out of me, Father; please." This I did after the final blessing as I have done before; the congregation gathered together as I prayed for release for the poor soul; the demons always leave; they are fearful of His Name. She begged for a cross to wear after kissing the icon of our father among the saints, John Maximovitch of San Francisco, so dear to all of us. This is who we are at St. James Mission.

I have nothing to teach any of you who will read this. I have the same education as the rest of you, and like you, I accept the faith of the Holy Orthodox Church without reservation or exception. Like you, I love the Lord with all my heart. But I am very, very muddled and upset. The reason I am muddled and upset has to do with my catechumens and with the inconsistency between what they are being taught as catechumens and everything we are now hearing and reading on the 'OCAnews.org' site. Perhaps my words will be added to the other submissions on that site; perhaps not. I will submit them either way, for even the least of the priests in the least of the missions is a part of the Body.

Let me explain. The substance of what I teach my catechumens is summarized in the Creed and in chapters 5 through 7 of the Gospel according to St. Matthew. I tell them, as I tell all my people repeatedly, ad infinitum, that we follow the example and the teachings of our Lord, because He is our Lord, period. We do not ask if those teachings work in any worldly sense, or if they will make things better for us or for the world in any practically. We follow them, because He is the Lord, and we are bound to Him. We follow them without question, because He is our Shepherd and we are His sheep. As our patron, St. James taught, we must not be double-minded. We ask and we pray and we praise and we serve in simplicity of faith; single-mindedly. We have no assurance that it will be easy, or that we will even exist as a mission beyond the next collection. We are not permitted to have one foot in the world and the other in the Kingdom. We are to be single-minded in our faith, totally of the Kingdom, not double-minded. We are to follow the Lord, because He is the Lord. And we are to follow Him in all things, without looking to the left or to the right; we follow the narrow way, the way of love and sacrifice and absolute obedience to Him and absolute trust in Him. We never look at outcomes, ever. Never, never, never, do we look at outcomes. The only outcome that matters is the Victory of Jesus Christ, nothing else. We do the Will of the Master, Jesus Christ, and we pray that our own will is crucified. Crucified. We do so, because we are His, period. We do so for no other reason. Outcomes in our lives in the world as priests and as bishops and as disciples at any level are in His hands. This I tell my people repeatedly.

So you see, what I explain to my people and to my catechumens about double-mindedness is now being challenged by the actions we are reading about. What can I say? The inconsistency is so clear. Only Bishop MARK (whom I do not know) may be held before my people at the present moment as one who has shown single-minded faith in Christ through this present crisis. He has been vilified, threatened by laity and then threatened within the hierarchy with exile, forced to consider having to apply to another national Orthodox communion. What great glory for him! This, you see, my catechumens understand, because they have read the Beatitudes: "Blessed are you when men revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for you reward is great in heaven, for so men persecuted the prophets who were before you." But why he has been so threatened by those in the Body I cannot explain without hanging my head in shame. How terrible, and what a missed opportunity for the Archdiocese. How the legacy of the Archdiocese and its present leaders would be given the flavor of salt if only they would stand up and defend him, or any who have been or will be so vilified. It is still possible, you know, and it really is not something that should be foreign to our understanding. What is the loss of income or approval on the part of those who vilify, if it means the hearing of those most desired of all words from the Gospels, "Well done, good and faithful servant; enter into the joy of the Lord?"

On the backside of my iconostasis at St. James, a few weeks ago, the man with the prophetic gifts in my parish, the man who directs my spiritual life, drew a small picture of a button. Beneath it he wrote, "Press here to reset." God has given all of us the reset button of repentance. Bishop MICHAEL at our annual priest’s retreat spoke of this to us at the Village about a month ago; it burned a hole in my heart. He said everything very plainly: God’s mercy to us is shown above all by the Grace of repentance, he said. God owes us nothing; He deigns in the beauty of His sovereign majesty to show us, who do not deserve it, mercy. Push here; reset; repent. How wondrous is our God!

This I pray with all my heart will be the legacy of the AOC in which I, the least of the priests in the least of the missions, serve with gratitude. We can still reset. The survey that came out a few weeks ago should make us very glad indeed. How few we are! With so few of us in church on a Sunday morning! How glorious to be part of the Little Flock that holds the ancient ways and the Holy Tradition of the Fathers and walks the narrow way. Why must we try and make it appear successful or better from a worldly perspective? Why may we not rejoice in the words of our Lord, "Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom"? Why?

So if and when I will be able to tell everything to my catechumens about the present crisis will depend on whether or not we press that reset button. Push here; repent.

My only question at this point from the least of the priests is: Where are you, Senior Priests and Bishops, our leaders – Where are you? And why do you not call for the legacy of reset, repentance, now in our beloved Archdiocese?

Please; let’s push that button.

(Editor's note: if anyone ever wondered why we have comments, it is because amidst all the fun, and clutter, and ocassional name-calling, and information, and opinions, all valid ( 'cept the name-calling) one gets a cry from the heart, that is so authentic it makes one stop and look again. This is one of those. My thanks, Father.

#216 Fr. Elias Yelovich (Link) on 2010-10-27 10:36

Extremely well said, Mark.

One of the great frustrations of mine of late is the lack of any public statement of the ecclesiological presuppositions of the EA process. Nor is their much of a discussion of them.

Fr Yousuf Rassam
Tarzana, CA

(Editor's note: Nor will there be. Just like there will be no discussion of the presuppositions of the "Great Council" because St. Justing Popovich already did - and Istanbul didn't like his answer. In his "Summoning of the Great and Holy Council" Popovich asked several important questions, none of which have ever been answered. Until they are, the Council is perhaps, as he stated, premature. )

#217 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 10:37

Bishop Mark never asked for any amount of compensation for his visits to St. Elias when I was there and never gave instructions for special hotel rooms or meals. Yet we gave good things to him, as best we could, because we knew he lived his life on the road and paid for many things as he went from place to place.

Fr John Chagnon
St. Paul, MN

#218 Fr John Chagnon (Link) on 2010-10-27 10:39

Be assured, if they are faithful, they will find a place - a school auditorium, someone's home (as in the early church) - One that is unencumbered by power hungry autocrats.

It is sad to see such gloating. We can only be assured that in the end, the Truth will win instead of the Evil One.

#219 justamom on 2010-10-27 10:48

Just thought I should clarify,

By "one of those people" I mean a Romanian-born immigrant.

#220 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 10:55

"look at a sister Church that votes on dogma." What? Who? Really?

(Editor's note: Sorry for the confusion. I meant the Episcopal Church. The term "sister Church" is used here a polite expression of Christian solidarity, not a dogmatic statement, theological judgement, approbation, etc. Please don't write me, people.)

#221 Matt Karnes of St. Nicholas Orthodox Church on 2010-10-27 11:34

To the Antiochians disillusioned by current events, I would say, "Despair not." In my experience major setbacks, however upsetting, are usually a much-needed catalyst for inducing change. Clearly, a serious problem exists; a serious answer is required. If this setback furthers the cause of engendering an American Othodox Church that can transcend ethnic Orthodoxy's internecine struggles, it is all to the good. A year from now, you may be thanking the Metropolitan.

#222 ahem on 2010-10-27 11:45

It's been almost a hundred messages since the last time I posted this, and still nobody has provided a substantive answer, so here we go again --

What did Bp. MARK do wrong that somebody like me doesn't understand? I'm asking because I really want to know what the answer to this is. It's an honest question, and I will do everything I can to respect an honest answer. Even if it's long, even if it's angry, even if it's accusatory. So long as it's substantive and specific, I would like to hear it. Seriously.

#223 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-27 11:49

The feelings and questions you have expressed touch me deeply and make me realize you have spoken for many of us who are so sad about this.

#224 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 11:51

Go to church on Sunday morning to feel ethnic? No one I know feels that way. Most Orthodox I know go to receive the Eucharist and have fellowship with other Orthodox. Ethnicity has NOTHING to do with it!

(Editor's note: LOL! You sound like the of-cited NY editor who famously said "No one I knew ever voted for Nixon..." And yet... Ethnicity is a major factor in many of our communities and in the spiritual life of many Orthodox Christians in America. Ignoring it doesn't help. For some it is a problem to be overcome, for others a virtue to be strengthened. Any ideas, people on how to bridge that gap?)

#225 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 12:02

Dear Kevin,

As a layman, you do not decide who is commemorated, who is bishop. What is there for you to obey or disobey?

