Order of commemorating bishops

edited October 2014 in Hymns Discussion
My question relates to the churches in NJ:

1) is General Bishop Karas commemorated in the Hiteniat even if he is not present in the liturgy?
2) if a more senior bishop is visiting, eg HG Bishop Youssef, who gets mentioned first - Bishop Youssef or Bishop Karas?


  • 1. A general bishop is not mentioned in anything if he is not physically present.
    2. Diocesan bishops are considered senior to general although I have seen general bishops commemorated out of respect of age, nothing more.
  • edited October 2014

    Are you sure about #2?
    It doesn't quite make sense, since if an old general bishop gets enthroned he will suddenly leap ahead of all the younger diocesan bishops who were enthroned before him. Surely then the date of ordination to bishop (as opposed to date of enthronement, or whether he is enthroned in the first place) is the proper marker of seniority?

    Note: when I say old and young of course I don't mean biological age, I mean time since ordination

    Also, what about metropolitans vs diocesan bishops?
  • edited October 2014
    I agree with Drew. It's by primacy of honor of the ordained order, and then age. So Metropoltian>Bishop>General Bishop

    And no, we don't commemorate HG Bishop Karas if he is not present in the parish. Simply because he is technically not "our bishop"
  • So why is a diocese bishop mentioned if he is not physically present? It seems inconsistent to allow the commemoration of a diocesan bishop not present when it is not allowed for a non-diocesan bishop.

    When we had the ordinations in Boston, we had Bishop David, Bishop Mattaos and Bishop Karas. We commemorated the names in this order. But Ibrahim Ayad switched it to Bishop Mattos, Bishop David and Bishop Karas. Maybe it was a mistake or simply his own habitual custom. 

    Plus, one thing I didn't know is that in the verses of cymbals, he said "confirm him on his throne" for Bishop David and Bishop Mattaos, but "beloved of Christ" for Bishop Karas. 
  • Hi everyone does an invisible throne suggest the kind of ecclesiology that suggests an "invisible church"?
  • @Remnkemi

    Actually, I believe that Ibrahim Ayad was correct in his ordering, as Bishop Mattaos has the Great Eskeem, and thus is mentioned directly after HH the Pope, even before the bishop of that particular diocese.

    "So why is a diocese bishop mentioned if he is not physically present?" Simple. Because he is the bishop of that church. A general bishop, however, cannot never be the bishop of a parish (as long as he remains general), as he is not actually seated.
  • "I agree with Drew. It's by primacy of honor of the ordained order, and then age. So Metropoltian>Bishop>General Bishop"

    If Drew and Mina agree, that must be the consensus patrum of tasbeha.org! :)

    However, if we accept this, then this opens the door to the ordering adopted by Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Synod_of_the_Coptic_Orthodox_Church

    Under wikis system, Bishop Abanoub comes before Bishop Moussa! What do u think?
  • Because Bishop Karas is not our diocesan bishop.  So we do not commemorate him.  We only commemorate those who are proper bishops, those who are enthroned for a people.  Bishop Youssef is the patriarch of SUS.  Bishop Serapion is the patriarch of SoCal and Hawaii.  Bishop David is the patriarch of NY/NE.  Bishop Mina is the patriarch of Western Canada.  Everyone else in North America, Pope Tawadros is our patriarch, not the general bishop.  Unless we become a diocese and we have our own bishop, there is no commemoration of a non-enthroned bishop.
  • @qawe is correct in that the correct order is Pope>Metropolitan>Bishop who Wears eskeem>bishop of diocese>rest of bishops in order of ordained. This was HG Bishop Youseff's response when I asked him prior to HG Bishop David's enthronement.
  • edited October 2014

    So Bishop Moussa comes before Anba David?
    Cos that would contradict Mina and Drew.

    Also, what does everyone think of the order provided by Wikipedia?
  • Sadly...yes.  But practically, I think HG Bishop David will not allow it in his presence, and will probably prep the deacons beforehand to give HG Bishop Moussa the first honor.  This great man should have been a Metropolitan, even if for a few years, because just those few will be fruitful beyond anything.
  • image
    Hopefully this picture shows, this was the original text. (Notice the time he sent it? lol) 
  • edited October 2014
    Nice...VIP access to HG Bishop Youssef... ;)

    So you'll be the go to guy if we need HG's answer :D
  • edited October 2014




    You mean 'no' right?


    What about Metropolitans that wear the eskeem?
  • Correct...I meant "No"...I misread your question
  • I was talking recently to a cantor who teaches inn the Clerical College in Cairo and he pointed out Ibrahim Ayad's new practice of saying "the beloved of Christ" instead of "preserve him upon his throne" for general bishops. He completely disagreed and said that the verse was akin to what would be said in the bishops' funeral. While a general bishop does not have a diocese the fact is he is still a bishop and has his seat in the Holy Synod.
  • edited October 2014

    The Coptic is 'ethronos' though, which translates to throne not seat. While they may have seats in the Holy Synod, they certainly don't have thrones.
    Just because 'beloved of Christ' is not appropriate, does not mean that 'confirm him on his seat' is correct. Both practices seem wrong.
  • edited October 2014
    @qawe whilst that is your opinion and I respect that the main point is hymns should not be changed by individuals as a solo practice without general consensus. The argument of whether a General Bishop is a Bishop etc is another argument which has been discussed numerous times. Whether we like it or not the rank of General Bishop is here to stay for the foreseeable future and they are commemorated at the end of the list. What I was taught is the following:

