ROCOR anti-unionists in the UK... ?

[Priest Siluan]

From a TOC yahoo gruop:

(parenthetical words and emphases mine)

On the basis of having studied the
ecclesiological teachings of Metropolitan Cyprian,
which are set forth in the book ECCLESIOLOGICAL THESIS
OR THE EXPOSITION OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH FOR
THE ORTHODOX RESISTING THE HERESY OF ECUMENISM (1993),
Metropolitan Cyprian's report at the 6th Orthodox
Conference THE HERESY OF ECUMENISM AND THE PATRISTIC
POSITION OF THE ORTHODOX (1998), and also a host of
publications and declarations of other hierarchs of
the Synod of the Resistors, we have arrived at the
following conclusions:

1) Metropolitan Cyprian and his Synod, while
recognizing ecumenist World Orthodoxy to be heretical,
nevertheless considers it to be a part of the Church
of Christ, thus CONTRADICTING THE TEACHING AND
TRADITION OF THE CHURCH, which clearly bears witness
in Conciliar decrees and the writings of the Holy
Fathers to the effect that HERETICS ARE FALLEN AWAY
FROM THE CHURCH.

2)...In regard to ecumenist-heretics, he writes,
"Persons in error concerning the correct understanding
of the faith---and thereby sinning, but not yet judged
by an ecclesiastical court---are ailing members of the
Church (ECCLESIOLOGICAL THESIS, Chapters 1,4, pp.
2,7). Calling for a walling-off from these ailing
members, Metropolitan Cyprian nonetheless considers
them to be WITHIN THE CHURCH. However, to permit
membership in the Church OUTSIDE AN ORTHODOX
CONFESSION OF FAITH is by no means possible; hence,
those "ailing in the faith" CANNOT BE MEMBERS OF THE
CHURCH, which is also confirmed by the teachings of
the Holy Fathers. "Without a doubt," says the
venerable John Cassian the Roman, "he who does not
confess the faith of the Church is OUTSIDE THE
CHURCH." The same is confirmed also by Patriarch
Jeremias II of Constantinople: "Members of the Church
of Christ are wholly devoted to the truth, and those
who are not wholly devoted to the truth ARE NOT
MEMBERS OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST." And St Cyprian of
Carthage teaches: "Just as the devil is not Christ,
although he deceives in His Name, so also such a one
cannnot be acounted a Christian who does not abide in
the truth of His Gospel and faith." IN AGREEMENT WITH
ALL THE FATHERS, the great hierarch Gregory the
Theologian, in his SECOND EPISTLE AGAINST APOLLINARIUS,
also teaches: "Avoid those holding to another doctrine
and consider them ALIEN TO GOD AND TO THE UNIVERSAL
CHURCH." The EPISTLE OF THE EASTERN PATRIARCHS
CONCERNING THE ORTHODOX FAITH states: "We believe that
all amongst us are members of the catholic Church,
even the faithful themselves, i.e., those who
unconditionally confess the pure faith of Christ the
Saviour." And Saint Gregory Palamas also explains:
"Those who are of the Church of Christ, the same are
of the truth; and THOSE WHO ARE NOT OF THE TRUTH, THE
SAME ARE ALSO NOT OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST."
Metropolitan Cyprian declares in his thesis that
"the Orthodox have become divided into two parts:
those who are ailing in the faith and those who are
healthy..." (Chapter 3, p. 4), but then he immediately
goes on to speak of "restoring to Orthodoxy" those
ailing in the faith (Chapter 3, p. 5), whereby he
clearly falls into a doctrinal contradiction, for how
is it possible "to receive into Orthodoxy" those who
already are Orthodox?!

