Greek Orthodox Church Seeks to Reclaim Property in Israel

Associated Press ^ | 10.28.01 | JACK KATZENELL

[grimalkin]

JERUSALEM - The patriarch of the Greek Orthodox church said in an interview published Sunday that the church intends to repossess land holdings in Israel, including the land under Israel's parliament.

Newly elected Patriarch Eireneos I said a team of experts is to examine all transfers of church property, particularly during the past seven years, with the aim of repossessing as much land as possible, the Jerusalem Post reported.

[prognostigaator]

bump .....

[aposiopetic]

ping

[aposiopetic]

I wouldn't either if I had to do a title search on each of those parcels.

[gcruse]

"In 1990, the group acquired the lease for St. John's Hospice from the previous tenants, against the church's wishes. "

Sounds like the church has a case.

[onyx]

The Amen corner will not like to hear this....

You won't like the outcome.

[The_Reader_David]

It's good to have a Patriarch in Jerusalem who will actually look out for the Church's interests. The late Patriarch Diodoros should have been deposed for violating the canons forbidding the alienation of Church lands to the state.

[Romulus]

A law dating back to the sixth-century Byzantine Emperor Justinian requires the patriarch-elect, and even candidates for the post, to obtain government approval.

Is this peculiar to the Jerusalem patriarchate, or does it pertain to all GO sees? To Orthodoxy in general?

[tracer]

All...

[The_Reader_David]

The law was normative in the Empire, though we never had anything as outrageous as the "lay investiture" controversy in the West--Emperors typically only blocked disfavored candidates. The Ottomans took over the "authority" (Mehmet the Conqueror plainly regarded himself as a Muslim Roman Emperor, and kept the prerogatives thereof). Some successor states have claimed the power (Israel vis-a-vis the Patriarch of Jerusalem, the Turkish Republic vis-a-vis the Ecumenical Patriarchate), some have not (Syria, where Antioch is in exile, and Egypt vis-a-vis Alexandria).

I am not sure of the status of various national churches on this question, though I am certain that none of the North American jurisdictions vet candidates with Congress, the President, the Canadian government, or any governments back in the "Old Country".

In Russia, of course, state interference has come and gone and come and gone. There was relatively little, and to my knowledge no formal vetting of episcopal candidates until Tsar Peter "the Great" abolished the Patriachate. St. Tikhon was certainly not approved by the state when the Patriarchate was restored, while the Soviets interfered in elections as soon as they gave up trying to destroy the Church outright. The Church in Russia no longer seems to be under state control (though it's hard to tell--the Russian Synod types don't think it's escaped).

[Romulus]

Thanks for your answers.

Some successor states have claimed the power (Israel vis-a-vis the Patriarch of Jerusalem, the Turkish Republic vis-a-vis the Ecumenical Patriarchate), some have not (Syria, where Antioch is in exile, and Egypt vis-a-vis Alexandria).

Does this mean that the churches acquiesce in the modern regimes' determination to retain this ancient prerogative merely as a matter of courtesy or political discretion, but are not required by their own laws to do so?

[tracer]

The Orthodox Church remains in Constantinople at the pleasure of the Turkish government, as it has for centuries. .....

[The_Reader_David]

Political discretion, as the case of those local churches where the custom has lapsed show.