But you do not have to praise the situation or excuse it. You do not have to pretend joy. You do not have to encourage it in any way whatsoever. You do not have to try to salvage the narrative of an "Antiochian Vision". You do not have to tow the party line. You do not have to pretend to not know what you do in fact know.

Fr Yousuf Rassam
Tarzana CA

#226 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 12:39

Ochlophobist's repeated hyperboles do tend to make me uncomfortable, after all, they are designed to.

They raise an important question: is sexual immorality and abuse the only kind of immorality and abuse about which we entitle ourselves to moral clarity? The only kind that "really matters"?

Fr Yousuf Rassam
Tarzana, CA

#227 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 12:47

This is all very good, but is there in fact a single item in the "Antiochian Experience" that can be brought "here" that is of any particular use?

You can say that all practices are constantinoplized, very true, but some more so than others. The fact is that we in America have an opportunity to select things from the greater Constantinoplitan Garden, so to speak, that work well *here*. Think of the areas of Music, architecture, liturgics (a lot of people find the russian typikon far more appropriate here), iconography, GOVERNANCE, spiritual literature, etc. Sure Antioch has a shared history and legacy. But to say that Antioch came up with the Octoechos is moot for purposes of the question at hand, because all the local churches can give me an Octoechos. Same with many saints, such as Ignatius, John Chrysostom, that are universal in character, i.e. they were entered in every National Church's Menalogia a long time ago.

Antioch does make the claim, repeatedly, (see Page 6 of the latest Word Magazine) that they are just better, more uniquely suited, to managing multi-cultural societies. Actually, the cultural blindness of the bearers of Antiochianism are their chief attribute, but I'll just for good measure concede and toss in that somehow the Antiochian Church has something valuable to tell us about how to live with Muslims and that we really need to hear it from them. Maybe that's one thing we could use from Antioch that you could put in your list, but WHAT ELSE?

Do we need to know Arabic? No.
Do we need to understand the LEvant? No.
Do we need to appreciate the difficulties of life in the ME? No

What does Antakya have in her great tool kit that we don't already have?

If this question could be answered, it would solve all other outstanding questions about Metropolitan Philip and this whole affair. It's a key question, because +Philip is making this claim (other national churches are not), and has accumulated a substantial convert presence in his jurisdiction. It's time to show us what he's got. If there is a unique contribution to make, then let's bear with Philip and his vision. If there is not a unique contribution (aside from a unique and important capacity to minister to Arab-speaking immigrants), then why try to morph what is "here" a Syrian Orthodoxy into something it's not? Perhaps someone who really knows and appreciates the Antakya identity should make the case in a Reflection. But I would argue that Antioch is a solution in search of a problem.

#228 steve knowlton on 2010-10-27 13:03

That there are 18 directives in this document, and that 18 is the sum of 666 seems appropriate.
#63.1 Marc Trolinger on 2010-10-26 08:14 (Reply)

Will the venerable clergy have the option of having this mark on either the hand or forehead?

(Editor's note: C'mon Kevin, you know it is encoded into the chips we all have in our cell phones already! Or was it on the bar codes at Krogers? I keep forgetting ...)

#229 Kevin Kirwan on 2010-10-27 13:18

4. All Auxiliary Bishops of the Archdiocese are expected to express, either verbally or in writing, their unequivocal obedience to the terms of the Resolution in order that the hierarchs, as brothers in Christ, may express their unity to the faithful. No one shall express any disparaging remark or negative personal opinions with regard to the terms of the Resolution. It is has always been the policy of the Archdiocese, that in order to encourage and foster confidence in the administration, all hierarchs and clergy should conduct themselves in a manner which expresses unity and brotherly love.

We can only hope for a grainy video of these confessions to be broadcast on Al Jazeera.

I think having the auxillaries propped in front of a blanket with a crude patriarchial seal would set the mood. You could then have each seated auxillary read his statement from a cue card as he nervously darts his eyes around the room.

A grim looking and scowling Bp. Antoun standing behind them, would then hand each one individually a pen and paper for their signed declarations.

Then when this deed is done, Can You Feel the Love Tonight, by Elton John fills the room. I'm choking up just thinking about it.

#230 Kevin Kirwan on 2010-10-27 13:49

Yes it is. It's a prayer for the Czar. Czar; Glorious Leader. What's the difference?

#231 VSO on 2010-10-27 14:32

MP's "Urgent Communication" regarding Bishop Mark's departure has been posted on antiochian.org

#232 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 14:50

Well, it's official (antiochian.org) +Mark is out and will NOT be visiting any more churches. +Thomas is the Locum Tenens of the diocese. +Mark will stay in Toledo as a "guest" until he is ready to move. The sooner, the better.

#233 Steve on 2010-10-27 15:20

There are many, many who would flee to the OCA and quickly if we did not fear our parish assets being stolen from us by an archbishop who had no hand in gathering them. He is a millinonaire off the sweat of others and would still demand we leave penniless. If he had the courage to grant parishes and clergy that wish to to leave with their assets intact his archdiocese would be 1/2 its size tomorrow.

#234 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 15:46

I sent this previously, but Mark didn't want to post it. It's simple! + Mark pissed off certain Arab Americans in Detroit. + Mark called for financial transparency in Detroit when monies were missing. He also insisted that parishes follow the Orthodox Traditional practice of celebrating the feasts on feast days and Vespers on Saturday. What's the issue? + Philip's buddies are making trouble for + Mark - it's ALL TRIBAL!

(Editor's note: As my first grade teacher told me " you play nice, you get to play with other children." This comment does not cross the line[ and on this site, its a large, wide line.)

#235 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 16:05

It's been almost a hundred messages since the last time I posted this, and still nobody has provided a substantive answer, so here we go again -- What did Bp. MARK do wrong that somebody like me doesn't understand? I'm asking because I really want to know what the answer to this is. It's an honest question, and I will do everything I can to respect an honest answer.

**

Let me second this request.

My guess at this point, based on previous documents in that sad drama, is that Bishop MARK:

Clearly was opposed to the financial arrangements in Toledo, fighting, it appears on the side of those investigating corruption: True or false.

Opposed to partying to the point of drunkenness. True or false.

Wanted parishes to offer vespers on Saturday night. True or false.

Insisted on observance, at the parish level, of the great fasts.

Wanted feast days celebrated on the feast days. True or false.

Dared to emphasize confession during the great seasons of repentance? True or false.

Was intensely interested in seeing more people, even adults, converted into the church. True or false.

What essential items or radical, non-traditional behavior did I miss?

#236 tmatt on 2010-10-27 16:13

What I find interesting is that someone who almost ('almost' is an attempt by me to be generous) never attends divine services (on my many visits to the this parish I have never seen him at church) and has been a thorn in the side of many priests would venture an opinion about something he really knows so little about.

#237 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 16:21

The last gasp of an anachronism.

#238 Anon. on 2010-10-27 16:35

Well said, Fr. John. +Metropolitan HERMAN and Fr. Bob Kondratick thought they had managed to sweep the scandal under the rug for at least a couple of years after it first came to light, but it didn't work out that way in the end. God Himself had different ideas. Don't give up. Fight for the AOCA because it is worth fighting for. I have a sneaking suspicion God is going to have the upper hand in this one. My thoughts and prayers are with you all, knowing how painful and discouraging it is to go through this type of thing.

#239 Janice Chadwick on 2010-10-27 16:45

Kevin,

Allow me to be more succint and hopefully more precise:

You asserted that the only thing that would justify a break from the “humble” acceptance of things would be apostasy and/or heresy. I offered the examples of rape/homosexuality to suggest that any sane man or woman would also have some point at which they would rebel or leave because of a matter of discipline. This seems to me an indisputable point among reasonable persons, and it begs the question of at what point such a break is justified. I am inclined to think that the overstatement here is the suggestion that the only choices are a “humble” route of staying in obedience unless there is apostasy or heresy, and a route which is not humble taken because of mere disciplinary matters. My argument is that clearly there are times when leaving or rebelling is justified on the grounds of inhuman discipline. From there, I would assert that the discipline in the AOANA justifies departure. Some disagree with me, but to those persons I ask for less pious rhetoric concerning their public quest to remain humble, and rather some description on their part of where exactly the line is that we might say justifies a break because of disciplinary matters.

And, of course, all of the above discussion rests on the hypothetical notion that all we are dealing with in the AOANA is disciplinary matters and not matters of faith. Many would dispute such a notion.

#240 ochlophobist (Link) on 2010-10-27 16:51

Any decision made from fear and anger will be the wrong one. The venom expressed here (coming from both 'sides') is simply wrong and disgusting especially the anonymous venom.