Metropolitan Cyprian makes a statement concerning
the division of the Church by reason of ecumenism, by
drawing an analogy between the present state of the
Church and Her state during the time of the
iconoclastic heresy (8th and 9th centuries). In his
ecclesiology, he attempts to compare the present-day
new calendarists and ecumenists with the iconoclasts,
whom the Fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council
UNITED TO THE CHURCH THROUGH REPENTANCE AND THE
RENOUNCING OF THE HERESY...He reaches a TOTALLY
UNFOUNDED CONCLUSION, that the iconoclasts, prior to
their having been judged by the Council, were not yet
heretics as such, and that their mysteries were
therefore recognized as being valid. However,
concerning the iconoclasts who were joined to
Orthodoxy, neither did the Ecumenical Council consider
them as having belonged previously to the Church, nor
did they themselves make any pretence as to their
comprising Her. Here are the testimonies of the
(iconoclasts who joined the Orthodox Church)...:Basil,
Bishop of Ancyra: "To the extent of my ability, I
investigated the question of icons, and with complete
conviction turned to the Holy Catholic Church."
Theodore, Bishop of Myra in Lycia: "...I pray God and
your holiness to join me, a sinner, to the Holy
Catholic Church, as well." John, the most
God-pleasing Locum Tenens of the Apostolic Throne in
the East, said: "Heresy separates every man from the
Church." The holy Council stated "That is obvious"
(not to many on this list). But Metropolitan Cyprian in his ecclesiology
changes the terminology: (he says): "They were
received into Orthodoxy," thereby inferring AN
UNTHINKABLE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE CHURCH AND
ORTHODOXY, which is IMPOSSIBLE. The Church, as the
Body of Christ, CANNOT BE DIVIDED. Such a phenomenon
is ontologically impossible, inasmuch as the Lord
Jesus Christ cannot have several bodies...In the
Church there can be no division; there can only be a
falling away from Her...CONTRADICTING THE DECREES OF THE CHURCH,
Metropolitan Cyprian declares that "the new
calendarists have not yet been condemned, to this day"
and that he recognizes "their Mysteries" to be
"valid" (Chapter 3, p. 5). But Local Councils of the
Church of Constantinople condemned the Gregorian Paschalion and the
Gregorian menologion: in 1583, in 1587, and in 1593,
with the Eastern Patriarchs taking part. For example,
the 1593 Conciliar definition of the Church states:
"Whosoever does not follow the customs of the church,
but desires to follow the Gregorian menologion and
paschalion is subject to anathema, to being
excommunciated from the Church and from the entire
assembly of the faithful." Patriarch Cyrill's 1756
Encyclical declares that "he who accepts the Gregorian
menologion will be separated from God."
(Metropolitan Cyprian is hoping for a
"unification council" that will unite these "separated
Orthodox"[!]) But HERETICS DO NOT BELONG TO THE
CHURCH and can return into the bosom of the Church of
Christ ONLY through being united to Her. Metropolitan
Cyprian sets forth A FALSE THEORY of uniting those of
unlike mind, at the same time making the very
convening of said Council dependent upon this
unnatural union. In this fashion, Metropolitan Cyrian's doctrine,
being the fundamental position of the Synod of
resistors, CONTRADICTS THE TRADITIONS OF THE CHURCH.
He declares that he is not in communion with heretical
ecumenist churches; meanwhile, however, he and his
Synod fail to sever themselves from these churches
spiritually, considering themselves to be the "healthy
part" of the one Church, at the same time as the
heretical ecumenists and new calendarist churches are
the "ailing part." Thus, Metropolitan Cyprian's
synod, despite the absence of communion in the
mysteries, finds itself DE FACTO, in a total
"healthy-ailing" UNION WITH HERETICAL WORLD ORTHODOXY.
This "Orthodox" CRYPTO-ECUMENISM, so to speak, even as
open ecumenism, FALLS UNDER THE ANATHEMA AGAINST THE
HERESY OF ECUMENISM, which was proclaimed by the ROCOR
Synod of Bishops under the presidency of the third
First Hierarch of the Church Abroad, Metropolitan
Philaret. This anathema was subsequently confirmed by
the ROCOR Sobor of Bishops in 1998....

