[quote author=Doubting Thomas link=topic=5469.msg72763#msg72763 date=1182238491] How did the British Orthodox Church came to be?
You will find this information on www.britishorthodox.org
And does anyone think that countries with adequate numbers should have their own Orthodox Churches?
Every country with sufficient numbers will have its own Bishops. Ideally those bishops should reflect the cultural/ethnic make-up of the people they are there to shepherd.
Thus British or French Orthodox people will have British and French bishops.
However, I strongly disagree with the concept that the jurisdictional boundaries of the Church should be defined by geographical borders; a concept that led to the creation of numerous new autocephalous churches in the EO following the break-up of the Soviet Union, or the creation of the Eritrean Orthodox Church following the Eritrean-Ethiopian war.
Thus the British Orthodox Church remains not an independant entity, but a part of the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria.
Indeed, and one of the reasons that the British Orthodox Church is part of the Coptic Church is that we firmly believe what you say about not needing an autocephalous Church. But what that does require, if it is going to work, is a Mother Church with the wisdom of a leader like Pope Shenouda III, who shares that vision.
One of the very many things which marks him out as a great Christian leader was his realisation that what matters in Orthodox praxis - and his recognition that ethnic practice is bound to differ. I become increasingly convinced that the failure to recognise this has produced great harm in the past.
Indeed, and one of the reasons that the British Orthodox Church is part of the Coptic Church is that we firmly believe what you say about not needing an autocephalous Church. But what that does require, if it is going to work, is a Mother Church with the wisdom of a leader like Pope Shenouda III, who shares that vision.
One of the very many things which marks him out as a great Christian leader was his realisation that what matters in Orthodox praxis - and his recognition that ethnic practice is bound to differ. I become increasingly convinced that the failure to recognise this has produced great harm in the past.
well am really not surprised with this great thinking. about 1500 yrs ago before the spilit, the Pope of Alexanderia was in fact 'The Pope'....or more better, "The Head of the Brothers". The term 'Pope' was bought to life when the See of St. Mark became the head of the church. Pope means the head of the patriarchs. And HH is still called Pope because of the churchs that are still part of us. British and French for example.
The British Orthodox Church was originally established in 1866 when a Frenchman, Jules Ferrette, was consecrated as a bishop by the Syrian Orthodox Church with the purpose of re-establishing Orthodoxy to the West.
Over the years this mission lost touch with its Eastern origins, and for many years we were, effectively, an autocephalous church, something which our current bishop, Abba Seraphim, felt should be rectified by recovering contact with the family of the Oriental Orthodox. The contacts with Alexandria proved so very fruitful that at the feast of Pentecost in 1994, at Saint Mark's Cathedral in Cairo, Abba Seraphim was ordained a Metropolitan by His Holiness Pope Shenouda III, and the British Orthodox Church became a constituent of the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate. Metropolitan Seraphim is a full member of the Holy Synod of the Coptic Patriarchate.
This enables us to do what, for example, the French Orthodox Church can also do - which is to appeal to the British or the French in a way that connects with them, but which brings them to Orthodoxy - which gets it the right way round. The Church is blessed in having at its head a man with the personal holiness of the Pope, who also has the great vision to see how people in other cultures can be brought into the fold; a great shepherd indeed - many years!
Comments
How did the British Orthodox Church came to be?
You will find this information on www.britishorthodox.org Every country with sufficient numbers will have its own Bishops. Ideally those bishops should reflect the cultural/ethnic make-up of the people they are there to shepherd.
Thus British or French Orthodox people will have British and French bishops.
However, I strongly disagree with the concept that the jurisdictional boundaries of the Church should be defined by geographical borders; a concept that led to the creation of numerous new autocephalous churches in the EO following the break-up of the Soviet Union, or the creation of the Eritrean Orthodox Church following the Eritrean-Ethiopian war.
Thus the British Orthodox Church remains not an independant entity, but a part of the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria.
Indeed, and one of the reasons that the British Orthodox Church is part of the Coptic Church is that we firmly believe what you say about not needing an autocephalous Church. But what that does require, if it is going to work, is a Mother Church with the wisdom of a leader like Pope Shenouda III, who shares that vision.
One of the very many things which marks him out as a great Christian leader was his realisation that what matters in Orthodox praxis - and his recognition that ethnic practice is bound to differ. I become increasingly convinced that the failure to recognise this has produced great harm in the past.
In Christ,
John
Dear Orthodox11,
Indeed, and one of the reasons that the British Orthodox Church is part of the Coptic Church is that we firmly believe what you say about not needing an autocephalous Church. But what that does require, if it is going to work, is a Mother Church with the wisdom of a leader like Pope Shenouda III, who shares that vision.
One of the very many things which marks him out as a great Christian leader was his realisation that what matters in Orthodox praxis - and his recognition that ethnic practice is bound to differ. I become increasingly convinced that the failure to recognise this has produced great harm in the past.
well am really not surprised with this great thinking. about 1500 yrs ago before the spilit, the Pope of Alexanderia was in fact 'The Pope'....or more better, "The Head of the Brothers". The term 'Pope' was bought to life when the See of St. Mark became the head of the church. Pope means the head of the patriarchs. And HH is still called Pope because of the churchs that are still part of us. British and French for example.
Yes, you are quite correct.
The British Orthodox Church was originally established in 1866 when a Frenchman, Jules Ferrette, was consecrated as a bishop by the Syrian Orthodox Church with the purpose of re-establishing Orthodoxy to the West.
Over the years this mission lost touch with its Eastern origins, and for many years we were, effectively, an autocephalous church, something which our current bishop, Abba Seraphim, felt should be rectified by recovering contact with the family of the Oriental Orthodox. The contacts with Alexandria proved so very fruitful that at the feast of Pentecost in 1994, at Saint Mark's Cathedral in Cairo, Abba Seraphim was ordained a Metropolitan by His Holiness Pope Shenouda III, and the British Orthodox Church became a constituent of the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate. Metropolitan Seraphim is a full member of the Holy Synod of the Coptic Patriarchate.
This enables us to do what, for example, the French Orthodox Church can also do - which is to appeal to the British or the French in a way that connects with them, but which brings them to Orthodoxy - which gets it the right way round. The Church is blessed in having at its head a man with the personal holiness of the Pope, who also has the great vision to see how people in other cultures can be brought into the fold; a great shepherd indeed - many years!
In Christ,
John