Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.7K
- General Category 10.8K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 367
- Technical Topics 367
Max Michel
Does anyone of you know how much members Max Michel (the man who thinks he´s a pope) has?
How much (we can´t say churches) buildings this organisation has?... How much men who call themselves priests and bishops?
I´ve heard with our bishop one of his "sermons" on an audiocasette... He´s screaming and shouting in this "sermons" (like a possessed man)... He often shouts "Al Kouwa" - "The power"...
I feel so sorry for him and for all who are following him. I feel so sorry for his wife and his kids (he has two girls). We as christians need to pray for him and for all his followers...he needs mental help and spiritual guidance... We need to pray for him that god will open his eyes...
[coptic]Gewrgioc[/coptic]
How much (we can´t say churches) buildings this organisation has?... How much men who call themselves priests and bishops?
I´ve heard with our bishop one of his "sermons" on an audiocasette... He´s screaming and shouting in this "sermons" (like a possessed man)... He often shouts "Al Kouwa" - "The power"...
I feel so sorry for him and for all who are following him. I feel so sorry for his wife and his kids (he has two girls). We as christians need to pray for him and for all his followers...he needs mental help and spiritual guidance... We need to pray for him that god will open his eyes...
[coptic]Gewrgioc[/coptic]
Comments
We should, indeed, pray for him.
I am sure that you are familiar with the joint statement from the Pope and the Greek Patriarch at this site: http://www.copticpope.org/downloads/commondec/commondec-2-2006eng.pdf
His heresy will come to nothing, but, like you, I am sorry for the harm he causes and for those close to him; and we are always enjoined to hate the sin and love the sinner. It is so sad.
In Christ,
Anglian
He is, alas, like too many people, someone who cannot accept that he may have things wrong and the Church has got them right.
if you would like to know what the Church has said about him in more detail, do have a look at this site: http://www.coptic.org.au/modules/news/article.php?storyid=317
In Christ,
Anglian
I think Max Michel should have never accepted this ordination by bishops of whom he never knew.
His main church in el moqattam by the name of St. Athanasius
serves about 50 families
but thats all i kno
Max Michel is a self-appointed pope of a heretical 'church'. He was never ordained by any bishops. From what I heard, the man is married with children. As such, the Church law would not allow him to be ordained at all. I did a quick web search and found this on the Diocese of Sydney and affiliated regions:
[coptic]+ Iryny nem `hmot>[/coptic]
Max Michel is a self-appointed pope of a heretical 'church'. He was never ordained by any bishops. From what I heard, the man is married with children. It states inside your source both theories except I read in St. John of Covina's magazine that Max Michel was ordained by bishops who remained unanimous. The Greek Pope and H.H. were trying to figure out if Orthodox bishops ordained him because if he was ordained, then truly he would be an Orthodox bishop. I guess your source says that the bishops that ordained him are unorthodox.
Each bishop or synod has jurisdiction over a certain well defined area or group and that cannot be exceeded and beyond which the ordinations are void and the bishop or synod members become subject to church canons and laws of discipline.
Even among churches in our communion, the Coptic Orthodox bishops cannot decide to ordain bishops in Syria, for example, or in Armenia, which already has orthodox bishops and synods. Even within the same church, such as the Coptic Orthodox Church, the bishop of episcopate X, even if he is the Pope himself, cannot decide to ordain priests or even deacons in another episcopate Y. Only by authorization of the local bishop and for valid reasons, such as health concerns or persecution, it can be tolerated.
Each bishop or synod has jurisdiction over a certain well defined area or group and that cannot be exceeded and beyond which the ordinations are void and the bishop or synod members become subject to church canons and laws of discipline.
Even among churches in our communion, the Coptic Orthodox bishops cannot decide to ordain bishops in Syria, for example, or in Armenia, which already has orthodox bishops and synods. Even within the same church, such as the Coptic Orthodox Church, the bishop of episcopate X, even if he is the Pope himself, cannot decide to ordain priests or even deacons in another episcopate Y. Only by authorization of the local bishop and for valid reasons, such as health concerns or persecution, it can be tolerated.