Metropolitan Vitaly
Archbishop Varnana
Bishop Seegei
Bishop Vladimir
Bishop Varforlomei
Protopresbyter Victor Melehov
Archpriest Sergei Petrov
Archpriest Joseph Sunderland
Archpriest Sypridon Schneider
Priest Anatoly Trepatschko
Priest Andrew Kencis
Priest Nikita Orlov
Hieromonk Damien
Priest Mikhail Marcinowski
Priest Yevgenii Santalov
Abbess Eugenia
Deacon Mark Smith

Holy Transfiguration Skete
Mansonville, Canada

December 16, 2001

[Justin Kissel]

...once you are gone, what really is the difference of how much?

Good question. When you find the answer you might leave factionanity and rejoin Christianity.

[ioannis]

Giving up with the long diatribes on the all-ambiguous "factionality" I see. It is much easier to read one sentence vs. 50 to see the same level of substance.

Just for once I would like someone to use the Traditions of the Church to show some level of error in the Orthodox (traditional) approach to heresy.

in the meantime, one-liners and sophisms amount to nothing.

[drewmeister2]

Move to Fili MOVE TO FILI
An Augmented
Version of the Earlier News Release

By Father Alexis
Saint Edward Brotherhood,
Brookwood, England
14/27 January 2007

THE DECISION of three communities formerly of the Russian Church Abroad in
England to place themselves under the omophorion of Metropolitan Cyprian of
Oropos and Fili, of the Synod in Resistance in Greece, has already received
wide coverage in internet lists.

The three former ROCA communities that have joined the Synod in Resistance
are:

a) the Convent of the Annunciation in London, which was founded by St John
of Shanghai in 1954, and until 1999 was under the spiritual guidance of the
Ever-Memorable Abbess Elisabeth (Ampenoff);

b) Saint Edward Brotherhood founded in 1982 with the blessing of the Blessed
and Ever-Memorable Metropolitan Philaret of New York and Eastern America,
then First Hierarch of the ROCA;

c) the nascent Mission of St Boniface at Ryde on the Isle of Wight.

The reasons for our leaving the Church Abroad were summarised in a letter
which I wrote on 13th December (n.s.) last year, namely: "In all conscience,
members of the Brotherhood do not feel that we can accept the present
rapprochement. The question of Sergianism does not seem to have been
adequately addressed, and the Moscow Patriarchate's involvement in ecumenism
seems to be growing, although they have made some concessions on paper. More
fundamentally, our acceptance of this mode of rapprochement requires us to
accept that the Patriarchate is, and has been for decades, the Mother Church
of Russia - this is not something that we have ever been taught. One may
claim that the MP is the de facto Church in Russia, that she is established,
even flourishing, - but, for a number of reasons, her canonical basis is not
as firm as ROCA's was until, in the last few years, she has decided to allow
that to be questioned. "

Having thought and prayed about our dilemma and written to ruling ROCA
hierarchs without receiving substantial replies, on our own initiative we
opened a correspondence with Bishop Ambrose of Methoni of the Fili Synod. On
23rd December / 5th January, I wrote to Archbishop Mark, asking for letters
of dismissal so that we might join the Synod in Resistance. His Eminence
replied on 9th January that he could not issue such letters, saying: "I
cannot grant such letters of dismissal by which I would agree to you placing
yourself outside the Orthodox Church." As the Synod in Resistance had for
many years been a Sister Church of ROCA, and there was no evidence that she
had changed her confessional course, this response appeared to us to lack
foundation and spiritual sobriety.

I wrote to Archbishop Mark explaining why in all conscience we felt
compelled to make this move: "Thank you very much indeed for your letter
December 2, 2006 / January 9, 2007 (sic). We appreciate that you did not
feel able to give our communities a blessing to seek spiritual protection
under the omophorion of Metropolitan Cyprian of Oropos and Fili, but thank
you for at least leaving the door open for us to leave, and not forbidding
us to do so [His Grace wrote to us subsequently explaining that we had
misinterpreted his letter and that he did not intend this kindness.].

