Ecclesiology question on ACOE

[mardukm]

This question is particularly for our Chaldean brethren from the ACOE.

According to the Eastern Orthodox Churches, the immediate jurisidiction of their Patriarchs is only in that Patriarch’s local episcopal (not patriarchal) See.

According to the Catholic and Oriental Orthodox Churches, the immediate jurisdiction of our Patriarchs is the entire Patriarchate (though in practice, if not in theory, the Eastern Catholic Churches might(?) be more similar to the Eastern Orthodox Churches - I hope my Eastern Catholic brethren can clarify this for me).

In short:

EOC position:
Patriarch only has immediate jurisdiction in his local episcopal see. He can practice plenary jurisdiction for the Patriarchate in
Synod and ONLY in synod;

Catholic and Oriental Orthodox position:
Patriarch has plenary jurisdiction in his patriarchal See. He practices this plenary jurisdiction in Synod or, in extenuating circumstances, on his own with later Synodal ratification.

What is the position of the ACOE on the matter? Does/did your Patriarch have plenary jurisdiction for the entire Church, or was it limited to his local See. In other words, was/is your ecclesiology closer to the EOC or the CC/OOC?

To all readers: please understand I am asking about the PATRIARCHAL office. I am not talking about the papal office.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Addai]

Mardukm how exactly do you look this stuff up? After various conversations on these issues regarding the Coptic Church, I’ve had a really hard time googling information like this.

 

[antgaria]

Dear Mardukm,

The Church of the East position is very akin to the Roman and Oriental positions. The local patriarch is seen as spiritual father to all. Similarly the patriarch of Rome is seen as spiritual father to all. This is the logic of Mar Abdisho in his canons.

Love,
Anthony

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Addai,

Mardukm how exactly do you look this stuff up? After various conversations on these issues regarding the Coptic Church, I’ve had a really hard time googling information like this.

Every Oriental Church normally appends the title “Supreme” when describing their Patriarch. You can look it up on their websites. This is something I gather you will never find in the EOC.

As far as the Coptic Church is concerned, you can get much information from the Coptic Encyclopedia. It is over $1200 last I looked several years ago, probably a lot more now. But your local Coptic Church should have it for public access. Your larger municipal public libararies should also have it.

Here is an excerpt from the Article in the Coptic Encyclopedia “Pope in the Coptic Church:”

“From ancient times, the Coptic Church has been orgainized as a quasi-monarchical institution. Therefore, the Council of Nicaea (325) stated: ‘Let the ancient custom prevail that was in vogue in Egypt and Libya and the Pentapolis, to allow the bishop of Alexandria to have authority over all these parts, since this is also the treatment usually accorded to the bishop of Rome.’ (Canon VI)”

There are other matters from which you can glean this quasi-monarchical status of the Patriarch of Alexandria. For example, the election of bishops. In the EOC, candidates are submitted to the Synod directly who then choose the bishop. In the Coptic Church, candidates are submitted to the Pope directly, who chooses, and then the decision is ratified by the Synod.

As brother Antgaria has noted, recognizing that the Patriarch is the spiritual father of the ENTIRE patriarchal Church, and not just his local See (as the EOC teaches), is an idea foreign to Oriental ecclesiology. We Orientals (as well as Catholics, btw) believe that, in perfect accord with the ancient canons, a Patriarch has actual jurisdiction in his entire Patriarchate, and not just his local see. Of course, this jurisdiction is never practiced or to be practiced tyranically or absolutely.

Abundant blessings,
Marduk

P.S. How goes your spiritual journey? If you want to PM or e-mail me on the matter, I would love to know what’s going on.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Anthony,

The Church of the East position is very akin to the Roman and Oriental positions. The local patriarch is seen as spiritual father to all. Similarly the patriarch of Rome is seen as spiritual father to all. This is the logic of Mar Abdisho in his canons.

Thank you for your response! It was what I suspected, but I wanted to make sure.

My theory is that the Church of the East, the farthest removed from the ecclesiological squabbles between the Greek Churches and the Latin Church, should have an ecclesiological perspective reflecting the actual intentions of the Nicene canons.

I have often heard/read of EO’s criticizing the Ecumenical Patriarch for being too “Romish” in the exercise of his function within the EOC. But, as I’ve expressed before in this forum, I feel the EP is simply trying to recover the actual prerogatives granted to him by the ancient Canons. Well, that’s something the EO’s have to work out among themselves.