I find it enlightening that there are those who feel (heavy emphasis on feel) that +Basil is and has been a tyrant: a perception that I would never have entertained myself. He is a bishop; he makes decisions; he requires obedience. Having been personally subject to one of his pastoral decisions with which I disagreed (still do), I found that I had a choice-submit to the authority of the Church in his person or rebel. My submission, despite my opinion, has blessed my life. I decided to submit because I love the Church and I love +Basil. I know him to be a man of love, compassion and deep faith i.e. there is a relationship of trust and understanding that is mutual. I’m lucky though; I’m a member of his Cathedral parish. I’ve known and interacted with him for over 20 years (prior to his consecration as a bishop). It is intuitively obvious to the most casual observer (or so I have always thought) that +Basil loves his flock. He will also discipline those who go astray, that is the nature of love. Because he is a man of love, it becomes much easier to submit to his authority even when I disagree. Precisely for these reasons, I will be immensely surprised if +Basil defies Met. Philip.

My perception of Met. Philip is quite the opposite. During 20 years of indirect experience with only a couple of opportunities to actually meet him in person, I see a tough, abrasive, capricious, self-absorbed man who is more interested in his agenda than in people and their pastoral needs. Such is also the testimony of people who know Met. Philip far better than I do. At best he is distant and uninvolved. Even when he is right, it is difficult to follow his lead.

Personalities cloud the issues though. Anger makes it even worse. There is always the danger of allowing ourselves to become caught up in the personality of leaders (for or against) rather than seeking the truth. Any cult of personality is deeply problematic for Christians when combined with anger, it is demonic.

When this whole situation started becoming public a couple of years ago, +Basil gave me one direction: “hold on to your peace.” That is the battle. Interestingly enough, since the hammer has finally fallen so to speak, I find that I have a greater peace and clarity than I have had before. There is even a certain joy as I continue to contemplate my direction. I pray for the soul of Met. Philip and that the Spirit of Truth be overwhelmingly present in his life so that he might fulfill his office. At the same time I recognize that my family and I have a decision to make. It is our decision and one that we must live with. That is true of everyone. Firing up 'righteous indignation' simply destroys my own soul and leads me from the truth.

Further, the rather surprising negative attitudes toward +Basil expressed here and the tendency for most to get caught up in personalities, opinion and self-will only points up what is fundamentally lacking in the life of the Orthodox Church in the United States: a united, functioning local synod to which we must all submit (bishops included). For too long out of complacency, apathy and ignorance, we have allowed our bishops to rule with little or no accountability. Such a situation is an invitation to sin on their part that few could resist. Now is the time to put a stop to our shirking sinfulness. Without a local synod to which bishops are accountable, it is easy for even the best of them to become vagrante in spirit if not in actual fact. Shame on us! God have mercy on them.

I don’t yet know what I will do, but my family and I will make a decision that is founded on prayer, love and obedience not fear, anger and spitefulness. Glory to God in all things.

#241 Michael Bauman on 2010-10-27 16:55

Thanks for the comment, Happy. I'm glad to see I have some talent for writing.

We need some more "classic" writing on this subject. And then action by all who truly disagree with+Philip.

More later, and hopefully good news at that time.

Mark Sudia.

#242 Mark Sudia on 2010-10-27 17:20

Dear "Happy",thank you teaching me in my old age the new meaning of the word REASON-I would never have guessed it ment "MONEY".In Christ,Abuna Habib

#243 Abuna Habib on 2010-10-27 17:23

Yes, can you say "East Berlin?"

#244 Antionymous on 2010-10-27 17:46

I think I may be choking up also Kevin. Oh no, I was just gasping for breath after laughing so hard. Thanks for the humor and perspective. The sadness and frustration being caused by this situation needs the balance.

#245 Marc Trolinger on 2010-10-27 17:46

Thank you; I was hoping for an answer from somebody who actually believes that Bp. MARK did something wrong.

Anybody? Is everybody happy just dancing around it, and not willing to spell out whatever the problem is? Seriously?

#246 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-27 17:56

My heart goes out to my wonderful friends in the AOCA. Having had to experience the OCA's time of troubles, I have nothing but sympathy and prayers for each of you. Just as many of us thought we would never see the light again, I know that you will in God's time come through your time of troubles. God works in all things, even through our suffering. I would like to say that I greatly appreciated +Mark's visit to our parish for the funeral of our beloved young choir director, whose family he had befriended. His posts and prayers during her terrible illness were greatly appreciated. I also want to thank him for his tremendous encouragement to those of us who work in prison ministry. This has also been a great blessing ! +Mark is truly a worthy servant of Our Lord ! Axios ! Axios ! Axios !

#247 Rd. Rick Wagner on 2010-10-27 18:26

I too am dumbfounded by the vitriol shown to +Basil. He is highly regarded outside the AOCA for his teaching and wonderful heart. I am personally grateful for his efforts to bring the witness of St. Silouan and Fr. Sophrony to America. It has changed my life in many ways. May God remember +Basil and his flock with His love an Mercy !

#248 Rd. Rick Wagner on 2010-10-27 19:02

I thank you as well, Father Elias. How telling it is that one who describes himself as the least of the least has the most courage. I echo your sentiments: "Where are you, Senior Priests and Bishops, our leaders – Where are you? And why do you not call for the legacy of reset, repentance, now in our beloved Archdiocese?"

#249 Gail Sheppard on 2010-10-27 19:12

Regarding Byzantine Fables. Fables indeed. If what Met. Philip was after was the EA and EP control through the EA, there are much easier and more effective ways of doing so.

All of this "There must be some secret plan, against great enemies". Yes, the Great & Wise Leader protects one from all the scary enemies: this Patriarchate, that Patriarchate, the Greeks, the Old Country, whatever. It is all so Animal Farm and Moscow Kremlin early 1953. (There's even a reference to a Jewish Doctor!! Those wishing for many, many, many, many many years etc. might think twice about auditioning for the role of Lavrenty Beria.)

When Met. Philip was "protecting self rule" at the beginning, he was defending a constitution that gave the bishops in N America less power than the proposed Damascus Constitution. Slight of Hand, smoke and mirrors, and his constitution that gave him more power was really about self rule, we must be protected from Damascus.

Then he appeals to the Patriarchal Synod, and clarifies the ambiguities which had arisen, with different titles etc. Yes, he is protecting the Archdiocese from some other enemy, yeah the EP and the Greeks. And to do that, he just has to have more power. There is some great (though partly hidden) threat, and straight forward action simply will not do.

Another rich bit of fluff: "O, we will have to wait and see what the final official text says". If there is not a certain finality to a document that was vetted and endorsed by the legal counsel and presented to the Eparchial Synod members during the meeting, what finality comes from the jurisdiction website? Are not the members of the Eparchial Synod at least as well to be informed as any of us who log onto "Antiochian.org"? What, "conciliarity", for example, could come of the Met. and the web site team changing the document now?

At this juncture, I will advise all to just drop the "They are not auxiliaries, but diocesans" routine. Their was ambiguity at the beginning about their exact status. Their status in Arabic texts has by now been documented. The difference between that and the Arabic used in the consecrations and the English texts has been documented. The appeal of the primate of the self ruled archdiocese to the mother Synod, and their response has now cleared up all ambiguity, whather one likes it or approves of it or not. And really, not one of the "diocesan bishops" was ever able to ordain on his own decision above the subdiaconate, assign clergy on his own decision, or to consecrate antimensia, nor were they able to establish and regulate their own finances. Therefore it is difficult to see what meaning the touted enthronements had or have in light of the obvious lack of real diocesan authority. They are now clearly auxiliary bishops, and in key ways have never been anything but.

A more real question (than, "is my bishop a diocesan?")
why was this auxiliary paraded around with some external trappings of a diocesan when the Met. never intended to let him be such? What was he playing at? And, is there any vision for the future of the Church in North America that does Not revolve around personality?

Fr Yousuf Rassam

#250 Anonymous on 2010-10-27 19:53

I thought the church defeated Arianism, Nestorianism, and Monotheletism!? Maybe I missed a chapter!

(Editor's note: Yes, the "Church" defeated Arianism - but your earlier use of the adjective "Byzantine" as a descriptive modifier is unnecessary and confusing. In the way you used "Byzantine", the more correct answer would be the Egyptian Church, the Roman Church, etc., defeated these heresies, not the "Byzantine" Church specifically. One should resist the temptation to play a shell game where one minute "Byzantine" stands for the entire Orthodox Church, and the next the Church in Constantinople. )

#251 Kevin Allen on 2010-10-27 20:50

Thank you, Father, for your cri de coeur!
"O Lord, I have cried unto Thee, hearken unto me when I cry unto Thee!"

