Does Esiphigmenou commemorate a Bishop?

GOCTheophan · Post by **GOCTheophan** » Wed 24 January 2007 7:50 am

What are we to make of this?

They are not. The Esphigmenou brotherhood is not of one mind about
which
bishop to commemorate. So they continue to commemorate no bishop.

Fr Ambrose

Father that is untrue. Please check it up.

No need to check it. I already know. I have been corresponding a little
with John Rigas who is a very strong supporter of Esphigmenou. We are
awaiting his translation any day of the letter of the Athonite kelliotes
composed in the first week of January.

John writes on this point of commemoration: "I was at Esphigmenou
Monastery in October and did not hear any bishop commemorated at the
services."

John's credentials? He is the strongest supporter of Esphigmenou and is
involved with the website http://www.esphigmenou.com

Here is his e-mail: johnprigas@...

Fr Ambrose

Priest Siluan · Post by **Priest Siluan** » Wed 24 January 2007 1:46 pm

I think that that is correct because the statutes of the Mount Athos says that the monasteries there cannot commemorate another bishop that the Patriarch of Constantinople (hen he should not be commemorated if he is a heretic). But I also think that it is certain that Esphigmenou receives help from GOC under Archbishop Chrysostomos, because this Synod orders their priests.

GOCTheophan · Post by **GOCTheophan** » Wed 24 January 2007 2:26 pm

Priest Siluan wrote:
I think that that is correct because the statutes of the Mount Athos says that the monasteries there cannot commemorate another bishop that the Patriarch of Constantinople (hen he should not be commemorated if he is a heretic). But I also think that it is certain that Esphigmenou receives help from GOC under Archbishop Chrysostomos, because this Synod orders their priests.

Father Bless!

I know for a fact that Bishop Photius was made a Priest there.

Also that Schemahieromonk Akajie when he left there for Serbia went immediately under our Synod's direction. He might have even been asked by the Synod to go there from Esiphigmenou.

The relationship seemed to me very much one of unity. Hence colorado monk Gregory's attacks on the Brotherhood...

Theophan.

Priest Siluan · Post by **Priest Siluan** » Wed 24 January 2007 4:19 pm

GOCTheophan wrote:
Priest Siluan wrote:
I think that that is correct because the statutes of the Mount Athos says that the monasteries there cannot commemorate another bishop that the Patriarch of Constantinople (hen he should not be commemorated if he is a heretic). But I also think that it is certain that Esphigmenou receives help from GOC under Archbishop Chrysostomos, because this Synod orders their priests.

Father Bless!

I know for a fact that Bishop Photius was made a Priest there.

Also that Schemahieromonk Akajie when he left there for Serbia went immediately under our Synod's direction. He might have even been asked by the Synod to go there from Esiphigmenou.

The relationship seemed to me very much one of unity. Hence colorado monk Gregory's attacks on the Brotherhood...

Theophan.

Dear Theophan:

God may bless you!

I agree, there is not any doubt about the canonical bonds between Esphigmenou and GOC, but due to the statutes none GOC bishops could be commemorated by Esphigmenou, at least that one of them becames Patriarch of Constantinople, because it is the only way that a bishop coul have a real and canonical authority on Mt Athos . For that reason they are called "non conmemoratives" Monks. Anyway, unofficially, but in fact, Esphigmenou is under the protection of the GOC Bishops, although the monks don't commemorate them at least in the territory of Mt. Athos.

ioannis · Post by **ioannis** » Fri 2 February 2007 8:01 pm

It is required that a bishop is commemorated in the divine services, and Esphigmenou does not break with tradition in this regard.

As Fr. Siluan mentioned, one of the points of the Mt. Athos "constitution" that has some teeth, is that all monasteries can only commemorate the living "Patriarch" of "Constantinople".

Therefore, since there are in fact people from Greece who monitor some of these boards, and the new-style monasteries on Mt. Athos monitor the internet as well, I am sure John Rigas is keen to point out that he did not hear a bishop being commemorated and that nobody should advertise assumptions on the internet.

However, the matter is clear, and for the sake of the monks, this should be put rest to the greatest extent possible.

Myrrh · Post by **Myrrh** » Sat 3 February 2007 8:10 am

I can't find it again, but historically the monks can choose a bishop, any bishop, for whatever purpose they need a bishop such as ordaining a priest. Monasteries aren't under bishops. There was also mentioned that if they wanted to go outside the area of Mt Athos, and I'm not sure now what that referred to, they had to obtain permission.

The patriarch has only been commemorated from the time Mt Athos was put in Constantinople's 'jurisdiction', a political move, there's nothing sacred about it.

Myrrh

Myrrh · Post by **Myrrh** » Sat 3 February 2007 8:31 am

Deacon Nicholai posted St Sava's typikon http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/vi ... php?t=7515

Thanks for this, a good explanation. Some bishops do have the tendency to think the Church revolves around them...

Myrrh