Take Our Church Back!: CANON LXXXI

“Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them,

and they that are great exercise authority upon them.

But it shall not be so among you:

but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;

And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:

Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto,

but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” (Matthew 20:25-28, KJV)

The word the Athenians used for their Assembly was Ekklesia, the same word used in the New Testament for Church

(and it is the greatest philological irony in all of Western history that this word,

which connoted equal participation in all deliberation by all members,

came to designate a kind of self-perpetuating, self-protective Spartan gerousia -

which would have seemed patent nonsense to Greek-speaking Christians of New Testament times,

who believed themselves to be equal members of their Assembly.)

- Thomas Cahill, Sailing the Wine-Dark Sea: Why the Greeks Matter

ΦΙΛΟΤΙΜΟ: THE GREEK SECRET

Saturday, August 11, 2007

CANON LXXXI

Taken from

The Rudder of the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church

The Compilation of the Holy Canons by St. Nicodemus and Agapius

Canon LXXXI of the Holy and Renowned Apostles

"We have said that a Bishop,or a Presbyter, must not descend himself into public offices,but must attend to ecclesiastical needs. Either let him be persuaded, therefore, not to do so, or let him be deposed. For no one can serve two masters, according to the Lord's injunction."

(Ap. cc. VI,XXIII; cc.III,VII of the 4th;c. X of the 7th; c. XI of the 1st-&-2nd;

c. XVIII of carthage)

Interpretation

This Canon too, like the sixth one, prescribes that those in holy orders must not meddle in wordly affairs, since it says: We have said (i.e., in our Canon VI) that a bishop or presbyter must not lower himself into political and secular affairs and business but must confine his activities to sedulously looking after the service and wants of the Church. So either let him be persuaded, not to do anything of the kind henceforth, or, if he cannot be persuaded, let him be deposed.For no one can serve two masters and please both of them, as the Lord says (Matt.6:24; Luke 16:3).

See also the Interpretation of Ap. c. VI

Ο voώv voείτω

Yannis Armaou

No comments:

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

CONSEQUENCES OF UPR "THEOCRACY"

The UPRs, as currently enacted, have succeeded in proving that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Having witnessed events first-hand for so long now, it is hard not to come to the sad conclusion that some of our clergy actually seem to relish the controversy, despite any inherent intellect, ability and talent.

Unfortunately this “brave new church”, spawned by these vaunted UPRs, and by this ridiculous and inept notion of the church as a military-style hierarchy, fosters a lack of humility, tact and compassion. It promotes utter disrespect and disregard for the laity, which, in turn, promotes disrespect for the clergy. The schism the regulations profess to prevent is the schism they are now engendering.

FALSE INFO? WE DON'T THINK SO!

The Metropolitan accuses many of providing false information with regard to parish property. He cites that the UPRs state that the parish holds title to all its real estate and personal property. He asks "what is the argument"?

One could be tempted to find comfort in this citation, if not for two other existing UPR conditions.

The first is that the Parish Council holds all control of said properties owned by the parish. Since the Parish Council can be disbanded, presumably at the whim of a peevish hierarch, where has the control shifted?

Second, if the laity becomes so exasperated with this sorry state of affairs that it reduces funding (the only real power left to it under an obnoxious system where the laity is utterly marginalized) and if a community is declared in disarray, or in schism, it is the hierarchy that comes in to take the real property. (This action was, in fact, attempted in 2009 in Charlottesville, Virginia.)

CONSIDER ...

There is a danger in the amassing of the Church property under one control. As the Catholic Church learned (the hard way) in sexual abuse cases that the the entire property holding will be subjected to payment of a lawsuit. Much better to decentralize!

This is a well-known business practice where corporations incorporate separate facilities so if one has poor results it can be dissolved without damaging the entire corporation. A single store could become bankrupt but not the whole.

- Peter C. Peropoulos - Houston, Texas

THE CHURCH AND THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE

From the Special General Assembly, June 27th, 1999: "First and foremost we are a church (ekklesia--meaning the people) any decisions should help minister to the people, effective, and efficient ministering to our peers. The Church has to do with people; people are the most important." - Fr. John Kaloudis

==========================

«Η έκκλησία δεv είvαι εξoυσία, ειvαι διακovεία.»

"The Church's purpose in not that of dominion or power; it is that of service."

- Ieronymos, Archbishop of Athens and All Greece

==========================

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

- The Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.

ON A COLD AND RAINY OCTOBER AFTERNOON ...

Today, October 24th, 2010, at 2:00 p.m. nearly 350 Greek Orthodox Christians gathered to say that voices may NOT be stilled or stifled. Of those who attended, 347 registered to participate and to vote; 339 actually cast ballots. Three questions (in synopsis form here) were asked, with both English and Greek ballots provided:

1. Asked if those assembled agreed with the decreed split, or if they would prefer to remain united. Vote: 328-FOR UNITY; 11-FOR SPLITTING

2. Asked if those assembled would favor the formation of a committee to appeal to the Archdiocese, the Eparchial Synod, and the Patriarchate. Vote: 330-FOR; 9-AGAINST

3. Asked if those assembled favored exploring legal action to prevent or challenge the division of the Parish in civil court, recognizing that the option would involve considerable expense. Vote: 248-FOR; 91-AGAINST