The EOTC Synod in Exile: Issues and Challenges

On the other hand, the exile synod made their own decisions that seem to indicate,
among other things, the scale of their future engagement. The synod clarified a number
of issues that were “incorrectly” raised by the home synod, including those related to the
way the fourth patriarch was ousted. More importantly, the exile synod vowed to build
its capacity at several ‘fronts’ and strengthen the spread of the Gospel in foreign lands.
They are also poised to bring “neutral” churches under their authority. Moreover, they
plan to expose the ill-conceived ‘moves’ of the home synod and the government in
Ethiopia to international organizations.

I believe that the synod’s decisions are kind of default measures to be taken. If
reconciliation is just a dream, it is crucial to focus on growing the church in quantity and
quality. Actually, a lot could be done in the years to come. The synod rightly decided to
build its organizational capacity for a better outreach. That EOTC believers live in nearly
all major cities in the West and Asia makes it necessary to get strengthened
administratively first. And that is quite possible. Innovative ideas and agile planning
could make a significant difference. Still, it is great to remain open to and flexible about
continuing the peace negotiations with the home synod if something develops, from
both sides, at any point in time.

My belief is that the exile synod could do great holy jobs in North America, Europe,
Australia, Asia and Africa provided that some issues are well addressed in the beginning.
There are several controversial and fuzzy issues that are raised in relation to the way the
synod deals with some people and services. Social media circulated several issues, which
are still active and fresh in the minds of many. In fact, these issues are provided as
reasons why churches and individual Christians do not want to be under the authority of
the exile synod. It is thus vital for the success of the synod and the church at large to first
carefully and publicly address these and other issues. To me, the first task the synod
should accomplish is to clarify issues related to its 1) organization, 2) ambition and
strategic plan, and 3) decisions made so far on core spiritual and administrative issues.

This paper aims to frankly outline some of the core issues and challenges the EOTC
synod in exile has faced and is likely to face in the times ahead. Unless the synod
adequately addresses these and perhaps other ones, it would be a practical rarity to
achieve their goals such as strengthening their international ‘influence’. The only goal of
this paper is thus to invite the synod to publicly entertain the issues that occupy the
minds of the many. If people and churches are cleared of these, there is no convincing
reason that forces them not to join the synod in exile. The major issues and challenges
that need adequate and timely clarifications include the following.

Role model

To me, the synod has that huge task of 1) retaining their own churches under their reign,
2) attracting churches and individual Christians from neutral churches and churches
that belong to the home synod, and 3) reaching non-believers with the Gospel. The
challenge is as much capacity related as it is related to spiritual strength and integrity.
Although the reconciliation effort is technically given its embarrassing end by the home
synod, the failure must be shared by the two synods. The debacle is a result of
uncompromising agendas and prerequisites put forward by both.

One could also argue that the exile synod’s demand (to reinstate Abune Merkorios as
patriarch) was much like a ‘misguided missile’. Meaning, the patriarch was dethroned
by the government who is still in power. What would happen if the home synod allows
Abune Merkorios to reassume his position? Will the government allow that to happen or
will it smoothly work with the patriarch? Absolutely not. So, the reconciliation should
have been with the government and not with the EPRDF-controlled home synod alone.

By default anyone who fails to forgive and make peace at any cost is not considered a
spiritual role model. The division between the two holy leaderships erodes their
credibility and integrity. That means, there might be a moral challenge for the exile
synod to teach Christians to make sacrifices and to forgive. Spiritual power and grace
expected from a role model is hard to be seen. The synod would have a particular
problem preaching about peace, reconciliation, forgiveness, love, and unity even within
its own jurisdiction. If the synod has that ambition of bringing the neutral churches and
the churches that are under the home synod to their authority, they need to ‘travel extra
miles’. In a way, the synod is expected to demonstrate its integrity if it plans to expand
services and structures around the world. In other words, they should identify and
‘exhibit’ the qualities that distinguish them from the home synod.

The issues and challenges outlined below seem to even complicate the matter. There are
some signs and rumors that need to be clarified ahead. Some of the following issues
concern some members of the synod. They could still adversely affect the integrity of the
synod even if one or more of the following are considered to be false allegations.
Regardless of their truth value and regardless of who raised them, the synod would
benefit a lot if they clearly and publicly address them in good time.

Just name calling

It seems that at least some of the Archbishops of the exile synod have very symbolic or
ceremonial relationships with their churches. Some of them do not have the time and
zeal to closely work with the parish councils and the Christian community at large. Part
of the reason may of course be related to their limited human and resource pool. In fact,
they do not seem to worry a lot about the growth and development of the churches. As
long as their names are called during prayers and as long as they are invited to observe
election of parish councils, they do not mind. This leaves behind bad message to the
church community, the message that the bishops care a lot about their personhood and
future vs that of the church. In some places, some churches publicly complain about this
already.

