Eastern Orthodox Churches

  • Thread starter Thread starter Matthew_Holford
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Matthew_Holford

Guest
I would be grateful if any Orthodox brethren would answer these questions about the Eastern Orthodox Churches.

Would you please confirm that the Eastern Orthodox Church is comprised of 15 autocephalous churches? Is the following list correct?
  • The Church of Constantinople
  • The Church of Alexandria
  • The Church of Antioch
  • The Church of Jerusalem
  • The Church of Cyprus
  • The Church of Georgia
  • The Orthodox Church of Mount Sinai*
  • The Church of Bulgaria
  • The Church of Serbia
  • The Church of Russia
  • The Church of Greece
  • The Church of Romania
  • The Church of Albania
  • The church of Poland
  • The Church of Czech and Slovak Lands
I believe there are a number of autonomous Orthodox Churches (listed below). What is the difference between an autocephalous church and an autonomous one?

Under the Œcumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople
  • The Finnish Orthodox Church
  • The Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church
  • The Patriarchal Exarchate of Orthodox for Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe
Under the Patriarchate of Antioch
  • The Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America
Under the Patriarchate of Jerusalem
The Orthodox Church of Mount Sinai*

Under the Patriarchate of Moscow and All Russia
  • The Estonian Orthodox Church
  • The Latvian Orthodox Church
  • The Moldovan Orthodox Church
  • The Ukrainian Orthodox Church
  • The Japanese Orthodox Church
  • The Chinese Orthodox Church
  • The Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia
Under the Patriarchate of Peć and All Serbia
The Orthodox Ohrid Archbishopric

Under the Patriarchate of Romania
The Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia

*I am confused that the Orthodox Church of Mount Sinai is listed among the fifteen autocephalous churches and among the autonomous churches.

Is the hierarchy in the Eastern Orthodox Church as follows?

Exarch – Eparch – Archbishop – Metropolitan – Major Archbishop – Patriarch

Regards

Matthew
 
Mount Sinai is not autocephalus.

The fifteenth Church is the Orthodox Church in America, though the Greeks don’t recognize that autocephaly, in which case there are only 14 with the OCA listed under Moscow (which does recognize it).
 
Major Archbishop is an Eastern Catholic title invented in the last 50 years. Not an Orthodox one.
 
Matthew_Holford said:
Is the hierarchy in the Eastern Orthodox Church as follows?

Exarch – Eparch – Archbishop – Metropolitan – Major Archbishop – Patriarch
Click to expand...
New here - but since no one else has answered this part of your question, I’ll give it a go. The hierarchy is not rigidly defined in the manner you outline because technically there are only three offices - bishop, priest, and deacon - with the highest being bishop. Anything else reflects administrative ranking which varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

So, depending on the jurisdiction, the head of the synod of an autocephalous Church could be an Archbishop (Greece, Constantinople), a Metropolitan (Bulgaria), a Patriarch (Russia, Antioch) and/or a Pope (Alexandria, title is Pope and Patriarch).

Under the ‘patriarch level’ will be various Archbishops, Metropolitans, and just-plain Bishops. The former two are titles signfiying one who is head over a large ecclesiastical jurisdiction (diocese, city, exarchate, autonomous Church, self-governing Church, etc.) Archbishops/Metropolitans may be administratively over a number of Bishops, or not and they may have auxiliary Bishops assisting them - or not. In some traditions Metropolitans outrank Archbishops and in others Archbishops outrank Metropolitans.

The only ‘exarchs’ I know of are not Bishops in the sense of belonging to the Synod. They are more like vicars for the ‘Patriarch’ and govern newly created diocese that are not yet self-supporting.
 
jgribb said:
New here - but since no one else has answered this part of your question, I’ll give it a go. The hierarchy is not rigidly defined in the manner you outline because technically there are only three offices - bishop, priest, and deacon - with the highest being bishop. Anything else reflects administrative ranking which varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

So, depending on the jurisdiction, the head of the synod of an autocephalous Church could be an Archbishop (Greece, Constantinople), a Metropolitan (Bulgaria), a Patriarch (Russia, Antioch) and/or a Pope (Alexandria, title is Pope and Patriarch).