Stavro,
I said, I read that in the St. John's magazine. I remember seeing it months ago on the Pope's website: CopticPope.org. Also, how about the Pope and the British and French Orthodox Churches? Can he ordain priests and bishops there? Obviously, if he ordained the metropolitan, then he can ordain anyone in the area.
pp4m
(By the way, I think having Bishops not be married is a really good thing, with a few negative aspects; we have a dedicated Shepherd, but I am not sure whether they can identify well with the family life, but then again we have our spiritual mentors, the priests for that.)
The fact is that monks were not prominent before St. Anthony, and that we had a Pope that was married (though living as brother-sister). As for many Apostles, all were married except John. (c.f. 1 Corinthians 9:5: Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas?)
So, let's get back to the question; the evolution of this restriction.
Clearly there could have been no requirement about bishops being monks before the development of monasticism, so any example from Apostolic times cannot speak to this one. What we do know is that since the fifth century it has been the custom for bishops to be monks and celibates.
In this sense we and the Eastern Orthodox are more faithful to the teachings of the early Church than the RCs, who used to follow the universal custom but which, from the eleventh century began to insist on priestly celibacy - partly to avoid Church lands being alienated to the sons of priests.
It would be interesting to hear more about this.
In Christ,
Anglian
Back to max michel. It has happened before in our church and soon people will forget about him. I really feel sorry for his children who had no choice in this.
pray for me
Quite correct; we should pray for his repentance too.
In Christ,
Anglian
His heresies should be emphasized, his relations to the government and schismatic groups and their ongoing plans since Saddat to divide the Church should be exposed, and the foundation of the Unity of the Church and the boundaries of the Church should be studied and expounded to provide a basis for the rejection of Mad Max rank and office.
You make an excellent point; it is those theological errors which risk the souls of others, and against which the Church is now, I think, warning.
In Christ,
Anglian
How can we call this Orthodox, when indeed it is not Apostolic?
The apparent dichotomy you present rests upon a superficially narrow understanding of 'Apostolic.' Throughout the Church the term 'Apostolic' has, at its core, been used to define a thing which conveys the 'Apostolic spirit.' Hence, St Athanasius the Great has gone down in the records of the Church as "St Athanasius the Apostolic" for his articulation of the Trinitarian mystery, which, although finding no historical precedence in the writings and teachings of the Apostles, preserved the spirit of their teachings on the nature of Christ and His relationship to the Father.
When you consider the essential role and meaning of the Bishopric you will find that, considered abstractly, married Bishops are not so much of a problem. Nevertheless, the canons of the Church do not address issues abstractly but are concerned with preserving the spirit of Apostolicity in the immediate historical context. The Bishopric is in place for two fundamental reasons: 1) To lead the flock, and 2) in so doing, to preserve them in the true faith. In her wisdom, the Church has seen it proper that monastics are best fit for the Bishopric because they possess the qualities capable of best fulfilling 1) and 2): a) their withdrawal in the first place signifies total commitment to God, which can thus be generally trusted to be exercised in the bishopric as much as it was in the desert, b) their spiritual authority and charisma acquired through their ascetic struggle has made them better candidates as guardians and spokespersons of Orthodoxy. On this latter point, one only need read St Athanasius' Life of St Antony and the Life of Aphou. One of the main principles underlying these works is the principle that the monastic's personal ascetic struggles have a wider purpose for the entire Church viewed as an ascetic community; it endows them with both the ability and responsibility for purging the Church of heresy.
The Church's prohibition against married Bishops is thus founded upon Spirit-inspired wisdom, the presuppositions of which can be traced back as early as the beginning of monasticism itself. It is not intended to absolutise any notion that married persons are incapable of effectively performing the duties of the Bishopric. Certainly, the Apostles were successful in this regard; but how many can claim to be on the level of the Apostles? As always, the Spirit speaks to the Church on practical terms to realise what is in her best interest and the Church obediently follows. Only those, such as Mad Max, who, concerned with the lusts of this world and further incapacitated from understanding the Church's wisdom on account of their evident intellectual deficiencies, would make such ignorant and simplistic arguments as: "well, the Apostles were married, therefore Bishops should be married."