#252 Fr Patrick B. OGrady on 2010-10-27 21:08

I think there may be a lesson that no one has yet uncovered (at least, not that I've seen).

The only reason the OCA was able, in my view, to come out from the Troubles, was because of local accountability. I hope and pray the Bishops in this country realize that only a locally accountable church will be effective.

Centralized authority (read: absolute power) corrupts absolutely.

In Christ who saves us all,
Dn. Marty

#253 Dn. Marty Watt on 2010-10-27 21:15

I regret that I did not make clear that my preceding comment was not meant and should not be read as a personal indictment of Kevin Allen, or of any other particular individual, as the way I worded it would unfortunately imply.

To clarify: the obedience to which we are called does not extend to towing the personal line of the personalities involved. I do not see much at this point that changes what any given layman in the Archdiocese will or will not obey. I believe that we have at times seen in the OCA, in the Antiochian Archdiocese, in the GOA, etc. attempts to manipulate the wholesome obedience to which we are all called into an active assent, and praising enthusiasm for personal agendas, the phrase which got used, and then abused, and is now almost (alas!) discredited amongst us in the OCA was "For The Good of The Church".

What I said about "You do not have to..." in the above post I think are specific applications of universal principles. It was most certainly not meant to say : "Kevin praises the situation and excuses it. Kevin pretends joy. Kevin encourages it. Kevin tows the party line. Kevin pretends to not know what he does in fact know." No, it was not meant to say that at all, I regret that it seemed to say that, and I apologize.

There has been one point of obedience for laity, but I regard it as already a past issue: they are called upon to acknowledge only the Metropolitan as their bishop. It is, after all important for a layman to know who his bishop is. I have written in another comment, as well as on earlier threads that I do not consider it worthwhile at this point to try to still assert that the auxiliaries are not auxiliaries.

One might ask me why I even bother to post? Why don't I mind my own business? Good questions, because the expression "Silence is Golden" has much to commend to it. But we North American Orthodox are very often too intertwined in our friendships, associations, etc. to not care what happens to each other.

Fr Yousuf Rassam.

#254 Anonymous on 2010-10-28 00:23

Perhaps some excused themselves from the unpleasantries in Constantinople in the 8th century, because it was just a squabble about pictures?

#255 Antionymous on 2010-10-28 03:37

OK, I did miss that the original writer was talking about +Dmetri of the OCA's South. But I stand my words about Bishop Demetri of the AOCNA. That is my expereince with him based on a dozen or so encounters. I realize others experience may be totally different.

#256 Antionymous on 2010-10-28 03:40

I am in the Greek Archdiocese, and do not feel any less an American. I am sure I speak the same as many converts in the GOA.

As to having multiple bishops serving the rich and varied cultures that make up the tapestry of Orthodoxy... you are aware that St. Tikhon envisioned such a model, I trust? The EP shoud not be castigated for implementing a model similar to what the Saint proposed.

With love of Christ's Holy Orthodox Church,
Rd. DC

|--------------------------------------------------
| Reader David-Constantine Wright
| http://constans_wright.tripod.com
|--------------------------------------------------
| "God became Human so that human beings
| could become gods." (St. Athanasius the
| Great, On the Incarnation) |

(Editor's note: That was over a hundred years ago. Has nothing changed? Perhaps not. )

#257 Anonymous on 2010-10-28 06:11

Maybe I've become too accustomed to the "like" button on Facebook, but I'd just like to offer some appreciation for this post, Michael.

Two particularly shiny gems:

"Any cult of personality is deeply problematic for Christians when combined with anger, it is demonic."

"Firing up 'righteous indignation' simply destroys my own soul and leads me from the truth."

I don't presume to know any of the right answers to this, but do know that each of us, and all of us, will only find those answers through prayer and reflection -- cautious, balanced, questioning and without giving in to the temptation to act out.

While all is far from "fixed" in the OCA, we're no longer mired in the very ugly place we were a few years ago. Reading the thoughts here brings the memories of those days -- the anger, frustration, bitterness. I don't regret those things because not to have felt them would have been to acquiesce to evil. But we also have to keep the focus on what it's all about.

I remember in the midst of the mess, our parish moved into a new, permanent space. Met. Herman came to serve liturgy. Many stayed home. I was there but found myself seething in his presence -- not healthy. Not sure of the point ... but hang in there and try to find a positive and constructive path forward.

#258 Anonymous on 2010-10-28 06:42

I thought we lived in America, where we have freedom in religion and other areas, where we are free to do what we want, as long as we do not infringe upon the rights of others. It seems our Archdiocese has been mysteriously transported overseas to a third world Communist country. And the leader of that country, MP, is definitely infringing upon our rights. God has always given us free will, hoping that we make the right choices. God gave you free will, MP, and you have abused it to no end, other than your own VINDICTIVE desires. ..... You should just throw our bishops in prison, lock the door and toss the key into the ocean. They have nothing else left in their ministry, thanks to your selfish desires to be King, rather than the Chief Shepherd of GOD'S Archdiocese - remember it isn't your Archdiocese, and it never was. I wonder if they will be allowed to breathe without your permission.

God bless Bishop MARK, who has always stood up for the truth and for the right thing to be done. He was definitely set up when assigned to that Diocese, knowing full well there would be nothing but controversy with those Arab friends who call themselves clergy. There was no way for him to succeed, because MP was waiting in the wings to shut him down every time he tried to bring his Diocese into compliance with the Orthodox teachings. This brings up another point. When the former Bishop of Toledo, Demetri, was there, were these financial dealings, illegal that they are, going on at the time, and did Demetri try to fix them, or did he look the other way, because he is a follower of MP? If he tried to fix them and was stopped, that means MP interefered again. If he looked the other way..... Either way, this transfer/removal of Bishop MARK is all about saving MP's face because of the illegal things happening.... The only good news is that the churches are being investigated by the state of Michigan....

Bishop MARK made the right choice to refuse the transfer. Even though the majority of faithful in the Northwest are converts, there are some die-hard Arabs there also, and no matter what Bishop MARK would try to do to make things right, MP would be right there to yank the rug out from underneath him, just as he did last year when Bishop MARK called for financial auditing of his entire Diocese - something every Bishop should have done. What's MP going to do - move all of the Bishops and further punish everyone because they are standing up to him? Maybe he really does want things back the way they were, when he was the only bishop in town, and he had to oversee everyone. Fine - let him have the whole thing and let's see how badly he screws things up.

Thank God for Bishop BASIL and Bishop ALEXANDER, who defended Bishop MARK last weekend. Will they be the next ones to go, leaving only the other 3, who we know are following exactly as the glorious leader wants them to? We will have nothing left in the way of leadership if that happens. MP has continued to divide the Synod on which side they sit on, and now we know that 3 bishops are following MP, no matter how wrong it is, and 3 are standing strong together, as they did since this whole mess began. Remember how strong Bishop MARK was to get up in Palm Desert, and very calmly, very lovingly and as a holy Shepherd, request that the audit be done to make sure all was in order. He did the right thing, and yet in the background, was the disrespectful comments and shouting out from clergy and laity who are the inner circle of MP.

This situation is only going to get worse, as it has since last year. There is no one on earth who will help us to bring back this holiness to our churches, and it is very disruptive to our lives as we try to follow GOD and only GOD. HE is our true SHEPHERD, and no one can fill HIS ministry. Forget Damascus - they are very comfortable with this whole situation, and rightly so with our money to keep them quiet.

My prayer is that God will act now, as He is the only one who can save us from further damage at the hands of a very evil man. Let us pray hard for God's will to be done so that we can have peace once more.

#259 It's Almost Halloween (Link) on 2010-10-28 07:00

Thank you, Fr. Elias. What an extraordinary comment; it's worthy of a post of its own. Your stories, as well as your call to action, resonate with me very much.

#260 AnitaAshland on 2010-10-28 07:19

Amen. Father, from the bottom of this sinner's heart, thank you! How we need such a word of encouragement at a time like this. May God give us all grace to have such single-minded love, devotion and faith.

#261 Karen on 2010-10-28 07:46

+Basil's qualities as you've described are the very reason for the vitriol. People love and praise him for these qualities when we are supposed to love and praise other things. We are not supposed to compare if it causes someone else's favorite to lose face. We are supposed to evaluate our clergy according to corporate standards and convention attendance; it gives the illusion of success.