Under the ‘patriarch level’ will be various Archbishops, Metropolitans, and just-plain Bishops. The former two are titles signfiying one who is head over a large ecclesiastical jurisdiction (diocese, city, exarchate, autonomous Church, self-governing Church, etc.) Archbishops/Metropolitans may be administratively over a number of Bishops, or not and they may have auxiliary Bishops assisting them - or not. In some traditions Metropolitans outrank Archbishops and in others Archbishops outrank Metropolitans.

The only ‘exarchs’ I know of are not Bishops in the sense of belonging to the Synod. They are more like vicars for the ‘Patriarch’ and govern newly created diocese that are not yet self-supporting.
Click to expand...
Just to add to this, a Metropolitan can be an auxillary bishop himself - Metropolitan Kalistos (Ware) is an example of this.
On Exarchs, I think your example is good. The one exarchate I’ve visited was based out of a monastery on an island with a population of 3,000, quite small for a diocese, yet remote enough that it couldn’t easily be placed under another bishop.
 
jgribb said:
New here - but since no one else has answered this part of your question, I’ll give it a go. The hierarchy is not rigidly defined in the manner you outline because technically there are only three offices - bishop, priest, and deacon - with the highest being bishop. Anything else reflects administrative ranking which varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

So, depending on the jurisdiction, the head of the synod of an autocephalous Church could be an Archbishop (Greece, Constantinople), a Metropolitan (Bulgaria), a Patriarch (Russia, Antioch) and/or a Pope (Alexandria, title is Pope and Patriarch).

Under the ‘patriarch level’ will be various Archbishops, Metropolitans, and just-plain Bishops. The former two are titles signfiying one who is head over a large ecclesiastical jurisdiction (diocese, city, exarchate, autonomous Church, self-governing Church, etc.) Archbishops/Metropolitans may be administratively over a number of Bishops, or not and they may have auxiliary Bishops assisting them - or not. In some traditions Metropolitans outrank Archbishops and in others Archbishops outrank Metropolitans.

The only ‘exarchs’ I know of are not Bishops in the sense of belonging to the Synod. They are more like vicars for the ‘Patriarch’ and govern newly created diocese that are not yet self-supporting.
Click to expand...
WELCOME!!!

I’d like to add that in the early Church, “Exarch” meant a head bishop of a province that was not within the traditional territories of the pentarchial Patriarchates. AFAIK, only the primate of Cyprus had that designation. I don’t know what the designation of the primate of Cyprus has now (officially) in the EOC(?).

Blessings
 
Nine_Two said:
Just to add to this, a Metropolitan can be an auxillary bishop himself - Metropolitan Kalistos (Ware) is an example of this.
On Exarchs, I think your example is good. The one exarchate I’ve visited was based out of a monastery on an island with a population of 3,000, quite small for a diocese, yet remote enough that it couldn’t easily be placed under another bishop.
Click to expand...
In the Catholic Church, an “auxiliary bishop” by definition has no prerogative of succession in the diocese he is serving (i.e., that prerogative belongs to the co-adjutor bishop). Is it the same in the EOC?

Blessings
 
mardukm said:
In the Catholic Church, an “auxiliary bishop” by definition has no prerogative of succession in the diocese he is serving (i.e., that prerogative belongs to the co-adjutor bishop). Is it the same in the EOC?

Blessings
Click to expand...
Pretty much. In the modern day it is a Bishop appointed over a see which doesn’t really exist for the purpose of assisting another bishop with whatever he needs. In the case of Kallistos Ware he’s the Metropolitan Archbishop of Thyrateira, which is in Turkey and of course doesn’t have a Christian population (the ruins of the cathedral are filled with cute lovable tortoises… but that’s getting off topic…), and his job is rather than tending a flock, to take care of Orthodox-Anglican Relations (officially for the EP, but from what I understand is he takes his job from a pan-Orthodox perspective). Another example is the recently concecrated OCA bishop of Quebec City, Irenee. His see has never existed as a distinct entity, and he serves under Archbishop Seraphim of Ottawa, and helps him keep his massive (geographically) see in order.

I know that’s more then you asked, but I figured I’d clarify some things in anticipation of possible questions others might have. 🙂
 
mardukm said:
WELCOME!!!

I’d like to add that in the early Church, “Exarch” meant a head bishop of a province that was not within the traditional territories of the pentarchial Patriarchates. AFAIK, only the primate of Cyprus had that designation. I don’t know what the designation of the primate of Cyprus has now (officially) in the EOC(?).

Blessings
Click to expand...
Cyprus is simply Archbishop now.
 
