The Vacant Diocese
The Vacant Diocese
In this issue, we wish to speak a frank word and try to shed a ray of light on the vacant diocese.
It is a clear principle established by our holy apostolic fathers when, by the Spirit of God, they said:
“Choose from among you… and we will appoint them” (Acts 6).
Was this an excess of authority from the apostles, or an exaggeration in granting rights to the people? Did our apostolic fathers see the people’s choice of their servants as diminishing apostolic dignity or encroaching on their pastoral rights?
And when the people chose seven men and presented them to the apostles, did the apostles object, thinking that the people were imposing names upon them?
No, they accepted the people’s wish with paternal love and apostolic gentleness, and the matter was completed in peace and calm:
The people choose, and the apostles lay on hands.
The People Have the Right to Choose Their Shepherd
Flatterers and the Counsel of Ahithophel
Today, there are many flatterers who pretend to defend apostolic authority, presenting harmful and disastrous advice, saying: “What business has the people in choosing? They have no right to impose anyone! They must submit and obey.” Thus they stir the air, muddy the clear water, spoil relationships, and turn the vacant diocese into a battlefield—forgetting the canons of our Orthodox Church, which give the people full right to choose their shepherd.
They also forget the wise and beautiful advice the aged elders gave to King Rehoboam, son of Solomon, when he asked them: “How do you advise me to answer these people?” They said to him: “If you will be a servant to these people today, and serve them, and answer them, and speak good words to them, then they will be your servants forever.” (1 Kings 12:6–7).
If only Rehoboam had listened to this wise counsel and rejected the advice of the young men who showed him dignity in a false path that ended disastrously.
What Does Our Orthodoxy Mean?
We are an Orthodox Church. But what does our Orthodoxy mean? Orthodoxy is not a name or a title; it is life—it is faith and practice according to the laws and traditions handed down to us by our holy fathers.
If we neglect the laws, traditions, and systems of the fathers, what difference then is there between us and the Protestants who deny the laws and traditions of the fathers? They deny them theoretically; we deny them practically! And yet we say we are Orthodox!
We love our Orthodox Church—not for its stones, buildings, towers, or external forms—but for its Orthodoxy. We love its wise canons and traditions established by our holy fathers who rightly divided the word of truth. These are the fathers whom we shall meet in eternity, when they rise in their holy majesty to judge this generation. With what face shall we meet them if we have broken their laws and commandments?
The Prayer of Absolution
In the Divine Liturgy, the priest stands and says:
“Your servants, O Lord, those who serve this day—and my own weakness—be absolved from the mouth of the Holy Trinity… and from the mouths of our fathers the apostles, and of St. Cyril, St. Basil, and St. Gregory… and from the mouths of the 318 assembled in Nicaea, the 150 in Constantinople, and the 200 in Ephesus.”
These are the ones from whose mouths we receive absolution. But what did they say about the election of a bishop? And if we break what they have said, how can we receive absolution from their mouths? How can we complete the Liturgy?
Then we ask—what is Orthodoxy? It is this: to obey our holy fathers and to carry out their teachings. We are their successors, and we must walk in their path, in the same way and with the same spirit.
So let those flatterers who flatter authority and forget the law be silent. The canons of the Church—as we have explained many times in this magazine—proclaim an important principle:
The people have the right to choose their shepherd.
How Does the People Express Their Opinion?
Here we face practical realities, such as:
The Farce of Recommendations
If someone wants to “appoint” a person—any person—as bishop of a diocese, whether the people want him or not, how easy it is to write a recommendation for him! How easy to collect names and signatures!
Some sign out of friendship or courtesy toward those collecting signatures, or out of boredom, or to escape their insistence. Others sign without knowing the candidate or out of persuasion from others. Others sign out of indifference toward the Church and her ministry—these are many who are “Christians in name only,” attending church only on feast days. Such people have no objection to signing more than one recommendation for different individuals!
Unfortunately, in recommendations, signatures are counted but not weighed. It is easy to collect hundreds of signatures from those who are strangers to the Church—yet their votes, when weighed, bear no true value and express nothing of the Church’s real opinion.
Then there are the fearful ones, who believe—or are convinced—that a certain candidate will be made bishop no matter the opposition. So they think it better to bow to the inevitable, lest wrath fall upon them. These fearful ones may not only submit to the inevitable but may even become promoters who shout in favor of the coming one—to gain his favor or avoid his anger. They may gather recommendations for him, warn him about those who oppose him, and so on.
Thus, the vacant diocese becomes a battlefield of nerves.
For all these reasons, we have said in a previous issue—and still say—that the best way to elect a bishop is by secret ballot, so that each voter may express his conscience honestly, without flattery or submission to external pressures.
Who Are “the People”?
“The people” are not one or two notable persons living in Cairo, nor one or two priests or lay leaders of the diocese who happen to be in Cairo, nor one or two close to the Patriarchate, nor any friend of this or that candidate.
The people of the diocese are all the faithful worshipers in it, represented by those whom they delegate officially from among their clergy, genuine lay leaders, or spiritual elders. It is improper for a single individual to come to the Patriarchate and speak for the whole diocese while representing only his personal opinion. No one should speak or negotiate on this serious matter except an official delegate who faithfully expresses the diocese’s true opinion within the bounds of his mission—no more, no less.
The canons of the Church decree that “a bishop be appointed by the choice of all the people,” “all the clergy and people shall testify to him,” “he shall be chosen from among the whole congregation,” “by the consent of all the people together,” “his people who present him must be pleased with him,” and “all the clergy and people shall say: We prefer him.”
The people have the right to choose their shepherd.
(See Didascalia, ch. 36; Apostolic Canons 21 and 52; Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus, canon 2; and Canons of Cyril ibn Laqlaq.)
This is the authentic ecclesiastical order. As for mere formalities intended only to give the situation a churchly appearance—they cannot satisfy anyone’s conscience.
The Meaning of Repeated Refusal
It may happen that the people unanimously choose a person they trust and find peace under his shepherding, and they present him to the Patriarchate—but he is refused. Then they present another—and he is refused. A third—and again refused. The people may present three or five names at once—and all are rejected. The situation becomes tense.
Then the Patriarchate puts forward its own candidate, whom the people of the diocese may not accept. Attempts are made to gather recommendations for him, with meetings and persuasion. If the people reject him, they are asked to submit another candidate different from the five. If they present a sixth, he too is rejected!
After these repeated refusals, some ask:
Is a bishop ordained by appointment or by the choice of the people?
And the question remains unanswered—or perhaps, it has an answer. Let the reader understand.
For better translation support, please contact the center.