We are not supposed to praise or value our connection to St. Silouan. That is why converts find out about it from people in other jurisdictions. This is why the best and most spiritual writings in Arabic are never translated for the American faithful. This is why Antiochians are unaware of their own saints. This is why parishioners have no idea what relics are in their churches. This is why Athonite elders visit dioceses in Lebanon but not the U.S. This is why ancient Antiochian manuscripts are auctioned off around the world during the same week we are absorbed in a convention.

Regarding Metropolitan Phillip's decisions, it must be remembered that many things fall under the prerogative of a bishop, and I'm sure that precedence for can be found somewhere in history. Let bishops do what bishops decide to do.

For the rest of us, the most important work yet to be done at the laity level is to invest our money and time in different things such as educating about and participating together in the liturgical cycle, promoting professional studies in language and theology, encouraging and standardizing fasting practices, preserving and recovering Antiochian documents that are being lost through international auctions, etc. These kinds of things will insure the permanence of the Archdiocese and its evangelistic efforts.

#262 David S on 2010-10-28 09:14

A huge part of the issue at hand is that Antioch as Met. Philip portrays it has little to do with the best of what is going on in Syria and Lebanon. This is partially a generational issue, as Philip left the Middle East before the fruits of the revival that was starting in the early fifties really became obvious.

One of the ways that the situation of the Church of Antioch parallels our own is it that it represents (in Lebanon but maybe not Syria) a minority of Christians in a society where Christians are a minority. And also, coming out of the extremely difficult circumstances in Ottoman Syria, followed by the world wars, the Church was in desperate need or revival of spiritual, intellectual, and monastic life. A lot can be learned by how this revival came about, and a lot can be learned from seeing the remarkably positive effect of the dozen or so healthy monasteries that have been founded or revived in Lebanon since the 1950's. Likewise, the activities of the Orthodox Youth Movement, especially in its early stages, provide a model that could be fruitfully emulated in North America. A major part of this is that this revival was not of a do-it-yourself nature. Rather it came from extensive contacts with other parts of the Orthodox world- in the beginning especially with the Institut Saint-Serge in Paris (another commonality North America has with Antioch is the strong influence of Francophone Orthodoxy) and with the Romanian monk Fr. Andre Scrima, but over time connections in the wider Orthodox world multiplied, and very close connections between several of the hierarchs and some of the monasteries of Mt. Athos developed.... So despite the strong differences between the Arab and American mindsets and cultures, the situation on the ground in Lebanon is the Old-World Orthodox situation most like our own in America, and one that we could most profit from learning from.... Of course, instead of doing so, Philip has generally chosen to emulate Protestant forms and missionary techniques.....

On my own blog, I frequently translate essays by Fr. Touma Bitar, the abbot of an Essex-style monastic community in Lebanon, and I have found that even though he's writing for the Lebanese context, much of what he has to say resonates particularly well in own own American context.... It is people like Fr. Touma and Met. Elias of Tripoli who we need to be listening to in order to understand what Antioch has to offer America!

#263 Samn! (Link) on 2010-10-28 09:29

Antionymous,

Sorry...but I don't see the current administrative situation in the North American Antiochian Archdiocese rising to the level of significance as the iconodule controversy in the 8Th century! That does not mean you should not be upset about the current situation, as you may see it.

I have been accused here of downplaying this situation, or taking a "tow-the-line" approach. My main point on this site - especially for our new converts and inquirers, for whom I have concern - has been: (1) there is an obedience that is sometimes virtuous for us even when the situation itself is lamentable (not all those who were against the wrongs of the RCC in the 14th century left and became Protestants - were they all "capitulators" or "towing the party line"?); and, (2) we cannot lose our faith and hope because of crises created by men, even our leaders. Leaders come and go; canonical rules and norms get pressed. IC XC NI KA: Jesus Christ Conquerer.

#264 Kevin Allen on 2010-10-28 11:32

Of course ecclesiology matters! If you don't "understand it" well enough to defend it, then on what basis did you choose Orthodoxy?

You said you wanted to "call a spade a spade" so I'm going to ask you some difficult questions: Does hosting your podcast on Ancient Faith Radio depend upon remaining in + Philip's good graces? I suspect that it does. Is it possible that you are using "obedience" and your "concern for converts/inquirers" as rationalizations for not jeopardizing your position? If this is the case (and only you know the answer), then you are exhibiting a form of false piety, my friend, and as your sister in Christ, I would be remiss if I didn't point this out to you. Talking about how you were shoved at a convention over a year ago does not buy you a ticket into the club of those who are willing to put it all on the line for the Church yesterday, today and every day. Don't feign interest (even a mild one) in a fight you don't share, because you will only lose credibility.

#265 Reflections on 2010-10-28 13:26

But it looked like +Metropolitan HERMAN and Fr. Bob Kondratic had won for a long time after the scandal came to light. For at least a couple of years, it looked like they had managed to squash the scandal, but they hadn't, had they? We were afraid that just like any of the Orthodox churches have had scandals and managed to push them under the rug, they were going to get away with it. But as we all know, they didn't. God took care of the situation (and used Mark and ocanews.org to help Him in this). He could very well be using Mark and ocanews.org again to work out His plan. This is not over, don't give up. Just keep plugging away.

#266 Janice Chadwick on 2010-10-28 13:59

You poor missguided and missled "soul".Abuna Habib

#267 Abuna Habib on 2010-10-28 18:50

Well said Gunter,where have you been for the last 18 months?Abuna Habib

#268 Abuna Habib on 2010-10-28 19:00

Dear Dear Father Elias,I kneel before you in all humility and shame and repentance and ask for your holy prayers for my unworthyness !The unworthy Abuna Habib

#269 Abuna Habib on 2010-10-28 19:18

Bishop Mark will NOT visit any more parishes for one reason only-and that is to STOP him from telling the TRUTH ! How sad that a once much admired Metropolitan is now afraid of the TRUTH being presented to the faithful of the MW diocese.Abuna Habib

#270 Abuna Habib on 2010-10-28 19:27

Are you slap Happy or a happy mughnoon?

You don't seem to get it. People will leave and are leaving. There are lots of options out there. If you are Happy they are leaving then I feel sad for you because not enough of the Arab children are staying in the church for it to grow.
Pretty soon the antiochian diocese of north America will only be a memory.

anaxios met. philip!!!

#271 Iskandra Tannous on 2010-10-28 20:45

Father bless!

To drop 'the "They are not auxiliaries, but diocesans" routine' as you call it is to deny what many of us witnessed: the enthronement of ruling bishops for newly created dioceses. Yes, newly created dioceses: the Arabic text alone of the self-rule resolution might have been ambiguous, using words that could have been Englished differently, but both the Arabic and English contained clauses stating that the texts in both languages were of "equal force and validity" (to quote the English), and the words was Englished as diocese and diocesan.

Are our liturgical rites real, or are they pantomime? If the enthronement of a bishop in the cathedral of his diocese with rites which declare him to be the bishop of that diocese does not make him its ruling bishop, does the priest blessing the waters at Theophany call down the Holy Spirit and grant the blessing of Jordan? If a synod of bishops can retroactively declare that enthronements were not enthronements, can a synod of bishops declare retroactively that the sins you absolved in confession are not forgiven, short of finding a defect in your ordination so that you were not a priest?

As Orthodox Christians, do we not believe that what we do liturgically is real? More real that most of what passes for real in this fallen world? We receive the Very Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist. The laying on of hands by a bishop the proper rites confers the grace of the priesthood. The Holy Spirit does descend into the waters at the supplication of a priest to sanctify them. And enthroning a bishop in his cathedral with rites declaring him to be the ruling bishop of a diocese makes it so.

(Editor's note: I agree this is a very troubling aspect to this whole debate. As much as I am for liturgical "realism", the historical fact is that the Church does undo things sometimes. Origin died revered, in full communion with the Church - hundreds of years later an Ecumenical Council, rightly or wrongly, condemned him. Our brothers in the Catholic Church regularly declare marriages of twenty years, with children, never to have existed. So, the issue is not as simple as you would make it. At the very least though, in this instance, the "appearance" that they were diocesan bishops was made for more than 5 years, and no one can deny that. That "misunderstanding", "deception", whatever word you want to use, should be addressed by those who support the Metropolitan's new position. Or the Synod in Damascus's "Clarified" position - whatever you want to call the new reality.)

