Coming soon - reunion of ROCOR with the Church of Russia

[mwoerl]

daniel wonders where the catacomb church fits into any possible rocor-mp union-they simply dont fit, as it seems they do not want any part of it.
michael woerl

[Daniel]

I wouldn't suppose the the Catacomb Church would want anything to do with the MP. I sorta asked the question wrong. I'm interested to know what ROCOR's current view of the Catacomb Church is and how it fits into their current relation with the MP. Are they just going to ignore it or what?

As to the idea that is being spread in ROCOR that there are/were two administratives centers for the Russian Church, one in Moscow and the other in New York, I have a couple of thoughts on this:

Firstly, this idea is completely new to me. I have never heard the situation put in those terms before. Secondly, I don't see how this can be from at least the time of Sergius' 'Declaration'. With that 'Declaration' Segius placed himself outside the Church and all those who commemorated his name. Moscow went into the hands of the God-hating communists, and who ever they put on the throne, and the lawful (illegal from the Soviet standpoint) and Orthodox Russian Church went underground. Now, this is just my feeble understanding of some of the recent history of the Church of Russia. None-the-less, if this is the case what makes the current/modern MP a Grace-bearing, and Orthodox Chruch. Surely the 'fall' of communists from power can't make apostates members of the Church with valid Mysteries. I seriously do not understand the current fascination with the MP.

Please, If my understanding of history is wrong, feel free to correct it.

[mwoerl]

the current fascination with the mp has to do with something called nationalism, as well as, to be fair, the many positive things going on in the russian church. but nationalism plays its part, whether there are many or any who want to admit it. your understanding of history...you know, i thought i understood it once myself...since there about a thousand different versions going around, its hard to figure which are self-serving, which contain elements of the truth, which are completely false. on the one hand, the mp wants to cozy up to the church abroad, while almost simultaneously complaining to the serbian patriarchate about one of his priests serving in a "schismatic church" (rocor chapel in bari, italy), & while its eyes are on any property of the church abroad it can get its hands on by means foul or "fair;" contradictory statements come out of rocor-there is no more sergianism in the mp, there is no more ecumenism in the mp-we cant join the mp until sergianism and ecumenism are gone; the oca wants to be kept in the mix-going head over heels in a sickeningly sycophantic letter to the patriarch of the mp praising to the skies the outright illegal seizures of rocor property in palestinian territory-and a few years later addresses their "brothers" in rocor! confusion abounds from day one-anyone taking any hard line position -which ever position- has to ignore things that have happened and been done. which is something i thought i would never say, but there it is.... unfortunately, myriads of circumstances and scenarios do not fit well into tightly woven positions and opinions and endless declarations...
michael woerl

[mwoerl]

the pertinent text from the 1971 sobor of bishops of the russian church abroad follows (from: "50th Anniversary of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia," Montreal, "With the Blessing of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia")
"Resolution Regarding the Election of Pimen (Izvekov) as Patriarch of Moscow" (pages fifty six/fifty seven)
Section Four: "All of the elections of Patriarchs in Moscow, beginning in nineteen forty-three, are invalid on the basis of the Thirtieth Canon of the Holy Apostles and the Third Canon of the Seventh Ecumenical Council, according to which, 'if any Bishop, having made use of secular rulers, should receive through them episcopal authority in the Church, let him be defrocked and excommunicated along with all those in communion with him.' The significance that the Fathers of the Seventh Council gave to such an offense is obvious from the very fact of a double punishmentfor it, that is, not only deposition, but excommunication as well, something unusual for ecclesiastical law. .......... the election of Pimen (Izvekov) as Patriarch of Moscow and All Russias at the gathering calling itself an All-Russian Church Council in Moscow the second of June of this year, on the authority of the Third Canon of the Seventh Ecumenical Council and other reasons set forth in this decision, is to be regarded as unlawful and void, and all of his acts and directions as having no strength."

[Lounger]

An interesting read: http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/vi ... 0428#10428 It seems all clergy are not so eager to be swallowed by the heretical Soviet Patriarchate as Reader Sergius here.

[Justin Kissel]

Seraphim and Joe,

Earlier David said, among other things:

It is nonetheless, all the rebuttal necessary. How can one who has never experienced the sacraments of Holy Orthodoxy stand in judgement of the brethren? I hope you find the truth, life, and communion of Christ when and if you become Orthodox but from this and other posts that seem to say nothing more than "I thank Thee, God, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican." This is technically an ad hominen attack, but I am not saying it to belittle you or attack your position as catechuman in a traditional Orthodox jurisdiction. The reason I am saying this is that I have genuine concern for your soul, that in your detailed studies of twentieth century Orthodox ecclesiastical politics your life in Christ is reduced to nothing more than a quest to find out not only who is right, but more importantly from your posting habits, who is wrong. Take care lest in the zealous search for authenticity that you bypass The Church completely. I would urge you to read The Arena by St. Ignatius Branchininov and also to share your postings on this site with your spiritual father. Forgive me, but you do not speak as one who seems to be working out their own salvation in fear in trembling, but rather one who would rather stand in judgement of his brother. There is much more than an internet debate of canoncity at stake. In the end, our words on who is right and who is wrong are just that; words. We will judge ourselves by the degree to which we have loved our neighbor and I have to say I find less and less of that love every time I visit this site. It is regrettable. There are so many here who could do so much for the glory of God residing on this site, but in the end will most likely continue their time as nothing more than a group of internet curmudgeons. May God have mercy on us all!

I think there is much to what he says here (hence the reason I quoted it in full). Perhaps you thought David was attacking you; if so, let me just say that I affirm the spirit of what he was saying (and think it is totally applicable to my own life as well.) I beg you to read what David has said here--and take it to heart. Do not look for an attack in it, or an attempt to slight you, but weigh the words carefully, and see how they might be of benefit in your own life.

There's a story about a monastic in the Sayings of the Desert Fathers that I think is relevant here. There was an Abba who would be visited by people, and would sometimes not gain anything or be edified by the visit. However, instead of thinking negatively of the visitor, the Abba would examine himself, asking things such as: "Why didn't I gain anything from the meeting?".

[Seraphim Reeves]

Justin,

Accusations (even if thinly veiled) of impiety or lack of spiritual sensitivity are, too often (on forums like this) an "easy out."

These forums are always going to be, by their nature, polemical. People are going to disagree - they are going to (if they can) try and justify why they think as they do, so as to have a "ready answer" as St.Peter exhorts. While sometimes expressions like the one you quoted can be genuine, it is also too often the case that they are a convienient way of being dismissive, while veiled in an air of piety and genuine concern. At best, such statements are best made privately, or not at all.

This is precisely why I avoid the sadly typical form of pseudo-charity you often see in debates on forums like this - "I will pray for you." Far from being charitable, usually this has the translated meaning of "I am right - you are in the wrong - I am in a better spiritual place than you - I am in a position to even plead your case with God - you are less than me, and worthy of being dismissed." There have been many times when I actually have prayed for those who disagree with - but I don't need to tell them this! To use the means of charity as an underhanded jab is shamelessly distasteful; the same goes for copious psycho-spiritual analysis of the real motives/problems of others in the context of a public dialogue/debate.

Seraphim