Thank you once again for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

Abundant blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

CORRECTION:

As brother Antgaria has noted, recognizing that the Patriarch is the spiritual father of the ENTIRE patriarchal Church, and not just his local See (as the EOC teaches), is an idea foreign to Oriental ecclesiology.

Wow! What a huge faux pas. That should be read:

As brother Antgaria has noted, the Patriarch is the spiritual Father of the ENTIRE patriarchal Church, and not just his local See (as the EOC teaches, which is an idea foreign to Oriental ecclesiology).

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Addai]

Dear brother Addai,

Every Oriental Church normally appends the title “Supreme” when describing their Patriarch. You can look it up on their websites. This is something I gather you will never find in the EOC.

As far as the Coptic Church is concerned, you can get much information from the Coptic Encyclopedia. It is over $1200 last I looked several years ago, probably a lot more now. But your local Coptic Church should have it for public access. Your larger municipal public libararies should also have it.

Here is an excerpt from the Article in the Coptic Encyclopedia “Pope in the Coptic Church:”

“From ancient times, the Coptic Church has been orgainized as a quasi-monarchical institution. Therefore, the Council of Nicaea (325) stated: ‘Let the ancient custom prevail that was in vogue in Egypt and Libya and the Pentapolis, to allow the bishop of Alexandria to have authority over all these parts, since this is also the treatment usually accorded to the bishop of Rome.’ (Canon VI)”

There are other matters from which you can glean this quasi-monarchical status of the Patriarch of Alexandria. For example, the election of bishops. In the EOC, candidates are submitted to the Synod directly who then choose the bishop. In the Coptic Church, candidates are submitted to the Pope directly, who chooses, and then the decision is ratified by the Synod.

As brother Antgaria has noted, recognizing that the Patriarch is the spiritual father of the ENTIRE patriarchal Church, and not just his local See (as the EOC teaches), is an idea foreign to Oriental ecclesiology. We Orientals (as well as Catholics, btw) believe that, in perfect accord with the ancient canons, a Patriarch has actual jurisdiction in his entire Patriarchate, and not just his local see. Of course, this jurisdiction is never practiced or to be practiced tyranically or absolutely.

Abundant blessings,
Marduk

P.S. How goes your spiritual journey? If you want to PM or e-mail me on the matter, I would love to know what’s going on.

Awesome this is exactly the thing I was looking for!

Although to play Devils advocate… I may have some counter evidence against your idea on Coptic Ecclesiology. Check out what this Coptic web page history class CMP102 says about their relationship with the EO (concerning the issue of reunification). The differences they highlight besides Chalcedon tend to be liturgical and discipline ones like fasting differences. (People like my wife would see that as as evidence that Coptic Church is really more like the EO. IF there was a big Ecclesiology difference they would say “Why wasn’t this raised during official negotiations?”).

suscopts.org/stmaryhouston/framePage.html?/stmaryhouston/ss/servantslessons/

My spiritual journey is about the same as it has been (staying Coptic O, as long as I remain in my area. But if I move out of the area (which my wife definitely does want to do) I will definitely seriously explore the option of being EC (most likely Maronite). Thanks for asking!

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Addai,

Although to play Devils advocate… I may have some counter evidence against your idea on Coptic Ecclesiology. Check out what this Coptic web page history class CMP102 says about their relationship with the EO (concerning the issue of reunification). The differences they highlight besides Chalcedon tend to be liturgical and discipline ones like fasting differences. (People like my wife would see that as as evidence that Coptic Church is really more like the EO. IF there was a big Ecclesiology difference they would say “Why wasn’t this raised during official negotiations?”).

The reason is quite simple. Though there is a difference in the ecclesiology, the ecclesiology is an INTERNAL affair within each particular Church. How a particular Church views its Patriarch and how that Patriarch acts within that particular Church will not affect any other particular Church’s internal affairs. The issue of ecclesiology with the Catholic Church, however, involves the issue of the papacy, which WOULD conceivably have inter-jurisdictional ramifications.

Of course, I do not know how it would work out with the Syrian (Oriental) Orthodox, as they consider the headship of Peter among the Apostles, and the resultant prerogatives of its Patriarch based specifically on that Petrine headship, as a matter of DOCTRINAL Faith, and not just merely ecclesiology.

