leandros
01-06-2005, 04:51 PM
Greek newspaper kathimerini reported from the Patriarch synod of Istanbul:
[Link] (http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_politics_100006_25/05/2005_56702)
"Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomaios chaired yesterday's meeting (25/05/2005) of the world's Orthodox Church leaders in Istanbul, which decided to uphold the ouster of the scandal-mired Irenaios, Patriarch of Jerusalem. Irenaios, who has denied claims he was involved in the covert handover of Church land in Jerusalem to Jewish investors, was quoted as saying he remained patriarch of Jerusalem, only to be contradicted by Vartholomaios.
The world's Orthodox Church leaders yesterday upheld the overthrow, by his own bishops, of scandal-mired Jerusalem Patriarch Irenaios, one day after the senior churchman defied a final appeal to voluntarily step down.
«We had to make a very sad decision concerning the Jerusalem Patriarchate,» Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomaios, who convened the rare meeting of senior representatives from the world's main Orthodox Churches - which Irenaios attended - told journalists after the decision was announced.
Irenaios has been accused of involvement in the politically explosive, covert handover of Church land in the Arab sector of Jerusalem to Jewish investors. Although Irenaios insists he is innocent - calling on God to cut off his hands should he be lying - rebel bishops raised the necessary majority in the Patriarchate's ruling body, the Holy Synod, to depose him early this month. This decision has since been confirmed by the Jordanian and Palestinian governments.
After an eight-hour session yesterday, Church leaders agreed to no longer recognize Irenaios as head of the Patriarchate, to strike him off the list of Orthodox leaders and to cease mentioning his name during prayers. Rebel bishops in Jerusalem were invited to appoint a caretaker patriarch before electing a replacement for Irenaios.
«We first decided to address a brotherly appeal to to voluntarily tender his resignation,» Vartholomaios said. «This was requested by our Synod, which did not convene as a court, as an act of sacrifice to pacify the Church. As [Irenaios] refused, the Synod accepted the decision by the Jerusalem Holy Synod.»
During his address to the Synod, Vartholomaios argued that, irrespective of Irenaios's culpability, «the peace of the clerics and lay members of the Church of Sion [the Jerusalem Patriarchate] has been broken, and cannot be restored without a sacrifice.»
My question is the following:
It seems to me from this report that, a secular failure is so important that even a Patriarch has to accept to be "sacrificed" for the sake of secular "peace of the clerics and lay members of the Church". This decision of the Synod was referring to secular and NOT spiritual failures of former Patriarch of Jerusalem Irenaios.
I know that the whole situation is much more complex, but I wonder how whould Orthodox church should reply to a secular situation of failure, in the context of spiritual submission to the outcome of being without the "peace of the clerics and lay members of the Church" ?
Is the peace of the clerics and lay members of the Church regarding a secular subject, an absolute standard by which Orthodox personalities are measured with ?
I ask this, because the synod decision was made "[i]irrespective of Irenaios's culpability".
A situation of secular turbulence can be designed and materialized by enemies of a person that has not the secular power to overcome this, in order to achieve his "sacrifice" in the name of a "secular piece".
If the personality of a Christian is judged as faint only for the account of his secular and not of his spiritual composition, then what is the Church's responce to him ? Can Orthodox Church afford secular failures ? Is the issue of secular life apprehended by the Orthodox Church as a political arena that needs to be manipulated in order to avoid upset the ecclesiastic superstructure ?
In the case that the Synod has found that former Patriarch Irenaios was unfitted and it tried to overcome this notion by refussing to sit in judgement for a verdict about him, using the pretension that "the peace of the clerics and lay members of the Church" is the most importand thing at that time, is exactly the same behaviour of secular realization of the Church as a political superstructure.
Could you please provide the Orthodox answer to this issue ?
(Message edited by admin on 01 June, 2005)
[Link] (http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_politics_100006_25/05/2005_56702)
"Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomaios chaired yesterday's meeting (25/05/2005) of the world's Orthodox Church leaders in Istanbul, which decided to uphold the ouster of the scandal-mired Irenaios, Patriarch of Jerusalem. Irenaios, who has denied claims he was involved in the covert handover of Church land in Jerusalem to Jewish investors, was quoted as saying he remained patriarch of Jerusalem, only to be contradicted by Vartholomaios.
The world's Orthodox Church leaders yesterday upheld the overthrow, by his own bishops, of scandal-mired Jerusalem Patriarch Irenaios, one day after the senior churchman defied a final appeal to voluntarily step down.
«We had to make a very sad decision concerning the Jerusalem Patriarchate,» Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomaios, who convened the rare meeting of senior representatives from the world's main Orthodox Churches - which Irenaios attended - told journalists after the decision was announced.
Irenaios has been accused of involvement in the politically explosive, covert handover of Church land in the Arab sector of Jerusalem to Jewish investors. Although Irenaios insists he is innocent - calling on God to cut off his hands should he be lying - rebel bishops raised the necessary majority in the Patriarchate's ruling body, the Holy Synod, to depose him early this month. This decision has since been confirmed by the Jordanian and Palestinian governments.
After an eight-hour session yesterday, Church leaders agreed to no longer recognize Irenaios as head of the Patriarchate, to strike him off the list of Orthodox leaders and to cease mentioning his name during prayers. Rebel bishops in Jerusalem were invited to appoint a caretaker patriarch before electing a replacement for Irenaios.
«We first decided to address a brotherly appeal to to voluntarily tender his resignation,» Vartholomaios said. «This was requested by our Synod, which did not convene as a court, as an act of sacrifice to pacify the Church. As [Irenaios] refused, the Synod accepted the decision by the Jerusalem Holy Synod.»
During his address to the Synod, Vartholomaios argued that, irrespective of Irenaios's culpability, «the peace of the clerics and lay members of the Church of Sion [the Jerusalem Patriarchate] has been broken, and cannot be restored without a sacrifice.»
My question is the following:
It seems to me from this report that, a secular failure is so important that even a Patriarch has to accept to be "sacrificed" for the sake of secular "peace of the clerics and lay members of the Church". This decision of the Synod was referring to secular and NOT spiritual failures of former Patriarch of Jerusalem Irenaios.
I know that the whole situation is much more complex, but I wonder how whould Orthodox church should reply to a secular situation of failure, in the context of spiritual submission to the outcome of being without the "peace of the clerics and lay members of the Church" ?
Is the peace of the clerics and lay members of the Church regarding a secular subject, an absolute standard by which Orthodox personalities are measured with ?
I ask this, because the synod decision was made "[i]irrespective of Irenaios's culpability".
A situation of secular turbulence can be designed and materialized by enemies of a person that has not the secular power to overcome this, in order to achieve his "sacrifice" in the name of a "secular piece".
If the personality of a Christian is judged as faint only for the account of his secular and not of his spiritual composition, then what is the Church's responce to him ? Can Orthodox Church afford secular failures ? Is the issue of secular life apprehended by the Orthodox Church as a political arena that needs to be manipulated in order to avoid upset the ecclesiastic superstructure ?
In the case that the Synod has found that former Patriarch Irenaios was unfitted and it tried to overcome this notion by refussing to sit in judgement for a verdict about him, using the pretension that "the peace of the clerics and lay members of the Church" is the most importand thing at that time, is exactly the same behaviour of secular realization of the Church as a political superstructure.
Could you please provide the Orthodox answer to this issue ?
(Message edited by admin on 01 June, 2005)