Antiochian Leadership

[Dietrich Johnson]

I read about Metropolitan Joseph's decision to (in 2016) make someone a bishop who had a bad reputation outside of the church (to put it mildly). After the outcry, this decision was reversed and that person did not become a bishop (nor return from retirement to the priesthood as far as I understand). When a decision of such importance is made poorly, despite being foreseeable... where is the line drawn? I mean, where is the line to where a Metropolitan should no longer be in that role?

 

[ArmyMatt]

the Spirit speaks through consensus, so if His Eminence didn’t listen, the Synod can correct him. if that also doesn’t work, the priests, deacons, laity, and dissenting bishops will correct it.

 

[Dietrich Johnson]

What I'm wondering is how it ever got to such a degree of error on part of Metropolitan Joseph? That mistake would seem to indicate that he (Metropolitan Joseph) was not qualified for that level of leadership.

 

[ArmyMatt]

What I'm wondering is how it ever got to such a degree of error on part of Metropolitan Joseph? That mistake would seem to indicate that he (Metropolitan Joseph) was not qualified for that level of leadership.

bishops make mistakes, sometimes big ones. just like the rest of us, sometimes they need correction. if he wasn’t qualified, He never would have been consecrated in the first place.

 

[Dietrich Johnson]

Just so I understand the context of your response, are you familiar with what he did? (the foreseeable mistake he made)

 

[ArmyMatt]

not more than what you posted

 

[ArmyMatt]

but I should say that even the saints have made foreseeable mistakes

 

[Chesterton]

I read about Metropolitan Joseph's decision to (in 2016) make someone a bishop who had a bad reputation outside of the church (to put it mildly). After the outcry, this decision was reversed and that person did not become a bishop (nor return from retirement to the priesthood as far as I understand). When a decision of such importance is made poorly, despite being foreseeable... where is the line drawn? I mean, where is the line to where a Metropolitan should no longer be in that role?

There is an element of democracy in Orthodoxy. Bishops are consecrated with the will of the people. During the consecration, the people chant the acclamation of Axios ("He is worthy"). I remember hearing of at least one instance in history where a priest in a remote city was to be made a bishop, but the local people knew him better, and did not say the Axios. An investigation was had, and he did not become a bishop. So, point being, if a mistake was made, and it was corrected, that's a good thing.

 

[prodromos]

There is an element of democracy in Orthodoxy. Bishops are consecrated with the will of the people. During the consecration, the people chant the acclamation of Axios ("He is worthy"). I remember hearing of at least one instance in history where a priest in a remote city was to be made a bishop, but the local people knew him better, and did not say the Axios. An investigation was had, and he did not become a bishop. So, point being, if a mistake was made, and it was corrected, that's a good thing.

I think all it takes is for one person to shout "Anaxios", after which the synod is required to investigate the complaint.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I think all it takes is for one person to shout "Anaxios", after which the synod is required to investigate the complaint.

yes, but to be clear it has to be before the consecration, you should not anaxios at the consecration.

 

[E.C.]

What I'm wondering is how it ever got to such a degree of error on part of Metropolitan Joseph? That mistake would seem to indicate that he (Metropolitan Joseph) was not qualified for that level of leadership.

Bishops can only work with the information they are given. At Metropolitan Joseph's defense, if he was given wrong, bad, or, more likely, incomplete information than that's one consideration.

There's an ideal ratio of bishops per layman that exists somewhere in one of the canons. However, because in the Americas we are stupidly divided by ethnicity and not efficiency we do not meet that ratio (I think the only autocephalous Church that comes close is the Patriarchate of Jerusalem). That all said, this is exactly part of why we need administrative unity in these parts: so that bishops can actually give more proper attention to these things and not have to rely strictly on what they hear from the bureaucracy.

 

[Dietrich Johnson]

There is an element of democracy in Orthodoxy. Bishops are consecrated with the will of the people. During the consecration, the people chant the acclamation of Axios ("He is worthy"). I remember hearing of at least one instance in history where a priest in a remote city was to be made a bishop, but the local people knew him better, and did not say the Axios. An investigation was had, and he did not become a bishop. So, point being, if a mistake was made, and it was corrected, that's a good thing.

Yes, a good thing in terms of the result. Is Democracy the basis for Orthodox Church decisions? And if so, what is the foundation for that (scriptural or other)?

 

[ArmyMatt]

no, democracy isn’t the foundation of the Church (Christ is). however, there are democratic elements in there.

 

[Chesterton]

Yes, a good thing in terms of the result.

Well it's good in terms of the result but also good in terms of showing that the system (for lack of a better word) works as it should.

Is Democracy the basis for Orthodox Church decisions? And if so, what is the foundation for that (scriptural or other)?

No, I just said that there's an element of democracy involved sometimes.