"Personally, I could not understand your objection, that by placing
ourselves under the Synod in Resistance we would be placing ourselves
outside the Church. One of the decisive factors in our joining Fili was that
until recently they were a Sister Church of the Church Abroad, that in 1994
the Council of Bishops of ROCOR published minutes of a meeting held on 28th
June / 11th July, in which they stated that the 'Synod of Metropolitan
Cyprian adheres wholly to the exact same ecclesiological and dogmatic
principles as our Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia,' and you yourself
praised the witness of the Synod in Resistance when you visited Brookwood,
shortly after going to Fili in your efforts to sort out the troubles which
ensued when the Prophet Elias Skete on Athos was snatched from us.…

"Again I would like to thank you for your care in the past, and express our
sorrow that in all conscience we feel unable to follow Your Grace and those
with you into union with the present administration of the Moscow
Patriarchate. We feel no sense of triumphalism over this move, but a sadness
that the Church which we have tried faithfully to serve for years has
changed her course to one which we do not recognise."

At the end of the Liturgy on Christmas Day, so that I would be able to reach
the greatest number of parishioners, I announced the fact that we had
applied to Archbishop Mark for letters of dismissal and our intention to
seek the spiritual protection of the Synod in Resistance.

It may be of interest to our readers to know why we left ROCA at this time -
many others are contemplating leaving in May, when the Patriarch and
Metropolitan Lavr sign the Act of Canonical Communion and concelebrate.
However, the hierarchs' decision has been made, and ROCA's path ahead is
clearly determined. Further, on a very practical point, Archbishop Mark's
decision to hold a Diocesan Conference in London in mid-January presented us
with a problem: should we attend and risk throwing the whole meeting off
course by announcing our decision, or remain silent and allow the
participants to make plans which we knew would be jeopardised. It seemed
best that we should leave, and allow the conference participants to plan
their future course untrammelled.

I travelled to Greece just after the Orthodox celebration of Christmas and
spent three days at the Sacred Monastery of Sts Cyprian and Justina at Fili.
During my stay there, on 28th December / 10th January, the feast of the
Twenty Thousand Martyrs of Nicomedia (so surrounded by a great cloud of
witnesses) the three communities with two priests, Fr Stephen Fretwell and
myself, were received into the jurisdiction of Metropolitan Cyprian.

In doing this His Eminence Kyr Cyprian noted that "having received your
letter of 5th January 2007 (n.c.) in which you request that you yourself,
the Brotherhood in Brookwood, and the Convent in Willesden, which is under
your spiritual care, be received into our diocese, on the grounds that you
are unable to accept the incumbent union of the Russian Church Abroad with
the Moscow Patriarchate, we inform you that we consider your request to be
well-founded, and therefore that from today you are considered to be under
the spiritual protection of our Metropolis. While we would have wished that
this transfer could have taken place with the consent of your former bishop,
this is not considered in this case essential, as the Russian Church Abroad
has declared to us that it has severed all ecclesiastical ties with our
Synod." As a blessing, Metropolitan Cyprian gave me a monastic prayer rope,
red in colour, as he pointed out - "the colour of blood."

During my stay at Fili, besides being able to join the monastic brotherhood
there at their Divine Services and see the many obediences which the fathers
engage in, and the enormous cathedral church that is being built alonside
the monastery itself, I was taken to visit the Convent of the Holy Angels at
Afidnai which is under the spiritual care of Abbess Taxiarchia. The church
there, like the one at Fili, is still under construction, but the lower
church is finished and is dedicated to St John of Shanghai. The sisters
showed me their workrooms - in the iconography studio, they had just
completed an icon of St Edward the Martyr! - and they introduced me to their
flock of goats, their chickens and their dog.

