A view of ROCOR

[Serge]

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/new ... hreadid=31

[Justin Kissel]

Serge,

You said:

Logically speaking, I should think its days as a separate jurisdiction from the Russian Church are numbered. Its work really is done.

I don't think this is consistent with something you said a few paragraphs earlier:

As ROCOR reacted to perceived liberalization by other Orthodox, it broke off communion with them and its clergy don't concelebrate with them

ROCOR counts many reasons for staying away from the Russian Church (Moscow), and the above mentioned one--ecumenism and modernism (aka liberalization)--is a key one. This is also the reason, of course, that ROCOR turned down the offer for partcipation in SCOBA, the reason that so many ties of communion were dropped in middle decades of the 20th century, and so forth. The MP seems to be taking steps in the correct direction, but they have a far way to go. It's not so simple as saying "they aren't under communists anymore, everything can go 'back to normal' now". Ecumenism is only one ecclesiological error; there are also the problems of officialdom (e.g., the adding of "Canonical" into SCOBA, with the implication that those who aren't in SCOBA aren't canonical and part of the "official" group of Churches) and neo-papal-patriarchalism (e.g., the idea that communion with this Patriarchate or that See somehow effects the degree [or even existence] of validity.) Many Orthodox groups are now even in the beginning stages of intercommunion with non-Chalcedonians (this despite the fact that the non-Chalcedonian representatives said openly that they had no intention of accepting the 4th-7th councils, still considered Pope Leo a heretic, etc.) Even the Churches that were at one time strong, such as Serbia (once guided by people like Saints Justin and Nikolai), are now "iffy" at best.

In my view, not only is ROCOR's work not done, but it is now entering into a time where it will play a central role in keeping Orthodoxy orthodox. As I slowly crawl into ROCOR, I am doing so with an eye to the future (especially with considerations of whether I will be called to the Priesthood or not -- this isn't just a flippant switch for me, but will immeasurably effect my future life and that of my family); I definately don't think it's in its 'last days'. I pray you will reconsider your position on this Serge. The Lord be with you!

Justin

[Seraphim Reeves]

Paradõsis,

I have to agree with you. I think ROCOR's days would be "numbered" if the MP was not "damaged goods" (as it is at the moment), and it took a clear stand against modernism (in particular, ecumenism, at least the "bad kind" as targeted by the '83 anathema of the Synod/ROCOR).

I agree with you, that the MP seems to be moving in the right direction, however slowly, and however reluctantly (on the part of some in the MP at least.) Spiritually, I have no doubts of my fellowship with the average rank and file parish priest, monk, and layman in Russia - as articles coming out of the True Orthodox Church of Greece point out, if the average Orthodox cleric or layman in the "mother countries" understood what ecumenists coming out of the west were up to, or what their heirarchs at home were often up to at ecumenical conferences, they'd throw a fit (and rightly so). This is precisely why the T.O.C. of Greece, or the other Old Calendarists that ROCOR is in communion with, are not fanatical "you're devoid of grace"-ites. Besides the fact that this mentality is entirely modern, reactionary, and un-Orthodox, it denies the fact that real schisms/descents into heresy involve an organic process of decay that doesn't happen over night, or even within a generation (particularly when the source of the division and error is so well cloaked from the eyes of the well meaning masses.) To have the juvenile mindset which people like HOCNA followers or other similar groups have, requires one to also take the simplistic view that the entire western Church suddenly "went into schism" overnight on a day back in 1054. The truth is, the divide back then began much earlier, and was cemented well after 1054 A.D.

It is the same in our time.

However, regardless of these considerations, the truth remains that there is an often elusive, heretical contaminant in the Orthodox world, in particularly in the halls of Orthodox "officialdom." It is for this reason that ROCOR has sufficient reason to exist as an administratively separate Synod from the MP.

Seraphim

[尼古拉前执事]

Glory to Jesus Christ!

Code: Select all

 Excellent responses both of you. I think there's great potential for a good amount of learning to go on here. God Bless us all!

[尼古拉前执事]

TO THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX PEOPLE

STATEMENT OF THE SYNOD OF BISHOPS
OF THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH OUTSIDE OF RUSSIA

The leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate has now officially declared that it looks upon the property of the Russian Church Abroad as its own, for only it, and no other, is the "sole legal heir to the property of the pre-Revolutionary Church," which, consequently, "is being held by the schismatics abroad illegally," and that such a decision "is accepted by the Orthodox believing people of Russia with joy and profound gratitude."

This statement compels us, the hierarchs abroad, to address the Russian Orthodox people directly. It is essential that we clarify the essential question which has emerged over the last decade

[Seraphim Reeves]

I think we all remember many instances of the MP's KGB-esque tactics in dealing with the Synod (whether by trying to split up parishes here, or even causing strife in the Holy Land.) Anyone who says that the "taint" is out of the MP is very mistaken.

Seraphim

[MikhailM]

I agree, now is not the time to get high on ecumenism. One day ROCOR and the MP will be one I am sure but we must wait for the MP to shape up first. For it is wrong to rush to unity without ironing out big problems.