IMHO, there are other matters that need to be put on the table, but only conditionally. For instance, the greater focus on penitential spirituality within Oriental Orthodoxy in general, as well as the specific adherence of Oriental Orthodoxy to the doctrine of the Atonement, which seems to be rejected, or at least mollified greatly, in the Eastern Orthodox Tradition. I say conditionally because I would be willing to let these matters go ONLY if the EO are willing to let these matters go with regards to the Latin Church. Otherwise, I think it would be hypocrisy to overlook this difference between the OO and EO Traditions, while the EO constantly lambast the Latins for their adherence to penitential spirituality and the Atonement.

My spiritual journey is about the same as it has been (staying Coptic O, as long as I remain in my area. But if I move out of the area (which my wife definitely does want to do) I will definitely seriously explore the option of being EC (most likely Maronite). Thanks for asking!

Thank you for the update! I will be praying for you. If you don’t mind some brotherly advice, instead of pointing out differences, keep pointing out to your wife how complementary the Eastern and Latin views are on many theological issues. If you need help in pointing out the complimentariness of the theology, I’ll be more than happy to discuss it with you. I’ve gone through all the arguments myself in my swim across the Tiber, and I’ve found only misunderstanding and misrespresentation, with no real cause for division on many of the issues that are claimed to be divisive.

Abundant blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

Among matters to be put on the table for discussion between EOC and COC, I would also add the issue of marriage. The EOC permits divorce and re-marriage in MANY MORE circumstances than the COC permits. It is true that there is an agreement IN EGYPT between the CO and the EO, Alexandrian Patriarchate, to recognize each others’ marriages, but this is only under limited circumstances. If there was full communion between the COC and EOC, the difference would become even more obvious and perhaps even divisive.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[JMJ_coder]

Why, may I ask, is the general notion I get from others is that the Oriental Orthodox are closer to reestablishing communion with the Eastern Orthodox than with the Catholic Church?

 

[Aramis]

I suspect it’s from several issues…

1. Pope Shenouda III is strongly vocal about no unification with the Catholic Church.
2. HH Alexi II of Moscow is openly anti-catholic
3. Neither has been supportive of the EP’s dialogs, both having criticized the talks.
4. HH Alexi and Pope Shenouda both have accused the Latins of Heresy. Neither’s synods entirely agree.

The thing is that the OOC ecclesiastical system is closer to Catholic than EO, but it isn’t the same, and the cross-patriarchal universality is not as strongly seen.

The Pope of Rome, however, claims a role which is best expressed as Archpatriarch; a role supported by Assyrian Theology! (In which it is said that the Pope is to the Patriarch as the Patriarch is to the Bishops; their patriarchal view is that of universal jurisdiction within the patriarchate.)

 

[JMJ_coder]

I suspect it’s from several issues…

1. Pope Shenouda III is strongly vocal about no unification with the Catholic Church.
2. HH Alexi II of Moscow is openly anti-catholic
3. Neither has been supportive of the EP’s dialogs, both having criticized the talks.
4. HH Alexi and Pope Shenouda both have accused the Latins of Heresy. Neither’s synods entirely agree.

The thing is that the OOC ecclesiastical system is closer to Catholic than EO, but it isn’t the same, and the cross-patriarchal universality is not as strongly seen.

The Pope of Rome, however, claims a role which is best expressed as Archpatriarch; a role supported by Assyrian Theology! (In which it is said that the Pope is to the Patriarch as the Patriarch is to the Bishops; their patriarchal view is that of universal jurisdiction within the patriarchate.)

Why does Pope Shenouda have it in for the Catholic Church? Patriach Alexi – well, yeah that’s well known - but why doesn’t Pope Shenouda like us?

And, seeing how he is aging and in failing health – maybe his successor would be more amenable to such a reunification?

And how goes our dialogue with other Oriental Churches – Assyrians, Armenians, Syriacs, etc.?

 

[malphono]

I suspect it’s from several issues…

1. Pope Shenouda III is strongly vocal about no unification with the Catholic Church.
2. HH Alexi II of Moscow is openly anti-catholic
3. Neither has been supportive of the EP’s dialogs, both having criticized the talks.
4. HH Alexi and Pope Shenouda both have accused the Latins of Heresy. Neither’s synods entirely agree.

