Jump to: navigation, search

Talk:Orthodoxy in the Philippines

11,008 bytes removed, 05:32, December 18, 2007
A fresh start
=="clandestine and cultic"==This language is has been a pretty strong -- maybe it would be helpful to have more identification here -- what are these groups like, what are they called? "Clandestine and cultic" should have some documentation to fill it out, otherwise this language is just regarded as personal opinion. — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] ([ talk])  =="clandestine contentious article and cultic"== Dear Father John,The online dictionary defined the word '''clandestine''' as "'''existing or operating in a way so as to ensure complete concealment and confidentiality'''" ([]). The American Heritage Dictionary defined the word '''cult''' as "a religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or '''false'''discussion page, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance lots of an authoritarian, charismatic leader. The followers of such a religion or sect. Listed below are registered churches in the Philippines claiming to be "Orthodox". No other information can be obtained from the internet except the name of their church. I have talked with some members personal attacks and clergymen of these "orthodox" groups years back while I was searchin for the true Orthodox Church and I found out that they professed the Hindu, Buddhist and "New Age" doctrine of Karma and '''Reincarnation'''. They also believed in "mediums" (iserious jurisdictional disputes.e., Christ, God the Father, the Holy Spirit, the Theotokos, the Child Jesus etc. possesing their spiritual leaders (priests and bishops) thereby receiving from them the power to heal, prophesy etc.). 1. ARCHBISHOP ISAAC NEE DANIEL L. GOROSPE EASTERN ORTHODOX CATHOLIC MISSION CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST, INC.  2. ARCHBISHOP JAMES NEE LEON C. CACHERO JR. INTL. ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST IS LORD, INC.  3. ARCHBISHOP PATRIARCH ABRAHAM JOHN PAUL I NEE ARTEMIO FRANCISCO.  4. PAULINO CANETE-PINERO D.D. OF THE ORTHODOX MISSIONARY FATHERS. 5. BISHOP OF LOS BANOS OF THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH INC. 6. BISHOP PRIMATE OF THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH INC. 7. BISHOP UNITED ORTHODOX APOSTOLIC EASTERN CHURCH, INC. 8. CONGREGATION OF ORTHODOX CATHOLIC MISSIONARIES INC.  9. DIOCESAN BISHOP OF THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CANONICAL DIOCESE OF THE PHILS. INC.  10. DIVINE ORTHODOX CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST INC. 11. FAR EAST ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH INC. 12. GOVERNING HIERARCH OF THE ASIAN ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH INC.  13. HOLY ORTHODOX CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST INC.  14. KATHOLIKOS ARCHIEREUS OF ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH ORD. IN PHILS.  15. ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH OF AMERICAS & ASIA INC. 16. ORTHODOX CATHOLIC MISSION INCORPORATED  17. ORTHODOX CHURCH IN THE PHILIPPINES, INC.  18. PHIL. ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH INC. 19. PHIL. PATRIARCH OF THE HOLY ORTHODOX CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST INC.  20. PRESIDING PRESBYTER OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH IN THE PHILS. INC.  21. PRIMATE OF THE ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH INC.  22. SAN AGUSTIN III (DASMARINAS CAVITE) RESIDENTS & MEMBERS OF INTL. ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN CATHOLIC CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST IS LORD.  23. SOVEREIGN ORDER OF THE ORTHODOX HOSPITALLERS OF ST. JOHN. 24. ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH, INC.  25. UNITED ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF GOD IN THE PHILS., INC.  26. WESTERN AND EASTERN ORTHODOX CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH MISSIONARIES SOCIETY INC.  27. WESTERN ORTHODOX CATHOLIC CHURCH IN THE PHILS., INC.   '''Source''': The Philippine Securities and Exchange Commission[]  There are other unregistered clandestine and cultic "churches" claiming to be orthodox which are not included m really interested in the above list.  Father, since you find the language "pretty strong" please provide a more appropriate alternative. Thank you very much. [[User:Filipino|Filipino]] 21:27, June 7, 2007 (PDT) ::Thanks, Filipino level- it's very interesting, if not helpful, to see all headed presenation of those groups. Perhaps strong language is appropriate, but maybe they are not all clandestine or cultic according to your definitions? Definitely they breed confusion, and it can be good to identify groups to avoid. — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] ([ talk])  ::Dear Father John I already removed the "strong language". Thank you for your unbiased insight and kind remarks.[[User:Filipino|Filipino]] 10:24, June 8, 2007 (PDT) If they are clandestine as you say "Filipino, then why are they listed with the Philippine Exchange Commission, have been recognized as religious entities by the Philippine government, and some of these groups are members facts of Orthodox church life on the National Council of Churches in the Philippines. Please stop politicizing this entry. ---Marcus :The term "clandestine" has been removed. The groups are what they are - it isn't really of concern to us ground here. Marcus, can you provide any solid documentation related to the arrival of the Lebanese families you metioned in the 1800's? Thanks, — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] ([ talk]) == Antiochians in the Philippines == It appears that there is some polemic here, with Marcus representing the Antiochian side and Filipino representing the Greek side. Both These have provided different histories of the origins of Orthodoxy in the Philippines, which each seem been very hard to bolster jurisdictional claims. come by! It's seems difficult for me to imagine that Antiochians aren't know who to trust in communion