    1. Pope and Patriarch as Bishop of Alexandria
    2. Metropolitan of Jerusalem
    3. Metropolitans and Bishops who hold the Great Eskeem
    4. Abbots of Monasteries
    5. Diocesan Metropolitans
    6. Diocesan Bishops
    7. General Bishops
  • @drewhalim

    Thanks for adding another version to confuse us all :)
    Where does the bishop of that PARTICULAR diocese that is being prayed in fit into this?  Between 5 and 6? And if he is a metropolitan, between 4 and 5?
    And obviously the ordering within each of these categories is by date of ordination as a bishop (of whatever kind), not the date on which they entered that category?

    Furthermore, for the ordering WITHIN category 3: is it first abbots of monasteries, then diocesan metropolitans, then diocesan bishops, then general bishops?  Or is it just by date of ordination as a bishop (of whatever kind)?

    Also Re: the Great Eskeem - obviously someone can hold the Great Eskeem as a monk, and then be ordained a bishop, and not be able to keep up with its requirements.  In that case, I assume he will be considered as a normal non-Eskeem bishop in the above list.  So how do you know if a bishop CURRENTLY holds the Great Eskeem? Is it something they wear? If so, do they always wear it?  If they don't always wear it, then we're back to where we started, how do you know?
  • Realistically with the ever growing number of bishops and the fact that they are not all known to us abroad you would not necessarily know their age or rank that's where the plural phrase of "our fathers the Metropolitans and Bishops who are with us" comes in very handy.

    1. Logically the bishop of the diocese would be number 2 as after the Patricarch everyone else is a guest praying with his permission although nobody would dare put a bishop before a Metropolitan these days. I think in historical times we did not have the issues of bishops traveling and gathering in one place so freely.
    2. Abbots of Monasteries (apparently) always come first and this is even evident in the last years of ordinations where it has been Abbot of a Monastery, Diocesan and then General all individual and swearing different oaths according to their bishopric.
    3. If a monk who became a bishop retired from the Eskeem when being ordained then he would only be a bishop and no longer considered a person of the Eskeem. I have never heard of this happen but I suppose not impossible. The crosses of the Eskeem are always worn underneath their clothing so you would never know from their outward appearance.
  • edited October 2014

    1. Isn't the patriarch also praying with the bishop of the diocese's permission? Should we then mention the bishop of the diocese before the patriarch?!

    2. That's very interesting, but I think you have misunderstood what I was originally asking (if you want to re-read what I was asking in my post you can, but it's probably too subtle a point not worth anyone's time).

    3. Thanks. Is there a list of the bishops who have the Great Eskeem?

    This raises a few other questions:
    4. What if a bishop is abbot of a monastery and also a diocesan bishop, eg HG Bishop Youssef or HG Bishop Serapion? Is he considered an abbot of a monastery or diocesan bishop in the order you provided?

    5. The authenticity of having a bishop of a monastery in the first place. I started a thread relating to this, but it hasn't received any replies: tasbeha.org/community/index.php?p=/discussion/15334/bishops-of-monasteries
    I am surprised the concept has not received as much criticism as general bishops.
  • In the church it's rank first then seniority (how long they have had the rank + age). For example lets say a bishop was ordained yesterday and he goes to a church which has a priest with 40 years, the bishop would lead the liturgy. If there is a bishop who is 40 but has been a bishop for 15 years and another who is 65 but has been a bishop for 2 years, the 40 year old would be commemorated first.
  • @Girgisantony
    I understand that but it does not answer my question.
  • @drewhalim @qawe I am sure muallem ibrahim doesnt come up with stuff on his own. These things were never so standardized as to have a general consensus to begin with. I will ask him and see when and who gave him the instruction. Either way it doesnt really make a difference. The concept of general bishops without seats is relatively new anyway so obviously it would make sense that they wouldnt say confirm him on his throne. Keep in mind a lot of the cantors are not educated in the rites and they condemn anything they aren't used to. 

    In regards to the topic of the Bishops. His Grace Bishop David said that its always supposed to be the bishop of the diocese first and then everyone else, but in unofficial occasions, sayedna usually goes by seniority. However in abouna peters ordination in our church we said his name before HG Bishop Tadros, because it was an official matter. All these things were never really standardized in the church anyway, they are usually left up to the bishops at the time and event. And then again, the deacons are the ones who say it, so im sure mistakes and things are made all over. 
  • @dg920

    "The concept of general bishops without seats is relatively new anyway so obviously it would make sense that they wouldnt say confirm him on his throne"
    100% agreed

    "I will ask him and see when and who gave him the instruction."
    Thanks please keep us updated.
  • edited December 2014
    hmmm that's weird. If you go to that link and search "the great eskeem" in the search box on the top right corner it will bring up "HH Pope Tawadros II receives the holy eskeem." Click on that. For some reason it won't let me link it. Sorry bout that.
Sign In or Register to comment.