The thing is that the OOC ecclesiastical system is closer to Catholic than EO, but it isn’t the same, and the cross-patriarchal universality is not as strongly seen.

The Pope of Rome, however, claims a role which is best expressed as Archpatriarch; a role supported by Assyrian Theology! (In which it is said that the Pope is to the Patriarch as the Patriarch is to the Bishops; their patriarchal view is that of universal jurisdiction within the patriarchate.)

I agree totally about the Muscovite position. It seems to me it’s a lost cause, at least in the present “circumstances” (as it were). Perhaps sometime in the future. The Copts are another matter. The facts are well stated above, and of course I cannot argue them, but I will make an observation:

I have a feeling that HH Shenouda’s opposition may be rooted in what I will call “Coptic self-isolation.” The Copts were very badly treated by the Arab conquerors and their Ottoman successors. They fared a little better under the British protectorate, but even that had a very negative point: the “Christian” missionaries who were hell bent on converting the Copts to Protestantism. In the modern period, it’s back to the Arab conquerors again, and back to the same ill treatment. Looking at that, while I don’t agree with HH Shenouda, in light of history I can sort of understand his m.o. and reticence to move forward. It would seem to me the “Coptic problem” is fear of being controlled (and possibly abused) yet again by outsiders, hence the feeling of “self isolation.”

I have encountered a number of Coptic Orthodox laity in the past couple of years, and invariably they seem to have no problem entering an OCC and assisting at services. And from what I understand, (source will remain unnamed but it’s someone personally involved with the discussions) the Coptic bishop in New York, is very much “on board” with the reunification talks. so we end up with a case where it’s “NO” from the top but “YES” from the bottom. Hopefully HH Shenouda can be made to see that the intent is not to dominate and destroy the Copts but, as with Moscow, it might also have to wait a while.

Bottom line, though, is I think the chances with the Copts are much better than they will ever be with Moscow.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother malphono,

I have encountered a number of Coptic Orthodox laity in the past couple of years, and invariably they seem to have no problem entering an OCC and assisting at services. And from what I understand, (source will remain unnamed but it’s someone personally involved with the discussions) the Coptic bishop in New York, is very much “on board” with the reunification talks. so we end up with a case where it’s “NO” from the top but “YES” from the bottom. Hopefully HH Shenouda can be made to see that the intent is not to dominate and destroy the Copts but, as with Moscow, it might also have to wait a while.

Bottom line, though, is I think the chances with the Copts are much better than they will ever be with Moscow.

I can p(name removed by moderator)oint an approximate date for the cold relations between the Coptic Church and the Catholic Church - 1994. This was when talks between the two churches were broken off. Why? It was the same year that the Catholic Church signed a Christological agreement with the ACOE. The COC and the ACOE are historic “enemies”, I’m VERY saddened to say. HH Pope Shenoute was quite vocal at the time in expressing his concerns to HH JP2 of thrice-blessed memory. Of course, the media has not reported the obvious connection between the two events, for good reason, IMHO.

This is the main source of all the more recent anti-Catholic sentiments within the COC (e.g. the statement by HE Bishoy in recent memory that Catholics are bound for hell along with the Protestants).

As you and brother Aramis have correctly pointed out, these singular actions have not found unanimous support in the Coptic Synod. Indeed, at the grass-roots level, you would not think such anti-Catholicism existed within the COC.

I am ashamed to say that I have not kept up with the inter-church affairs for the past two years (life has made me very preoccupied with other matters), but I do recall hearing that official talks between the COC and the CC will start up again, or have been scheduled to do so. There is hope (more hope than with the ROC). Rome and Alexandria before Chalcedon were historic and close allies. I pray for the day when such relations will be re-established.

Abundant blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

The thing is that the OOC ecclesiastical system is closer to Catholic than EO, but it isn’t the same, and the cross-patriarchal universality is not as strongly seen.

The Pope of Rome, however, claims a role which is best expressed as Archpatriarch; a role supported by Assyrian Theology! (In which it is said that the Pope is to the Patriarch as the Patriarch is to the Bishops; their patriarchal view is that of universal jurisdiction within the patriarchate.)

