The quote directly below is from An Interview with the head of the Orthodox Church in America, Metropolitan Herman given by ITAR-TASS.
Interview quote:
QUESTION: What is the OCA's relationship with the Russian Church
Abroad, the majority of whose parishes are in the USA? How do you
view her [ROCA's] reuniting with the Russian Orthodox Church in
Russia?
ANSWER: Of course we desire this reunification. All these years --
about 80 years -- the Church Abroad was actually in schism with the
Church in the Fatherland, and still has no canonical relations with
any Orthodox Church in the world.
UNQUOTE
The following is actual HISTORY!
NOT "re-wrtten history"!
Unless any of this has been subsequently rescinded or changed, it appears that the following is indeed correct.
As stated above,
"...the Church Abroad was actually in schism..."
The following quotes are taken from the book A History of the Russian Church Abroad 1917-1971; Published by Saint Nectarios Press, 9223-20th Ave. N.E., Seattle, Wa., 98115; LCCN 72-79507; ISBN 0-913026-04-2.
QUOTE:
On 31 March 1970, the autocephaly agreement between the Russian American Metropolia and Moscow was signed. Metropolitan Nikodim of Moscow and Metropolitan Ireney of the Metropolia were the signatories.
On 20 October 1970 a council of the Metropolia episcopate met at Saint Tikhon’s Monastery in South Canaan, Pennsylvania where the tomos of autocephaly was read aloud. There was a vote taken, and 301 out of 310 individuals voted to change the name of the Metropolia to “The Orthodox Church in America”.
The following are verbatim quotes from the "Jubilee Album", commemorating the 50th anniversary of the existence of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia.
QUOTE:
THE OPENING IN MONTREAL, CANADA, OF THE SESSION OF THE SOBOR OF BISHOPS OF THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH OUTSIDE OF RUSSIA
(Canada, September 1971), as delivered by Metropolitan Philaret:
Most important on the agenda of the Sobor was the question of the attitude to be taken towards the election in Moscow of Patriarch Pimen...These matters were totally discussed at this session.
THE RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF BISHOPS OF THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH OUTSIDE OF RUSSIA, OF 1/14 SEPTEMBER 1971 ON THE CATACOMB CHURCH
The Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, the only free part of the Russian Church, looks with sorrow on the suffering to which the faithful are subjected within the boundaries of the Soviet Union.
To the open persecutions by the atheistic rulers, whose purpose is to destroy all religion, there are added temptations by false brethren.
In 1927, when the late Metropolitan of Nizhny Novgorod Sergius, who called himself Patriarch of Moscow, published his well-known declaration, the elder bishops of the Russian Church and among them those chosen by Patriarch Tikhon in his legacy for temporary leadership of the Russian Church, did not agree with him, seeing the peril for Orthodox souls in the new course along which he led the Church despite the orders of Metropolitan Peter of Krutitsa.
The names of Metropolitans Peter, Cyrill, Arsenius, Joseph, Archbishop Seraphim of Uglich and many other hierarchs, clerics and laymen will go down in the history of the Church on an equal par with the famous confessors of Orthodoxy in the face of persecutions, villainy and heresies.
The free part of the Russian Church, located outside the boundaries of the USSR, is heart and soul with the confessors of the faith, whom the antireligious guidebook call "True Orthodox Christians" and who in common usage are often called "the Catacomb Church", since they are obliged to hide themselves from the secular authorities in the same way the first centuries of Christianity.
The Council of Bishops acknowledges its spiritual unity with them and the Russian Church Outside of Russia always prays for all those who in conditions of persecution manage to keep the true faith and "do not bend under a foreign yoke with the unbelievers", recognizing that there is nothing in common between light and darkness and no agreement between Christ and Belial ((II Cor. 6, 14-15).
The free part of the Russian Church, besides praying, tries to help its brethren who suffer for the Faith in the Fatherland also by continually seeking to reveal to the world the true position of the Church in the Soviet Union, exposing the falsehood of her supposed well-being, which false pastors, traveling abroad, attempt to spread there, glorifying the persecutors and disparaging the persecuted. In the difficult circumstances which our brethren in the Soviet Union must experience, it is a consolation for us to look at the first centuries of Christianity, when the persecutors of Christ also attempted a physical humiliation of the Holy Church. But we remember the encouraging words of the Saviour, "Fear not, little flock" (Luke 12, 32). And we remember the Saviour's words of encouragement for those whom the Lord has judged to be on this earth in the last days of her existence: "then look up and lift your heads, for your redemption draweth nigh"; Luke 21, 28.