Nine_Two said:
Pretty much. In the modern day it is a Bishop appointed over a see which doesn’t really exist for the purpose of assisting another bishop with whatever he needs. In the case of Kallistos Ware he’s the Metropolitan Archbishop of Thyrateira, which is in Turkey and of course doesn’t have a Christian population (the ruins of the cathedral are filled with cute lovable tortoises… but that’s getting off topic…), and his job is rather than tending a flock, to take care of Orthodox-Anglican Relations (officially for the EP, but from what I understand is he takes his job from a pan-Orthodox perspective). Another example is the recently concecrated OCA bishop of Quebec City, Irenee. His see has never existed as a distinct entity, and he serves under Archbishop Seraphim of Ottawa, and helps him keep his massive (geographically) see in order.

I know that’s more then you asked, but I figured I’d clarify some things in anticipation of possible questions others might have. 🙂
Click to expand...
I’m finding these posts interesting if not a little confusing. I seem to be more ignorant of the hierarchy of the EOCs than I thought. Never mind, I’ll get there.

Nine_Two can I check what you said about Metropolitan Kallistos (Timothy Ware). You say he’s the Metropolitan of Thyrateira. Both Wikipedia (where I first found him) (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Kallistos_%28Ware%29_of_Diokleia) and the Ecumenical Patriarch’s website (http://www.ec-patr.org/hierarchs/index.php?lang=en) lists him as the Titular Metropolitan of Diokleia.
 
Matthew_Holford said:
I’m finding these posts interesting if not a little confusing. I seem to be more ignorant of the hierarchy of the EOCs than I thought. Never mind, I’ll get there.

Nine_Two can I check what you said about Metropolitan Kallistos (Timothy Ware). You say he’s the Metropolitan of Thyrateira. Both Wikipedia (where I first found him) (http://orthodoxwiki.org/Kallistos_%28Ware%29_of_Diokleia) and the Ecumenical Patriarch’s website (http://www.ec-patr.org/hierarchs/index.php?lang=en) lists him as the Titular Metropolitan of Diokleia.
Click to expand...
Orthodox wiki isn’t Wikipedia, but I’d trust those sites over me. So he’s metropolitan of Diokleia, not Thyrateira.
 
Nine_Two said:
Orthodox wiki isn’t Wikipedia
Click to expand...
OK. Looks like Wikipedia just thought it was part of it.
Nine_Two said:
but I’d trust those sites over me.
Click to expand...
I am not Wikipedia’s biggest fan. Only accepted what it said because was confirmed on Ecumenical Patriarch’s web site.
Nine_Two said:
So he’s metropolitan of Diokleia, not Thyrateira.
Click to expand...
Wanted to check because I’m not well up on Orthodox hierarchy. I think he’s based in Orthodox diocese (?) of Thyrateira.
 
Matthew_Holford said:
OK. Looks like Wikipedia just thought it was part of it.

I am not Wikipedia’s biggest fan. Only accepted what it said because was confirmed on Ecumenical Patriarch’s web site.

Wanted to check because I’m not well up on Orthodox hierarchy. I think he’s based in Orthodox diocese (?) of Thyrateira.
Click to expand...
That’s what it is, the diocese name that he serves is, according to Wikipedia, “Great Britain and Thyrateira”.
 
Nine_Two said:
Pretty much. In the modern day it is a Bishop appointed over a see which doesn’t really exist for the purpose of assisting another bishop with whatever he needs. In the case of Kallistos Ware he’s the Metropolitan Archbishop of Thyrateira, which is in Turkey and of course doesn’t have a Christian population (the ruins of the cathedral are filled with cute lovable tortoises… but that’s getting off topic…), and his job is rather than tending a flock, to take care of Orthodox-Anglican Relations (officially for the EP, but from what I understand is he takes his job from a pan-Orthodox perspective). Another example is the recently concecrated OCA bishop of Quebec City, Irenee. His see has never existed as a distinct entity, and he serves under Archbishop Seraphim of Ottawa, and helps him keep his massive (geographically) see in order.

I know that’s more then you asked, but I figured I’d clarify some things in anticipation of possible questions others might have. 🙂
Click to expand...
How and who appoint a Bishop?

What and who decide whether it’s a Autocephalous, a Metropolitan, a Patriarch and a Pope?

Hope the questions make sense and clarification is welcome if that’s not the way EOC functions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top