Everything you have stated is true, brother. The COC need a gentle reminder that it was Pope St. Athanasius HIMSELF at the Council of Sardica who helped assign to the bishop of Rome the prerogative to be able to hear appeals from all the bishops in Christendom (ratified by the Sixth and Seventh Ecumenical Councils no less - well, the latter fact may not register to an OO, but it should register to an EO).

Everyone (Latins, Easterns, and Orientals) needs to be reminded that the role of ArchPatriarch, as it is with the role of Patriarch, is not to be a watchdog, policeman, or boss, but to be a respectful ELDER BROTHER. No one should feel threatened that such roles exist, because they exist for the good order of the Church of God.

Abundant blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother JMJ_Coder,

And how goes our dialogue with other Oriental Churches – Assyrians, Armenians, Syriacs, etc.?

Though I have not kept up diligently with inter-Church affairs in the past two years, from the grapevine, I can tell you that the relationships with the other OOC’s is VERY GOOD.

I’ve pointed this out in the past, but it may be a good refresher.

The Armenian Apostolic Church and the Syrian Orthodox Church have pastoral agreements with the Catholic Church IN THE UNITED STATES to recognize each others’ marriages.

This is similar to the pastoral agreement between the COC and the EOC,Alexandrian Patriarchate.

If the latter can be used to approximate the good relationship between the COC and the EOC, the former can be used to approximate the good relationship between the CC and the rest of Oriental Orthodoxy.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Ghosty]

I can p(name removed by moderator)oint an approximate date for the cold relations between the Coptic Church and the Catholic Church - 1994. This was when talks between the two churches were broken off. Why? It was the same year that the Catholic Church signed a Christological agreement with the ACOE. The COC and the ACOE are historic “enemies”, I’m VERY saddened to say. HH Pope Shenoute was quite vocal at the time in expressing his concerns to HH JP2 of thrice-blessed memory. Of course, the media has not reported the obvious connection between the two events, for good reason, IMHO.

Interestingly I was recently discussing a similar event with an ACOE/Assyrian Catholic priest (his parish was one of Mar Bawai’s that recently entered the Catholic Communion, and I’m not sure how exactly they’re referred to yet). Apparently the Syriac Orthodox Church was having good dialogue with the ACOE as well, until Pope Shenouda gave some very negative words about the matter to the Syriac Patriarch. After that the talks all but ceased. It seems we shouldn’t underestimate the difficulties between the Coptic Orthodox Church and the ACOE.

As for the Oriental and Eastern Orthodox being so close, I think it’s because they really ARE so similar, just as ALL the Apostolic Churches are (including the Latin Church and all the others). From the ground level it’s really difficult to draw “hard lines” between any of the Apostolic Churches, IMO.

Peace and God bless!

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Ghosty,

Interestingly I was recently discussing a similar event with an ACOE/Assyrian Catholic priest (his parish was one of Mar Bawai’s that recently entered the Catholic Communion, and I’m not sure how exactly they’re referred to yet). Apparently the Syriac Orthodox Church was having good dialogue with the ACOE as well, until Pope Shenouda gave some very negative words about the matter to the Syriac Patriarch. After that the talks all but ceased. It seems we shouldn’t underestimate the difficulties between the Coptic Orthodox Church and the ACOE.

Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut! This is very sad indeed.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[malphono]

Interestingly I was recently discussing a similar event with an ACOE/Assyrian Catholic priest (his parish was one of Mar Bawai’s that recently entered the Catholic Communion, and I’m not sure how exactly they’re referred to yet). Apparently the Syriac Orthodox Church was having good dialogue with the ACOE as well, until Pope Shenouda gave some very negative words about the matter to the Syriac Patriarch. After that the talks all but ceased. It seems we shouldn’t underestimate the difficulties between the Coptic Orthodox Church and the ACOE.

As for the Oriental and Eastern Orthodox being so close, I think it’s because they really ARE so similar, just as ALL the Apostolic Churches are (including the Latin Church and all the others). From the ground level it’s really difficult to draw “hard lines” between any of the Apostolic Churches, IMO.

Peace and God bless!

I don’t see a year, and I’m curious as to who the Syriac Orthodox Patriarch in question was. If it was Mar Zakka, yes, I can see how it happened. If it was before that (Mar Ignatious Yaqoub), I’d be very surprised.

 

[JMJ_coder]

The COC and the ACOE are historic “enemies”, I’m VERY saddened to say.

Could you give me more information on this?