Patriarchate of Jerusalem Severs Communion With Patriarchate of Romania

[thomon16]

The Holy Synod of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem met on Monday 9 May 2011 regarding the anti-canonical actions of the Patriarchate of Romania, which has built a church and hostel in Jericho without their permission.

The Holy Synod of Jerusalem, after an in-depth investigation, decided to sever communion with the Patriarchate of Romania.

johnsanidopoulos.com/2011/05/patriarchate-of-jerusalem-has-severed.html

Was this important enough (for example, heresy) to break communion?

 

[po18guy]

If this has been going on since the 1990s, and was done in spite of an expressed lack of permission, then it would constitute a serious matter. Rather than heresy, which involves false teaching, it appears to be an act of disobedience. This decision does not appear to have been hastily done, and probably follows 15+ years of dialog. It is very sad, but good may yet come of it. Let us watch with interest and prayer for Christian unity.

 

[thomon16]

“An act of disobedience”? Disobedience to whom? Is the Romanian OC “disobedient” to the OC of Jerusalem? I know - disobedient to the canons of the Orthodox Church. But, does this situation merit breaking communion? It reminds me of the scandalous and unChristian clergy fights in the Holy Sites of Jerusalem. “Vanity, vanity, all is vanity…”

As the following website states: “The most serious thing appears when a deviation from the faith comes up. This could be the only serious reason for breaking up the Eucharistic or liturgical communion with a hierarch of a Church… The breaking up of the communion with the Patriarch of Romania, namely his removal from the diptychs is also an extreme measure that can be taken only in extreme cases, when a Patriarch of a Church falls into a heresy, in very serious situations.”

In any case, discussions will take place and efforts will be made to resolve this. And, I agree - let us pray for Christian unity.

Romanian Patriarchate seeks reconciliation with Jerusalem

byztex.blogspot.com/2011/05/romanian-patriarchate-seeks.html

 

[po18guy]

Clearly, there is more to it than is contained in the article. For such serious action to be taken, a serious violation, or violations, must have occurred. It sounds as though this has been brewing for decades. However, on a practical level, what would the effect of breaking communion be? Conciliar?

 

[steve_b]

The Holy Synod of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem met on Monday 9 May 2011 regarding the anti-canonical actions of the Patriarchate of Romania, which has built a church and hostel in Jericho without their permission.

The Holy Synod of Jerusalem, after an in-depth investigation, decided to sever communion with the Patriarchate of Romania.

johnsanidopoulos.com/2011/05/patriarchate-of-jerusalem-has-severed.html

Was this important enough to break communion?

The question I would ask the patriarch,

• with the Christian population at less that 2% in ALL the holy land, how is your action going to increase those numbers?

 

[Bezant]

Q: Was this important enough (for example, heresy) to break communion?

Church of the Holy Sepulcher brat politics, magnified

 

[Bezant]

The question I would ask the patriarch,

• with the Christian population at less that 2% in ALL the holy land, how is your action going to increase those numbers?

The question of numbers is irrelevant, IMO, especially given immigration and conversion of non-Jews in Israel and the West Bank are low.

To take your good question a step further, how will your behaviour look before Christians already weary of infighting and splits amongst Christians in the Holy Land?

 

[Hesychios]

“An act of disobedience”? Disobedience to whom?

Disobedience is probably not the best term.

I know - disobedient to the canons of the Orthodox Church.

Not just the Orthodox church, those canons are Roman Catholic canons too, unless the RC wishes to forget it’s own past.

It would be like the Arcbishop of New York city building a parish in London, and staffing it with a priest from NYC without permission. It’s not allowed in your church any more than it is allowed in the Orthodox church, and the reason is the same.

In the early church this kind of dispute could sometimes be handled with excommunication. I read recently where saint Ambrose in Milan Italy had excommunicated some other Catholic bishops in Spain (or France/Gaul, I forget). That didn’t mean these other bishops were out of the church, destined for hell, graceless or any other such thing. It just meant he was no longer going to commune or concelebrate with them, mainly as a sign of his displeasure and indignation over what they had done which he considered extremely serious. This was the Catholic church of the fourth century.