It is recommended that the synod members make carefully planned visits to churches
and make genuine discussions with parish councils and the general laity. Discussions
must include issues related to growing the church by numbers- how to increase
membership and how to establish and maintain new churches. The laity must feel that
they have someone at close range who listens to and solves their problems. Focus on and
worry about the church and not on and about you as a synod or as a bishop. If this is
taken up, it would be easier to identify real orthodox believers from people having
reformist agendas.

The excommunicated

In the past, the home synod officially excommunicated some people for their wrong
teachings related to EOTC dogmas and traditions. The excommunicated managed to
leave for North America and join the churches administered by the exile synod. This
appears to be a worrisome development to many believers. If the excommunicated
abandon their wrong teachings and if they once again demonstrate their correct
understandings of church teachings (and with penitence), that must be a great news and
must be made public. If not, how does the synod explain this to the laity who appear to
be very sensitive to and knowledgeable of church dogmas and traditions? This is a
serious issue that needs to be handled with utmost care. If not dealt with, it would
seriously compromise the very spiritual integrity of the synod.

Hymn

EOTC has its unique hymn, which has its base the Bible. The exceptionally sophisticated
and soul- touching songs of Saint Yared are the real gifts from God. All the rhythms,
melodies, and/or instruments of EOTC songs reflect these works and the Bible. Modern
musical instruments are not thus allowed to be used for singing and prayers. But the
exile synod seems to be a bit relaxed on this regard. There are at least some bishops who
themselves use modern instruments for singing and praying. They believe that using
these instruments is an aspect of bringing modern technologies to the church. I am a
witness here- that one of the Archbishops told the congregation with confidence and
pride that he used and love to use modern instruments for prayers. This is something
hard to swallow to many EOTC believers.

This and other developments seem to tell the fact that the difference with the home
synod may not be strictly speaking related only to administration. It seems to have these
added dimensions. I am requesting the Holy Synod to clarify on this issue- whether the
synod as an entity/organization believes in the use of modern musical instruments for
prayers and singing. If it is the belief of individual bishops, how could that still be
explained to believers? If it plans to improve its outreach, the synod must come up with
a clear communiqué about this and other issues related to politics.

Politics

The exile synod members appear to show a political ‘gesture’; some of them try to
champion the efforts of Diaspora opposition. They endorse the formation of political
parties and their decisions. One could ask: what is wrong with this? It is a good question.
I believe that the synod and individual bishops have the obligation to defend the truth
and to stand in defense of their followers. But this should be made in a systematic and
spiritual fashion. It is difficult to understand why a bishop visits an armed group in the
field. It just itches ears when a bishop calls the ruling party “…. …..» although we
for certain know that the party is indeed that type. What am saying is that it is
absolutely possible to oppose freedom violators without resorting to insults and words
which are not in tone with the talks expected of bishops. And I do not believe that it is a
good idea for a bishop to endorse the formation of parties, groups and campaigns. Fight
injustices of any kind using the most ethical and spiritual standards.

Another political issue raised in relation to the exile synod concerns its history. I recall
several people shared the idea that the synod, particularly the patriarch, used to ‘play at
a silent mode’ during the reign of Mengistu Hailemariam. The point is that the patriarch
kept silent when hundreds of thousands of Ethiopians were massacred in the name of
Red Terror. As a patriarch of this great and historic church, Abune Merkorios was
expected to oppose the arbitrary killings. Some even believe that the patriarch has had a
good relationship with the killer machine called Melaku Tefera of Gondar. The synod is
expected to clarify what happened during that dark period of time to at least the young
generation who begin to question and learn from our past.

A related but minor complain is that the synod is dominated by bishops of Gondarian
origin, as the home synod is dominated by bishops of Tigrean origin. This sort of issues
is beyond my imagination. How spiritual people who reached at the top of the hierarchy
found themselves in mindless and earthly matters such as the one raised here? I wish to
see a solely merit-based future ordination of bishops! Unless issues like this are not
adequately clarified and considered for future moves, it would be a particular challenge
for the synod to accommodate as many churches and Christians as expected.

Concluding Remarks

Although they put forward a hard-to-meet prerequisite for reconciliation, the synod in
exile patiently waited for the decisions of the general assembly of the home synod.
Knowing that the fourth patriarch cannot be reinstated back to his position, the exile
synod passed several decisions that are aimed at harnessing the growth of the EOTC in
the other parts of the world. The ambitions are great and holy and could be met if the
synod takes very strategic moves.

Perhaps the first move may be winning the hearts and minds of believers. To do just that,
the synod needs to clarify issues and rumors that are under circulation in the cyber
world. I am not arguing that all those aforementioned issues are true; I am saying that
rumors and false propagandas could ruin the integrity and credibility of the synod. The
synod could profit a lot from campaigns that are aimed at 1) briefing the public on the
organizational make-up and readiness of the synod itself, and 2) clarifying issues that
are honestly raised in this paper and elsewhere.

The writer could be reached at [email protected] and also blogs at
http://tekluabate.blogspot.no/.