with Greeks -- is this really the particular situation. Ina ny case? Was the deacon merely representing himself, or was he sent by his bishop? I can definitely see the canonical problems here, though. It may be helpful to keep in mind that these canonical issues persist throughout the "diaspora" - hence the historical interest in claiming first landing in the country. There is no doubt that these conflicts will remain with us for some time. My hope is that on the wiki we can seek to describe the situation as completely and dispassionately as possiblenow, with attention to the historical circumstance and competing canonical claims. We are definitely biased towards the what I propose we call "Mainstream Chalcedonian Orthodoxy", i.e. those churches in communion with the ancient patriarchates (start here with the exception of Rome), but I would prefer to remain as neutral as possible in the midst of inter-jurisdictional disputes such as this. — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] ([ talk]) 10:45, June 8, 2007 (PDT) Chris Gain is not a deacon within the Antiochian Archdiocese of Australia clean slate and New Zealand or any Orthdox Church. His views do not represent the views of any canonical bishop in Australia --Marcus  : I reverted the article to the previus revision as of 17:37, June 8, 2007 by Fr. John. Marcus, please justify your act of deleting the reference to the first reception of Filipino Orthodox Christians in the Philippines and for removing the links to the canonical Orthodox Church in the Philippines. Likewise, Marcus, please cite your sources and historical documents to support your claim about the Lebanese and Syrian Christians in the Philippines. If you can provide evidence and documentation for this then reference to Lebanese and Syrian Christians as the "first" Orthodox Christians in the Philippines should be included in the article.[[User:Filipino|Filipino]] 20:31, June 8, 2007 (PDT)  :It seems to me that see if we should keep the reference in to the Lebenese families. Not sure why it is so contentious. Certainly, any canonical claims cannot merely rest on the "a few families from someplace arrived here first" argument. It's an interesting historical tidbit, anyway.  :About the other matters, I kindly request that you both refrain from personal attacks and from attributing bad motives to one another, at least here. These are difficult issues, and it's a difficult time in church history (can't think of one that wasn't...). Ultimately, the bishops must work these things out. Honestly, I think that all of these "it's my territory" claims are doomed to failure in the so-called diaspora. The world has changed - increased mobility of peoples and other forces of globalization means that traditionally Orthodox peoples, each with their own histories, find themselves in far corners of the earth. Naturally, they bring their heritage -- and their hierarchy -- with them when there is no established and deeply rooted Orthodox church body in the region. The various jurisdictions will simply have to learn to live with each other under these new circumstances, observing and preserving carefully the bonds of communion which tie us together. I am sympathetic with the desire for canonical order that I see reflected in Filipino's statements, as well as the desire for an authentically indigenous Orthodoxy I see in Marcus' comments. It seems to me that these issues won't be really worked out unless there is make a functioning primacy according to Orthodox canonical tradition, that bears the interests better go of the whole deeply in its heart. We may all dream of such a day, but it doesn't appear that this will happen anytime soon. :I want to emphasize once again that the role of OrthodoxWiki is not to take a side in these debates, but to honestly reflect the situation as clearly as possibly, avoiding gossip, speculation, and slander. The articles should reflect ''who'' says ''what'', ''where'', ''when'' and (to the degree it can be ascertained) ''why''second time around. This may not solve anything -- but that's not the purpose here. I hope this approach will be of service to people trying to figure these things out on all sides.  :May God bless us and have mercy on all of His struggling children! — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] ([ talk]) 21:Dear Father John32, I totally agree with you. Truly, any canonical claims cannot merely rest on the "a few families from some place arrived here first" argument. Sadly, it is a well known fact that those who deny the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in the diaspora are mostly those who belong from the uncanonical group of eastern orthodoxy. Again, thank you very much for your valuable insight. Marcus, can you tell us more about the "Orthodox Church in the Philippines" which is registered at the Philippine SEC as the "'''Iglesia Orthodoxa ng Pilipinas'''". Its website does not indicate any address in the Philippines and abroad. Is it under the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch? In the year 2007 Antiochian Archbishop's Report Fr. Deacon Chris Gain's name is listed as one of the Deacons under the Antiochian Archdiocese of Australia (pls. see [ Archbishop's Report.])His name is also listed at number 14 under "Clergy no longer with the Archdiocese". You wrote that "Chris Gain is not a deacon within the Antiochian Archdiocese of Australia and New Zealand '''or any Orthdox Church'''" but the February 06, 2007 ([ Antiochian Archdiocese News.])wrote: "With the written blessing of Metropolitan Archbishop Paul, Father Deacon Christopher was released from the Archdiocese of Australia and New Zealand this day '''to assist the Patriarchate located in Damascus, Syria'''." But you said Chris Gain is not a deacon in "any other Orthodox Church". And why did you refer to Fr. Deacon Chris Gain simply as "Chris Gain"? I hope you can shed more light on this. Thank you. [[User:Filipino|Filipino]] 04:09, June 9December 17, 2007 (PDTPST)
Bureaucrats, Check users, interwiki, oversight, renameuser, Administrators

Navigation menu