We were greatly heartened that on Sunday 1st / 14th January, the first
Sunday on which we served on the antimension given us by Metropolitan
Cyprian and commemorated him as our Metropolitan and father, a number of the
Russian parishioners from the Convent of the Annunciation supported us by
joining us at the Liturgy at Brookwood.

In response to our move, Archbishop Mark issued a series of decrees on 3rd /
16th January, in which he suspended the clergy who had left him and forbade
the monastics to receive Holy Communion in his churches. On the same day, he
issued a decree assigning Fr Peter Baulk "to administer to the needs of the
English-speaking parishioners in the Greater London area," and promised the
setting up of a ROCA English-language parish in London after Pascha, when
the lower church at Harvard Road is free. He also admonished his people to
abstain from attending further services at the churches which have
transferred to Fili, stating that the priestly functions there are "null and
void" and " serve for the condemnation rather than the salvation of those
who partake thereof. " This is undoubtedly a decision which those who wish
to remain with Archbishop Mark will have to accept as binding; however, our
communities had already been received under the spiritual care of
Metropolitan Cyprian when these condemnations were posted and we serve with
his blessing.

Our decision was not taken lightly. The sisters at Willesden have been
members of ROCA for over seven decades, they left their homeland as refugees
in loyalty to her. I have myself, albeit badly, served as a ROCA priest for
over 30 years, as a monastic for nearly 40. The outline of events given
above is necessarily rather cursory, but if anyone is genuinely concerned to
learn more - not for reasons of contention, but to understand our decision,

• we will gladly answer any questions, provide copies of documentation, and
  try to help you.

We would like to thank all those of you who have written to us and e-mailed
us, hearing of our move. The vast majority of messages have been kindly and
supportive. A few expressed worry and concern, and two or three (literally)
have taken issue with us for making this move. Although greatly appreciated,
it was perhaps to be expected that we should receive messages of welcome
from clergy and laypeople within the jurisdiction of the Synod in
Resistance, but we were more surprised to receive so many from those within
the whole spectrum of Orthodox churches and especially at this time to
receive messages of support, understanding and concern from three hierarchs
not within the traditionalist range of that spectrum: one from a bishop of
the Œcumenical Patriarchate, one from a bishop of the Moscow Patriarchate,
and one indeed from a ROCA bishop.

I mentioned in the opening lines, that there has been an inordinate amount
of information (and, it must be said, misinformation) disseminated about the
move of three such relatively insignificant communities. Because some of the
opinions being circulated had disturbed some members of the congregation, on
Sunday 8th / 21st January, at the end of the Liturgy, I advised the faithful
to respond to any approaches with the utmost restraint, and, more
importantly, to pray more earnestly for our detractors.

As I mentioned above, we will gladly answer anyone who is confused or hurt
by our move, but do not wish to enter into needless bickering, but perhaps I
should attempt to correct one untruth that has been spread, perhaps
inadvertently. An article, which purportedly was written even before we had
received a reply to our request for letters of release from Archbishop Mark,
contained several errors of fact, but it would be tedious and churlish to
try and answer them, and in any case it would spoil a rattling good yarn!
However, this piece did suggest that the Bishop who ordained me later left
the Russia Church Abroad. This is in fact not true, and, to respect his
memory, I feel that I should correct this one point. Although unworthy, I
was blessed to be ordained by the Ever-memorable Metropolitan Philaret of
New York and Eastern America, whose sacred relics, on 28th October / 10th
November, 1998, were uncovered and found to be incorrupt. He ordained me
deacon and priest and raised me to archimandrite, but he did not die outside
the Russian Church Abroad. In fact he reposed as its First Hierarch on the
feast of the Archangels, 8th /21st November, 1985. It is in a attempt to
hold fast to his last testimony - "Hold that fast which thou hast" (Rev
3:11) - that in all sadness we have felt that we must leave that church and
cleave to one whose confessional witness is at one with his. May his holy
prayers before the Great High Priest help us to do so.