#272 DNY on 2010-10-28 21:04

I believe that this ad hominem attack on Kevin Allen's motivation and character is unfortunate. Kevin's comments have deeply challenged my faith in a healthy way. Furthermore, amidst some of the stridency Kevin comments often seem to me to be an oasis of peace and moderation. We need more peacemakers like Kevin, and I hope he will continue to allow his faithful voice to be heard.

#273 Andrew Geleris on 2010-10-28 21:14

I regret that I did not make clear that my preceding comment was not meant and should not be read as a personal indictment of Kevin Allen, or of any other particular individual, as the way I worded it would unfortunately imply.

To clarify: the obedience to which we are called does not extend to towing the personal line of the personalities involved. I do not see much at this point that changes what any given layman in the Archdiocese will or will not obey. I believe that we have at times seen in the OCA, in the Antiochian Archdiocese, in the GOA, etc. attempts to manipulate the wholesome obedience to which we are all called into an active assent, and praising enthusiasm for personal agendas, the phrase which got used, and then abused, and is now almost (alas!) discredited amongst us in the OCA was "For The Good of The Church".

What I said about "You do not have to..." in the above post I think are specific applications of universal principles. It was most certainly not meant to say : "Kevin praises the situation and excuses it. Kevin pretends joy. Kevin encourages it. Kevin tows the party line. Kevin pretends to not know what he does in fact know." No, it was not meant to say that at all, I regret that it seemed to say that, and I apologize.

There has been one point of obedience for laity, but I regard it as already a past issue: they are called upon to acknowledge only the Metropolitan as their bishop. It is, after all important for a layman to know who his bishop is. I have written in another comment, as well as on earlier threads that I do not consider it worthwhile at this point to try to still assert that the auxiliaries are not auxiliaries.

One might ask me why I even bother to post? Why don't I mind my own business? Good questions, because the expression "Silence is Golden" has much to commend to it. But we North American Orthodox are very often too intertwined in our friendships, associations, etc. to not care what happens to each other.

Fr Yousuf Rassam.

#274 Anonymous on 2010-10-28 23:50

I appreciate your perspective, and I appreciate your important, heroic interview.

#275 Antionymous on 2010-10-29 04:03

Editor: every good conspiracy theorist knows it's encoded in the dots on the backs of the road signs in Indiana, so that the black helicopters will know where to land.

#276 Michael Strelka on 2010-10-29 09:41

Well said, Michael. We have twice, in our family, been the recipients of the bishop's decisions with which we disagreed (still do also). But we didn't take our ball and bat and go play elsewhere...we submitted in love because he's our bishop.

We too are still waiting and praying before making a decision. May we pray for one another as well.

#277 Mary Brigid on 2010-10-29 12:13

I hope what you wrote was meant to be a parody, David, because we can't invest our time and money in anything unless the Metropolitan allows it. Had he wanted the laity to "promote professional studies in language and theology" and "preserve and recover Antiochian documents" for example, we'd be doing it. I was shocked by a comment he made at the summer convention concerning Mary Magdalen. He referred to her as a prostitute. I don't have a degree in theology, but even I know he's got the wrong "Mary." He transferred out of Holy Cross after a few months because he had trouble learning Greek and if he submitted the required second thesis for his masters at St. Vlads, no one can find it. Since he hasn't shown much interest in education and professional studies, what hope do we have to pursue such lofty gains? - Insisting upon total control is not "what bishops do." It's what dictators do.

#278 Gail Sheppard on 2010-10-29 12:38

I am not angry, and if I seemed angry it's because this website repulses me and the comments that come out of the hearts of these people make me want to vomit. By their fruits you will know them. If these comments are the fruits of Mark's works and his supporters, then I am happy he will ge gone from this archdiocese. We have the icon of Christ in the header of every page of this website, and people don't care. They continue to r*EVIL*e and persecute people without knowing the person or realizing that God is in total control of HIS church. Yes, we are all human, but I know Metropolitan Philip made a plege to honor God by making decisions that are best for this archdiocese.

If Metropolitan Philip is singling out Bishop Mark, it's not because he's the only convert bishop; it's because he's not doing his job. I work for a Jewish man, and there are other Jewish employees there as well. He keeps me because I am doing a good job. If he fires me, it would not be because I'm a Christian. It would be because I'm not doing my job.

As far as Saul's in the church, there are divisions in some of them, and they are fueled by the priests. Yes, I know this for a fact. I belong to one of them. Peace. +

#279 Anonymous on 2010-10-29 17:27

The questions I raised are legitimate and relevant to understanding Kevin's position. If he comes back and says, "I thought about what you said and you are mistaken," I will accept it. - I don't think he will, however.

#280 Reflections on 2010-10-29 18:10

And you would know this Happy because you are member of the Glee club in Detroit,
as I suspect? I have seen Arab priests with my own eyes commune episcopalians and roman Catholics in Antiochian parishes in this country. I wouldn't surprise me if the Muslim wife of an Orthodox man was communed in Detroit. Palestinian Christians have tried to convince me that Muslims are our friends and believe in the same God we believe in. Detroit Orthodox theology is warped and twisted....

#281 Iskandra Tannous on 2010-10-30 09:54

Anonymous,

You sound like somebody who might be able to provide a substantive answer to my question.

What did Bp. MARK do wrong that people like me don't understand? Again, I don't care how angry your answer is, or accusatory, or negative, or whatever -- so long as it's substantive and specific. I really am trying to understand. Thank you for helping me to do so.

#282 Richard Barrett (Link) on 2010-10-30 10:15

His Grace Bishop Irineu is a fine man and a good bishop. He travels the length and breadth of this country and Canada ministering to the spiritual needs of the Romanian speaking faithful in our large diocese. His heart is full of love for the people of God. I would be honored to serve him should that day come.

As for V. Rev. Fr. Joseph (Morris) he had quite a bit of support in the Episcopate Congress but because of how his candidacy was handled the vote went against him. Not because of him as a person but as a repudiation of the process bringing him forward that did not allowing other candidates into the selection process.

Please pray for Romanian Unity between the ROEA and ROAA as a precursor to full administrative unity in the US.

#283 Subdeacon Robert Aaron on 2010-10-30 11:12

Dear Reflections,

I have been thinking about your post before responding to it. In fact I have gone back and forth on whether I should be posting here at all (probably shouldn't!), as moderate voices seem to evoke mass bullying. (I am appreciative of Dr Geleris and Antionymous for their defense!) Truth be told, I sent a previous reply, and then asked Mark not to post it because it seemed to me I was responding from hurt feelings by some of your comments that challenged my personal integrity.

But in answer to your comments...

(1) "Does hosting your podcast on Ancient Faith Radio depend upon remaining in + Philip's good graces? I suspect that it does."

I met Met Philip the first rime when I interviewed him. His good graces have nothing to do with my voluntary (ie unmercenary) work on Ancient Faith Radio. Could he pressure AFR to get me off the site if he wanted to? I suppose he could, but AFR's management has a lot of integrity and I doubt they would simply or easily "roll over" unless they agreed something I said (or any podcaster said) was inappropriate to the mission of AFR. (AFR is an AOCANA archdiocese department, but truth is it functioned before as an independent site and could do so again if necessary). I have written Met Philip two critical private letters over the past few years and he never exerted any pressure to get me off of AFR in response. In the process of obtaining an interview, + Philip never edited my questions or put restrictions on what I could ask him. On the contrary, he said "ask me anything you want". I did. We posted the recording with minimal editing and nothing of substance was edited. So no I do not agree with your assessment.

(2) Is it possible that you are using "obedience" and your "concern for converts/inquirers" as rationalizations for not jeopardizing your position?

What is my position you imply I am rationalizing for fear of jeopardizing? I do a podcast where I ask other peole their opinions- big deal. I am not defending +Met Philip's decisions, some of which I strongly disagree with. However I have lived long enough to realize that things change, God works in wondrous and often mysterious ways and God is not "off duty" during this crisis. It seems many posters here feel that all is lost, the wonderful ideals of an American Orthodox Church have been corrupted, we have to write scathing ad hominem attacks...etc. I think among other things this site serves the purpose of being a pressure valve and that may be necessary, but we have to understand that the Church transcends its personalities and leaders, too. We are visible and invisible and the visible Church always seem to be a pale and often disappointing (frustrating) facsimile of the Church Triumphant. Does that mean we should not work to make changes that are more consistent with Orthodox ecclesiology and our Holy Tradition? I am not disagreeing. But we should do so respectfully, in a Christian manner, perhaps even with some restraint. The AOCANA is not the OCA - these sorts of online attacks and rants are going to do nothing to change the jurisdiction (through external pressure). And yes I AM concerned about newcomers who read these posts, some of whom have asked me whether they should join or continue to remain in Orthodoxy because of some of the vitriol they encounter here (and elsewhere).