RESOLUTION OF THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH OUTSIDE OF RUSSIA CONCERNING THE ELECTION OF PIMEN (ISVEKOV) AS PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW
The Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia on September 1/14, 1971 considered the gathering which, calling itself an All-Russian Church Council, met in Moscow from May 30 to June 2 of this year for the purpose of electing a Patriarch of Moscow and all Russias.
This gathering declared that Metropolitan Pimen was elected to the Patriarchal Throne.
After considering all aspects of this election, the Council of Bishops, representing the free part of the Russian Orthodox Church, came to the following conclusion:
For the election of the Primate of a Local Church it is essential that such an election take place according to the laws of the given Church and that it be free, representing a genuine expression of her voice.
In 1917 the All-Russian Council adopted a resolution restoring the Patriarchate in Russia, and elected to the Patriarchal See His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon.
This council included all canonically consecrated bishops of the Russian Church, representatives of the monastic clergy and the Orthodox Theological Academies, invited by the Synod on the basis of the Regulation it had issued.
All the representatives of the diocese were chosen freely at elections on three levels: parish elections, deanery elections and diocesan meetings.
The actual election of the Patriarch took place in a fashion that guaranteed freedom in the nominating of candidates for election. The latter were established by a secret ballot, and at first a large number of candidates were named.
From among them, by systematic balloting, the three who received the highest number of votes were picked, and of those one was finally elected by the drawing of lots.
This system of election, guaranteeing complete freedom and confirmed by the All-Russian Church Council, was never abolished by a free council of equal authority.
Therefore, and election of Patriarchs, effected otherwise and not in a free manner,does not express the voice of the Russian Orthodox Church and is not lawful.
Not only the election of the present Pimen, who claims to be Patriarch, but those of his two predecessors must also be regarded as unlawful.
Their supporters can not defend these elections by saying that the external conditions caused by persecutions against the Faith prevented the realization of a lawful form of election, since, despite the obvious, they constantly insist on the supposed full religion's freedom in the Soviet Union.
Similar decisions were made the now-elected Patriarch Pimen. At all three Patriarchal elections, no one attempted or had any possibility of nominating a candidate other than the one indicated beforehand by representatives of the secular authorities.
- The lawful succession of higher Church authority in the Russian Church has been broken since 1927, when the Acting Locum-Tenens of the Patriarchal Throne, Metropolitan Sergius of Nizhny-Novgorod, went against the order of the Metropolitan of Krutitsa whom he was replacing and signed an agreement with the atheistic authorities, to which neither Metropolitan Peter nor the other elder hierarchs agreed.
The Soviet government began to throw all the hierarchs who did not agree with Metropolitan Sergius in prison, thus clearing the path for him to become the head of the Russian Church.
He for his part, taking no account of the elder bishops, formed a Synod by his own personal choice and, while Metropolitan Peter of Krutitsa, to whom by position the Moscow diocese belonged, was still alive, he unlawfully gave himself the title of "His Beatitude the Metropolitan of Moscow" with the right to wear two Panaghias In 1943, by orders of the atheist and the malicious persecutor of the Church, Stalin, he hurriedly (in four days) pulled together, in fulfillment of the latter's political plans, a Council consisting of bishops specially chosen and freed from prison for the purpose by Stalin, a Council which, counting Metropolitan Sergius, consisted of only 19 bishops, and which elected him Patriarch.
In 1945, after the death of Patriarch Sergius, Metropolitan Alexis of Leningrad gathered a Council, to which representatives of the clergy and laity, picked without elections and prepared for the election of a Patriarch, and, submissively following the directions of the atheistic authorities, unanimously elected as Patriarch Alexis of Leningrad.
After his death, in the same illegal manner the so-called All-Russian Council was convoked this year for the election as Patriarch of Metropolitan Pimen, known not so much for his devoutness or theological education, but rather for his diligence in carrying out the orders of the atheistic government, which are directed toward the destruction of the Church and toward fulfilling the political plans of the Soviet Regime.
