ROCIE ecclesiology

[Jean-Serge]

Il woul like to know what's ROCIE ecclesiology :

• what are the true churches according to them
• who has Grace
• where are they allowed to commune
• what do thhy think about the world orthodoxy
• what do they think about other traditionnalist churches

[Jean-Serge]

Hey anyone from ROCIE to answer my question? Yeeeeeewheeeeeew is there anyone?

[Edward]

I do not have a direct answer but I once had the opportunity to listen to a talk by Metropolitan Vitaly in 1998 at the Southern Missions Conference in Atlanta, Georgia. He opened his talk stating that the number one temptation of our times was the Moscow Patriarchate. He then continued on saying that when Metropolitan Sergius signed the declaration, the Moscow Patriarchate lost Apostolic continuity and had no grace. This is almost verbatum what I write. He then said, "this is what I believe".

At the end of the talk, there was a chance to ask him question. Myself, being a former Old Calendarist (our jurisdiction had gone under Constantinople earlier that year), I asked him, "Vladika, you said that the Moscow Patriarchate had lost Apostolic continuity and had no grace, do you mean that they have no grace in their mysteries. To be more specific, when the faithful partake of communion in the MP Churches are they partaking of the Body and Blood of Christ or just bread and wine?"

He then replied, "no, no, that is not what I mean, God, in his mercy, provides grace in the mysteries for the simple believers there, but not for the clergy!"

Bishop Gabriel of Manhattan then interupted saying, "The Church Abroad has never stated that the Moscow Patriarchate is without grace."

It is a strange ecclesiology. Imagine, an MP Priest celebrating liturgy, reading the prayers of consecration but nothing happening until it touches the lips of a pious, simple believe in Russia? I have met pious people in Italy, but I would never state that there is grace in the Latin mysteries for the pious people but not for the clergy. There is no grace in the mysteries of the Latin Church.

Edward
geh8988@gmail.com

[spiridon]

I too am curious of a Rocie Response, unfortunately I think there might be some controversy within its own jurisdiction from those that speak for Vladyka Metropolitan Vitaly, and those that dont hear from him personally in america............maybe after the sobor of Rocor-V bishops meet this november ,we can get a more grounded response or understanding of where they stand today.............

[Priest Siluan]

I do not have a direct answer but I once had the opportunity to listen to a talk by Metropolitan Vitaly in 1998 at the Southern Missions Conference in Atlanta, Georgia. He opened his talk stating that the number one temptation of our times was the Moscow Patriarchate. He then continued on saying that when Metropolitan Sergius signed the declaration, the Moscow Patriarchate lost Apostolic continuity and had no grace. This is almost verbatum what I write. He then said, "this is what I believe"

Many pius people believe the same thing, if you don't believe you ask among the faithful of ROCOR (I am speaking of ROCOR-L)

[Justin Kissel]

ROCOR have a good right to believe in this strange distinction between clergy and laity, since ROCOR documents from councils have said this publically and "officially". In fact (and it is a fact), ROCOR has made this distinction between clergy and laity for decades now. I do not claim to know how theologically orthodox it is. However, supposing that it isn't Orthodox, I think that raises an intersting question: I'd like to know why all the people who bring up in minute detail all the supposed canonical and traditional lapses of ROCOR haven't brought up this belief? Could it be that people don't bring it up because those people need ROCOR to be Orthodox until year X (1987, 1994, whatever), and thus any errors before that are to be swept under the rug, while any errors after that are to be examined under a microscope?

I have never personally understood the theological principles behind such a belief. As I said, I have brought it up on this forum more than once, asking for people's opinions. Since I want to give ROCOR the benefit of the doubt, I call to mind other seemingly peculiar beliefs. St. Seraphim of Sarov, for example, believed that even if someone couldn't partake of the Eucharist before they died, that nonetheless God would give them that same grace because of their intention and because they were prevented by something out of their control. Is this situation a similar situation, so that the laity's pure intentions and inability to change the situation was looked on by God as reason for letting them have the grace of the Mysteries, even when the very clergy were of questionable status? This is all speculation, and I am not claiming that this is the case, this is just one of the things that comes to mind when I grapple with this.

If you are in the GOC, ROAC, etc. then I think you need to grapple with it as well. ROCOR was not so pristine and pure "in the old days" as some make her out to be, neither is she fallen and rotten today as some make her out to be. Here are two recent quotes in which ROCOR articulating this idea, I have posted similar comments from older synods before on this forum...

We believe and confess that in those churches of the Patriarchate of Moscow where the priest fervently believes and sincerely prays, showing himself to be not only a "minister of the cult", but also a good shepherd who loves his sheep, to those who approach him with faith, the grace of salvation is accessible in the mysteries. Such churches are few in number on the immense territory of the Russian land. The churches of the catacomb Christians, our brethren, in which the divine services are celebrated by priests who have preserved canonical succession from those who received the crown of martyrdom, the true archpastors of the Church, are even fewer in number and inaccessible to the vast mass of believers. - Statement of the [ROCOR] Synod of Bishops, 1990

We are distressed that wide circles within the Patriarchate have been following the lead of other Local Churches who have lost a healthy sense of the understanding of the Traditions of the Holy Fathers. Yet at the same time we rejoice that within the same Patriarchate there are also healthy elements. These consist of priests and even laymen who are Orthodox in mind and preach true Orthodoxy despite all obstacles? - Statement of the [ROCOR] Synod of Bishops, 1994

[Priest Siluan]

see it http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~sshoemak/3 ... church.htm