(3) "If this is the case (and only you know the answer), then you are exhibiting a form of false piety, my friend, and as your sister in Christ, I would be remiss if I didn't point this out to you."

I am certainly not above or beyond ego and false piety. I struggle with both. But I do not think the tone or "position" (as you put it) I have taken in my posts here is a reflection of either in this case.

(4) "Talking about how you were shoved at a convention over a year ago does not buy you a ticket into the club of those who are willing to put it all on the line for the Church yesterday, today and every day. Don't feign interest (even a mild one) in a fight you don't share, because you will only lose credibility."

I regret mentioning the convention last year and yes my insignificant involvement. But to your point about feigning interest in a fight I don't share...This is my fight as much as it is anyone's on this site. I may not share all of the opinions expressed, but one thing I share with everyone is their love for and concern about the Holy Orthodox Church, especially in North America. We may just have different ways of expressing our concerns.

I hope there is no offense taken by what I have said. I certainly do not hold anything against you.

#284 Kevin Allen on 2010-10-30 12:14

Brother George,
Would it not be +Philip's duty to show respect to the the Ecumenical Patriarch before you ask your brothers in the laity to respect him?

#285 diogenes on 2010-10-30 14:50

I have heard (through a reliable source) that plans are now underway to transfer Bishop JOSEPH to Englewood to take over and that Metropolitan PHILIP has been encouraged to quietly retire sometime next summer. Can anyone verify this information?

#286 Anonymous on 2010-10-30 21:34

if you that are truley dissapointed with Bishop Mark, layity and clergy included as well as those in the turstee's seats who have not jumped ship dut to the disgrace of the office. Don't get too comfortable, eventually. God has a way of handling these dark times. What's the problem with a Bishop who was asked to be a Bishop, to uphold the teachings of the chruch. Oh excuse me the older teachings of the chruch. Faith, kindness, outreach, to teach one to work towards ones salvation. Well the Bishop Bashing of Bishop Mark era is over. For all who are rejoicing in the new POWER OF THE MET and absoulute power you can be thankful but I wouldn't use the word God in your remarks might come back to haunt you. Now for the people who have been engaging in your own fullfillment will have tobaiting thievery, deception, anarachy, conspiracy, tax evasion, strong armming, threats, vindictiveness and what goes along with this. Eventually this will come full circle and you will be held accountable for the laws and sins which you have committed. Don't feel vindicated because you have the blessing of a man born of this world who happens to have a collar. Treachary, thievery, bribes to do one's bidding all will have to be answered for. Truely the people who don't care for the teachings that Bishop Mark and the many faithful clergy in our Archdioscese. Move on, take your money and superfical place of power and move on. We have work to do for our faith. God will bless Bishop Mark as well as the clergy. bwg.

#287 anoymous as well for now on 2010-10-31 12:30

I appreciate your response, Kevin, but what I appreciate more is the fact that you clearly took the time to consider my questions. Thank you.

When I spoke about jeopardizing your "position," I was referring to your position on Ancient Faith Radio. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I think +Philip could indeed force you off air. I don't doubt that AFR's management has a lot of integrity, but they would be no match for +Philip if he decided your time was up. There were/are people with integrity who tried to put up a fight to save our chancellors and our bishops, but to no avail. If he could neutralize them, he could get rid of you.

At the risk of testing your patience, I wonder if you would be good enough to answer a few more questions. 1) Did +Philip ask you to do the interview or did you ask him? 2) Did he know what questions you were going to ask in advance? 3) After the interview, did he give you the impression that he would like you to field questions, concerns, etc. (like here, for example) that surfaced as a result of the interview? 4) When you said, "This is my fight as much as it is anyone's on this site," what did you mean? 5) Did +Philip respond to your letters or did he dismiss them?

I don't doubt that you love the Church, Kevin. If I implied that, please forgive me.

#288 Reflections on 2010-10-31 22:50

Metropolitan Philip is not "doing his job" in his allowing.....nay, his own ENACTING of the dismantling of the unity of this archdiocese, by persecuting the loyal opposition, his refusal to give his flock financial transperancy and accountability, and by his refusal to be respectful of the canonical rights of his brother bishops. You CANNOT sugar coat it. He is at fault for the great evil that is sweeping over our Church, and he needs to be a great example to us his children, by repenting.

#289 Antionymous on 2010-11-01 05:44

While many of us our heartbroken over the recent events in our Church, we do not serve the Lord by trying to "buffer our positons" by adding lies. Let us all, no matter where we side in this controversy, be advocates of Truth; and that means being open to changing our minds when Truth shows us we need to do so.

#290 Antionymous on 2010-11-01 05:50

Dear Reflections,

I am a little uncomfortable becoming - somehow - a focal point in this debate! But since you have challenged my credibility (but I am not taking offense) I will answer your questions about the interview:

1) Did +Philip ask you to do the interview or did you ask him?

I sent an unsolicited letter to Met Philip requesting the interview. I felt it was time for questions to be answered by the person at the center of this controversy. He agreed to it and we flew to Englewood at personal (mine) and I assume AFR (John Maddex) exoense.

2) Did he know what questions you were going to ask in advance?

I sent him an overview of the areas and matters I wanted to discuss. By the way, I send all my guests a questions overview ahead of time. I find - having done it both ways - that I get better interviews - more content-rich and well-thought - when my guests have a chance to think through the questions and areas beforehand. For the record, Met Philip showed up for the interview without notes or the overview I sent him. I worked from my questions, he answered, I did unscripted follow-ups, to which he responded. We only edited out one divergent section on the entry of the EOC into the AOCANA because the producer, John Maddex, felt the story had been told many times and was off topic. Otherwise the recording is true to the interview.

3) After the interview, did he give you the impression that he would like you to field questions, concerns, etc. (like here, for example) that surfaced as a result of the interview?

We had no discussion after the interview, or since about fielding questions, etc. In fact Bishop Antoun who was at lunch asked me what my role was in all this, since he did not know me or know why I was there.

4) When you said, "This is my fight as much as it is anyone's on this site," what did you mean?

You don't know me, obviously. No one who knows me thinks I am a "shill" for the archdiocese or the metropolitan. I may come off as "moderate" in opublic but I have strong opinions and concerns like many who post on this site.

5) Did +Philip respond to your letters or did he dismiss them?

He responded to one of them.

#291 Kevin Allen on 2010-11-01 09:03

Hi Steve: Actually, you're absolutely right. There are several O.C.A. Diocese that would benefit from being reduced geographically.

And let's start with your suggestion of the Diocese of the South. Once the new Bishop of Dallas and the South is elected, consecrated, and installed, he could oversee the process of creating a Diocese of Baltimore and the Eastern United States.

This new diocese would encompass the states of Maryland, North and South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia, Georgia, and Florida.

The Midwest could be reduced to Michigan, Illinois and Indiana. Ohio could become a separate Diocese. And The remainder of the Diocese of the Midwest would be replaced by the Diocese of Minneapolis and the Central United States.

And, of course, a Diocese of Seattle and the West, (Including New Mexico) could also be created.

Naturally, this all depends on how much the faithful in each area truly believe it should be done, and desire it.

And according to the O.C.A.'s Governing Statute, creating a new diocese is the responsibility of the Holy Synod.

This is an idea I've actually suggested to His Grace Bishop Benjamin on one or two occasions. At least once, he stated that the Holy Synod was considering having larger diocese, and fewer bishops.

Also, for what it's worth, I think the EA, (at least in theory), is supposedly to eventually be responsible for creating canonically structured diocese, and consecrating bishops for the future united O.C.A.. (sounds like a giant definite maybe to me!)

Still, that's a great idea. (or at least I think so).

I've also suggested this to His Beatitude Metropolitan Jonah, who as Locum Tennes of the Midwest and the South could easily have started the process by now.

I'm going to trust that in His wisdom, he sees that it's better to have the New bishops of those Diocese initiate the process themselves. And he might actually be right.

Only time will tell.

#292 Mark Sudia on 2010-11-01 17:23

Dear Mr. Allen,

I always just assumed that you had integrity ans now, it is no longer just an assumption. Thanks for your words here (and on AFR). You encourage the rest of us. God bless you!

