John Haluska wrote:It is very rude, not to mention, very disrespectful, to address ANY Hierarch, Clergyman, in the aforementioned manner, using the disrespectful appendages "ite" or "ites".
The usage of any Hierarch's name should be prefaced by his actual title, Metropolitan, Archbishop, Bishop. Unless I am mistaken, The usage of "last" names with respect to any monastic is not done. When they become monastic, they take on another name, and are not associated with their "last" names any more.
This type of crude labelling is rampant everywhere and does absolutely nothing else but cast aspersions on the people proffering such naming.
It smacks of "familiarness" and " encourages disrespect.
Didn't the Apostle Paul say something to the effect, "Am I of Paul, am I of Apppolos?" In other words, the usage as presented automatically engenders the "One is of this Hierarch or that Hierarch" mentality.
There is entirely too much of this and it accomplishes absolutety nothing.
Hierarchs and Clergymen have been ordained and as such deserve, if nothing else, the proper usage of titles and names. Hierarchs, especially, are "EPISCOPOS"; 'epi' meaning around, and 'scopos' meaning seeing; literally overseeing all. (Sorry about the Greek translation.)
Hierarchs are a direct continuation of the Apostles and as such should be accorded due Honor.
I have seen an actual list of PROPER names for Hierachs and Clergy. If any one has this, please 'post' it to this area as it would be most helful in the future in the PROPER naming of Hierarch and Clergy.
Please show PROPER respect for Hierarchy and Clergy.
Thank you,
John
Should we should have a rule at E Cafe that we should address all those who have been ordained or consecrated with their rightful "political" titles? What would be the criteria for a proper or canonical ordination or consecration? In this broken world, who would decide?
Defrocked and/or schismatic priests and bishops who frequently change synods and/or jurisdictions create problems.
Demanding that we use the former proper titles for all these defrocked, schismatic and/or heretical clerics would be misleading and wrong.
Faithful bishops, clerics, and faithful who belong to synods from which certain priests/bishops have been defrocked are placed in a difficult situation.The very act of honoring these defrocked and/or schismatic clerics with their former titles could get these faithful in trouble with their current synods.
For example, Archbishop Gregory of Colorado formerly belonged to ROCOR, then HOCNA, then ROAC, and now he is beholden to none but himself. However, by using the title, "Archbishop" to refer to Gregory of Colorado, I am conferring a title that Gregory himself created -- a title that can mislead others. A brief excerpt from Orthodox Wiki shows the confusion he has created.
cf: https://orthodoxwiki.org/Genuine_Orthod ... of_America
The jurisdiction's primate, Gregory (George) of Denver (born an Antiochian), who was consecrated to the episcopacy in the ROAC, claims to be "the only hierarch in the United States who has remained free of any communion or union with this heresy of Ecumenism who has valid apostolic succession," and thus claims "to be truly canonical."[3]
In 2007, Archbishop Gregory received Archbishop Ambrose (Moran-Dolgorouky) of New York City, one of many episcopi vagantes who claim to have been consecrated by independent Ukrainian bishops, into the GOCA. After his reception, he participated in the consecration of Archimandrite John (Egan) as Bishop of Colorado Springs, along with Archbishop Gregory, on January 6, 2008. Since the reception of a bishop can only be canonically accomplished by a synod, Archbishop Gregory initially claimed that Archbishop Makarios of Athens gave him verbal consent for the reception over the telephone. This was vehemently denied by both Archbishop Makarios and his Synod of Bishops. Six months later, Archbishop Ambrose left the GOCA and returned to his former status as an independent bishop. Since the consecration of Bishop John was administered by only two bishops, one of whom was uncanonically received into the Church and possessed questionable apostolic succession, the GOCA has become completely isolated from other Old Calendarist communities. A number of members of those communities issued condemnations immediately after his unjustified separation from the ROAC.
In more recent examples, defrocked Monk Seraphim (formerly under Met. John (LoBue) of New Jeresy, and then most recently under the GOC-A aka the Hellenic Patristic Church of Greece) is now currently a bishop with the defrocked Monk Kirykos who was not too long ago with the original synod of St. Matthew.
I am trying to avoid using the -ites, the -mites, and the -kites. However, do you see the confusion this creates? What a mess!
If we are supposed to use honorific titles for everyone, would this include the World Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, and non-Christian religious figures? How far would this go?
An egregious example of this is retired OCA Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo) who was formerly with the ROCOR, but who was defrocked and then joined several other Old-Calendarist synods before he found a home in the OCA. It was he who debated long and hard with Father Seraphim Rose of Platina against Aerial Toll Houses. After being defrocked from the ROCOR (as a deacon), he changed his name and then subsequently changed synods before being accepted as a retired bishop in the OCA. The OCA acquired some lovely real estate in this deal along with a promise from Archbishop Lazar to remain quiet.
Here is some biographical information on Archbishop Lazar from Orthodox Wiki, which is run by an OCA priest.
cf. https://orthodoxwiki.org/Lazar_(Puhalo)_of_Ottawa
His Eminence, the Most Reverend Lazar (Puhalo) of Ottawa, is a retired hierarch of the Orthodox Church in America, and founding abbot of the Monastery of All Saints of North America, Canada.
Prior to his reception into the OCA in 2002, Archbishop Lazar had served as a clergyman, in various ranks, in the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, the Free Serbian Orthodox Church, the Church of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece, the Holy Synod of Milan, and in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Kyiv Patriarchate) - leading some to, perhaps misleadingly, describe him as a "contemporary episcopus vagans". Being part of the OCA has, however, normalised this status, and he remains a retired bishop of the Orthodox Church.
Archbishop Lazar is known for his prolific (and, at times, controversial) theological writings, particularly regarding his criticism of the Orthodox teaching of the Aerial Toll-Houses, and his positions on homosexuality and transgenderism. The Synod of Bishops of the OCA has forbidden him to speak on the subject of homosexuality in any way contrary to official position of the Church.[1]
More seriously, would not this practice of honoring everyone fall under the heresy of Ecumenism?
And then there is the Pope of Rome, who is an obvious heretic with his recent pontifications and videos. I will not go into detail.
If E Cafe tries to institute a general rule to use proper titles, how far would this rule go? Would this also apply to all politicians?