4 All the elections of Patriarchs in Moscow, beginning in 1943, are invalid on the basis of 30th Canon of the Holy Apostles and the 3rd Canon of the 7th 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 those in communion with him".
The significance that the Fathers of the 7th Council gave to such an offense is obvious from the very fact of a double punishment for it, that is, not only a deposition but excommunication as well, something unusual for ecclesiastical law.
The famous commentator on Canon Law, Bishop Nicodemus of Dalmatia, gives the following explanation of the 30th Canon of the Holy Apostles:
"If the Church condemned unlawful influence by the secular authorities in the ordination of bishops at a time when the rulers were Christians, then it follows that She should condemn such actions all the more when the latter are pagans and place even heavier penalties on the guilty parties, who are not ashamed of asking for help from pagan rulers and the authorities subjugated to them, in order to gain the episcopate. This (30th) Canon has such cases in view". If in defense of this position examples are given of the Patriarchs of Constantinople who were placed on the Throne at the caprice of the Turkish Sultans, one can reply that no anomaly can be regarded as a norm and that one breach of Canon Law cannot justify another.”
Taking into consideration all the above-mentioned reasons, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, as the representative of the free part of the Russian Church, determines:
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 2nd of June of this year, on the authority of the 3rd Canon of the 7th Ecumenical Council and other reasons set forth in this decision, is to be regarded as unlawful and void, and all his acts and directions as having no strength.
THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE SO-CALLED METROPOLIA
As regards the relationship to the so-called Metropolia
IT WAS RESOLVED:
The Sobor of Bishops, having heard the report of the Synod of Bishops about the fact of the so called Metropolia has received autocephaly from the Moscow patriarchate, approves of all the steps taken by the Synod of Bishops to convince Metropolitan Ireney and his associates of the fallacy of their decision, which increases the rift provoked in 1946 by the Cleveland Sobor with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia.
The American Metropolia has received its autocephaly from the Moscow Patriarchate, which does not have a true succession from His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon ever since the time when Metropolitan Sergius, later called the Patriarch, broke his obligations toward the Locum Tenens of the Patriarchal Throne, Metropolitan Peter, and embarked on a course which was immediately condemned by the eldest Exarchs of the Russian Church.
The Moscow Patriarchate, more and more subservient to the influence of the atheistic and anti-Christ government, ceased to be the voice of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Therefore, as correctly stated by the Synod of Bishops, none of its acts, including the granting of autocephaly to the North American Metropolia, have any legal effect.
Besides, independently of this, this act, which has affected the rights of other numerous Churches has resulted in protests by a number of Orthodox Churches which have severed relations with the American Metropolia.
Observing with sorrow this illegal act and acknowledging it to be without effect, the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, up to now not relinquishing the hope for the reunification of the American Church unity detects in the announcement of the American autocephaly a step leading the American Metropolia to even further rift away from unification of the Russian Church.
Seeing in it a mortal sin toward the subservient and suffering Russian Church,
the Synod of Bishops DECREES:
That hereafter, the clergy as well as the laity should not have spiritual or liturgical relation with the hierarchy and clergy of the American Metropolia.
Unless my "Russian" is incorrect, the following Hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia were in attendance at this Sobor:
Metropolitan Philaret
Archbishop Nikon, Washington and Florida
Archbishop Seraphim, Chicago and Detroit
Archbishop Philothei, Berlin and Germany
Archbishop Vitaly, Montreal and Canada
Archbishop Anthony, Los Angeles and California
Archbishop Averky, Syracuse and New York
Archbishop Anthony, Geneva and Europe
Archbishop Anthony, San Fransisco
Archbishop Seraphim, Brazil, SanPaulo, Venezuela
Archbishop Theodosi, Sydney, Australia, New Zeland
Bishop Paul, Stuttgart and Germany
Bishop Laurus, Manhattan
Bishop Constantine, Brisbane
History shows that this "autocephaly" granted to the Metropolia produced one thing...the result was the emergence of a new autocephalous Church, the Orthodox Church in America. #1.
#1 – "A History of the Russian Church Abroad": 1917 - 1971).
Published by St. Nectarios Press, 9223-20th Avenue, N.E., Seattle,
Washington, 98115. ISBN 0-913026-04-2.
This History was prepared by Holy Transfiguration Monastery in Brookline, Massachusetts.
UNQUOTE
John