#293 Irrelevant on 2010-11-01 17:54

" I love the editors note, be careful, very good " Fellow parishioners, in regaurds is there any proof of the priest insulting and dedregating the entire faith because they think that they are bigger than God, you need to drink a sip of some Turkish coffee and read whats been on the net. Remember the letter that some of the Michigan Priest put on the internet slamming Bishop Mark and then were COMMANDED by the Met. to write an apology and the apology was a little more insulting than the original insult. More later, much more

#294 anoymous for now on 2010-11-02 03:42

the monster dosen't live in ohio pal. You of course don't care or will say wow I was wrong that's okay. Let the historians write this one. Kiss this legacy goodby, it will now have a different ending.

#295 anoymous for now on 2010-11-02 03:49

Applies to Bishop Philip: May his days be few;
may another take his place of leadership.
KJV Psalm 109.

Bishop Philip has become as King Saul. He gathers goats and slays the sheep.

#296 Daniel on 2010-11-02 06:35

Regarding Bishop Philip: Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin

#297 Daniel on 2010-11-02 09:51

Bishops and Priests of the Antiochian Archdiocese:

I do not like to write letters like this, but I feel that it would be wrong to remain silent.

How can these things be happening in our church? Through the centuries Christians have been persecuted for serving the one true God and pursuing His righteousness in love. Now it seems that the persecution is from within the hierarchy of the church itself.

I live within the area that Bishop Mark served. In his role as our bishop he has been a godly man seeking to live up to his responsibilities of safeguarding his people and God's righteousness. He has visited our church regularly and listened when people came to him with concerns. I fear that he gets in the way of an agenda that has nothing to do with the goals of true Orthodox Christianity as handed down to us by the Holy Fathers.

Now not only has our godly bishop been taken from us, but also out faithful priest, Fr. David Moretti. He is accused of not adhering to a dress code, but he has adhered to it. After being directed to change his attire to the normal clerical garb worn by Roman Catholic priests (black pants, black shirt, white collar) instead of a cassock, he did so. I am one of his parishioners and it pains me that such an injustice has been done to him and his family as well as to the whole parish by taking away this man who has been such a servant to the community here. In so many ways he has shown us his love and devotion to God, caring diligently for the spiritual well being of his flock. Does this count for naught?

I am aware that others have also been removed from positions (at least two deans, I do not know if there are more). One of them serves my area and although I do not know him well myself, others speak highly of him.

Is this truly God's will? Why is the leadership failing to stand for what is right? Please do not let these things continue. Have mercy on those for whom you have been given responsibility and stop this destruction.

I pray that God will be merciful to us and lead us in the way we should go, both for His glory and the salvation of us all.

#298 Paula on 2010-11-02 19:06

The so-called "draft" is no longer a draft. MP's 18 point resolution has been posted on the AOCA website.

#299 Laurence on 2010-11-03 10:31

I COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT BETTER! THANK YOU!

#300 Anonymous on 2010-11-05 09:43

EXTERNAL AUDIT, HERE IS VOTE NUMBER 2

#301 anoymous for now on 2010-11-08 04:54

An Internal audit is absolutely necessary!!! Unfortunately, unless all of the faithful of the Archdiocese request it; +Philip suddenly decides to "come Clean," (which is unlikely); his health renders incapable of performing his duties, (perhaps a severe heart attack or a stroke); or he simply reposes, (the most likely end to this), it probably won't happen.

And remember, his auxiliary bishops have no power to act according to the Canons, their wishes, or the desires of the people.

Pray that God clears the slate soon, so peace can be restored in the Archdiocese.

#302 Mark Sudia on 2010-11-08 09:20

I have some sad news to share with everyone here. Fr. Elias Yelovich (my priest) has been removed as priest from St. James the Apostle Orthodox Church in Westminster, Maryland for comments made on this website. I have read his comments and did not find them inflammatory in any way, and I did converse with him about this last night and found his perspective free of emotion and slander. Consequently, I'm baffled by this abrupt move tonight which did not afford opportunity for conversing in love. Yesterday, I was a man who did not know much about the controversies in the AOCA and chose to live in blissful ignorance; however, today I (and several other families) were cut off by Metropolitan Phillip! I may not know much about these controversies, and I try to remain skeptical until I know more facts, but this sudden change offends me greatly! Why has no one representing Metropolitan Phillip discussed the matters which bother and offend him? Why has no one brought us (the parishoners) along to understand the actions which the Archdiocese intended to take in response to the comments Fr. Elias posted? The sudden actions of dismissing a mission priest who is the minister to needy families and homeless in Westminster, Maryland affect us all here! I expect brash and inconsiderate actions from hardcore Evangelical fundamentalist churches and schools, but not the Orthodox! I thought I left that when I embraced Orthodoxy a mere 2 years ago. My roots, I'm afraid, are not deep enough to properly react to this event. I may have saved myself hundreds of dollars monthly tonight, but my soul and the souls of others hang in the balance. ....

#303 Karl Hjembo on 2010-11-08 20:42

Richard: You may be ABSOLUTELY right, that the EA is only another way for the Old World Orthodox Churches to maintain control of their dependencies in North America, and throughout the world.

While i don't have an Orthodox Episcopal Crystal Ball, and therefore I can't predict what will happen once the EA has fulfilled all directives of the Mother Churches, I'll take a (figurative) stab at predicting it anyway.

When the 8th Ecumenical Council, (great and Holy synod), or what ever they finally choose to call it finally convenes, the following things will happen.

1. Obviously, it will convene.

2. After some discussion of the Diaspora Issue, they will produce a set of canons that finally sets the procedure for local churches being granted Autonomy, (perhaps by their mother churches), and Autocephaly at a later date.

3. An equitable arrangement will be created by which the Patriarchate whose jurisdiction is largest in each nation will form the nucleus of the local Autonomous Church.

And the final granting of Autocephaly will be left to the E.P. or to a future Ecumenical Council.

4. His All Holiness the EP, (whom ever he is at the time), will attempt to exert his non existent authority, and decree that all Patriarchates release their Diocese, Archdiocese, or Metropolitan Districts to His care.

Which would cause the exact schisms that all hope to avoid.

5. The hierarchies within each country will simply say "enough is enough", to the respective Patriarchs, and declare themselves to be Autocephalous Churches.

Choice #3 above seems to be the most interesting "solution", as it would pit Constantinople, Bucharest, Damascus, and Moscow against each other, since there are regions in which is nearly identical to its sister jurisdictions in size.

In closing, shouldn't we in North America find it interesting,(or Fascinating), that although S.C.O.B.A. has been succeeded by the EA, (and therefore supposedly no longer exists), its members haven't gathered to officially dissolve the (apparently) defunct organization?

I believe that EA can move us toward the creation of the single Indigenous American Orthodox Church that must eventually exist in this country.

The great question is will the members of Our Episcopal Assembly have the Balls to stand up to the Patriarchs and simply declare itself to be the Holy Synod of Bishops of the American Church, if delegates to the Great and Holy Council decide amongst themselves that North America isn't ready for its own Autocephalous Church?

Only time will tell. And, I truly hope that His Grace bishop Basil's prediction that it's coming Soon is true.

(Editor's note: Interesting, except it goes askew at the first assumption. It is not obvious to anyone but you and Metropolitan Jonah it will convene in the near future. Chambesy was just closed. Where is the prep work for the next two years going to be done? And by whom? Paid by whom? Who's going to pay for at least 25 reps from 16 churches, plus observers, translators into 4 languages, etc. for this shindig that must last at least a week? Not Greece now. Not Turkey. Not Russia, because if they pay, you dance to their tune. Tell me who is going to pay ( Greeks in America, in Europe?) and I might begin to believe they will meet. Until then, dream on....)

#304 Mark Sudia on 2010-11-09 09:42

Dear Antionymous: I believe the Rabbi's answer to the Question of "Is there a Prayer for the Czar", was

"May God Bless and keep the Czar far away from Us!"

Any one speaking of Keeping +Philip for many years, or unto ages, missed and misses the point of the Rabbi's answer.

Besides, +Philip has already passed his 3 score and 10 years, (70), and is on his way to Four Score (80).

I suspect that his health may fail completely before he reaches 4 score and 10 (90).

#305 Mark Sudia on 2010-11-09 10:16

"Orthodox" North America, clear enough for yah?...and since when is "diplomacy" this country's first course of action? Your delusion is showing. Force and manipulation have won the day for the USA...for now. Unpack your invisible knapsack, homie...you live in an Empire.

"...and Whitey's on the Moon..."
-Gil Scott Heron

Moses the Tlingit

#306 Moses on 2010-11-12 19:23

+Philip Silences His Bishops

OCA News

Monday, October 25. 2010

+Philip Silences His Bishops

Calendar

Quicksearch

Archives