Fr. Steven Allen: ROCOR, Met. Agathangel & SiR

[Ekklisiastikos]

Frankly, I was not aware that Metropolitan Cyprian of Fili had ever referred to this 1929 epistle of Metropolitan Cyril of Kazan

You can find it in the 191th issue of their periodical "Agios Kyprianos ", 1983 , pg: 390

[Pravoslavnik]

There you go: This is the exact underlying premise of World Orthodoxy's involvement in the WCC.

I rest my case.

(?) Father Mark,

Code: Select all

    I'm not sure what you mean here by "involvement."  What I clearly stated above is that I have chosen to refrain from communion with certain suspect jurisdictions.  It appears to me that our main differences of opinion have to do with your absolute certainty, and Father Steven Allen's-- regarding the issue of grace NOT being at all present in the sacramental life of certain Orthodox jurisdictions.  I am less certain.  God works in mysterious ways-- and has even accomplished His purposes, at times,through the transgressions of sinners, such as Judas Iscariot, or the Hebrew Patriarchs, the elder brothers of Joseph the Patriarch.

    So, what of the example I mentioned of the Patriarch Levi, the son of Israel ?  Were he and his descendants deprived of God's grace as a result of his throwing his brother Joseph down a well-- as the Sergianists did to the Russian Church?  Before closing your case prematurely, please respond to this example from the Holy scriptures.

[GOCPriestMark]

So, what of the example I mentioned of the Patriarch Levi, the son of Israel ? Were he and his descendants deprived of God's grace as a result of his throwing his brother Joseph down a well-- as the Sergianists did to the Russian Church? Before closing your case prematurely, please respond to this example from the Holy scriptures.

Umm, the Levites didn't have "grace" they were under the law.

[Mark Templet]

If you really did read the information that Father Siluan posted, and what Father Steven wrote, and my own statements and you still think we are wrong, then I think we have exhausted our efforts to convey to you the error of your ecclesiology. Nothing more is to be gained in this debate; clearly we are not persuading you and I can assure you that you will not change my mind either. I will pray for you and I humbly ask your prayers for my sinful soul as well. May God have mercy on us all.

[Jean-Serge]

The cas of Joseph's brother is quite different. The brothers repented when they finally discovered Joseph was ruling Egypt and the family made peace...

[jgress]

My understanding is that Met Cyprian is more than just unsure about the presence of grace in World Orthodoxy, as you are, Pravoslavnik. Rather, he is sure that they DO have grace. The Synod of Abp Chrysostomos II of Athens, my own Synod and the one which represents the majority of Greek True Orthodox, is sure that they do not. However, I am told that not everyone in my jurisdiction believes this, and our bishops generally choose not to make a matter of faith out of their position regarding the World Orthodox, in order to avoid further schisms on this matter. For us, it is sufficient for our faithful to refrain from communing in ecumenist churches; what they believe about the presence of grace in those churches is a matter for their own conscience.

By contrast, it is worth noting that the Cyprianites of Greece HAVE made their ecclesiology a matter of faith, since that is their sole pretext for refusing to reunite with us. I am told that Met Agathangelus' position is more "moderate", i.e. he doesn't insist on his ecclesiology as a matter of faith, although it is hard to see what that means in practice when he refuses to accept the grace of other Russian or Greek TOC jurisdictions on the grounds they are are schismatic, while claiming that the heretical WO still have grace.

Your uncertain ecclesiology seems more characteristic of pre-1994 rather than post-1994 ROCOR. Thus, before 1994 you had ROCOR bishops who believed the WO had grace and those who believed they did not have grace, but there was no common position. After 1994, the official position was that they DID have grace. Fr Steven's point is that, once you hold as a matter of faith that the WO, including the Moscow Patriarchate, have grace, then it becomes very hard to justify continued separation from them. This what he means by Cyprianitism as the "Trojan horse" with which agents of union, quite probably working for the KGB, persuaded the "right wing" of the ROCOR to assent to union.

However, from what you say, Pravo, you don't appear to be a genuine Cyprianite. On the other hand, Fr Steven's other point is that even before 1994, when ROCOR had no official ecclesiology, their lack of decision was itself dangerous. By not making their position clear after 1983, when they anathematized ecumenism, that the heretical WO, including the MP, were under the anathema, outside the Church and devoid of grace, they left the door open to this new-fangled ecclesiology which held that formally uncondemned heretics must have grace until a "Unifying Council" (i.e. not a local council like in 1983) is convened. The process in fact began in 1986 when Met Vitaly proclaimed in his Nativity epistle that the 1983 anathema only had local validity, and that it was up to the ecumenist jurisdictions to accept or reject the anathema. Of course, this only makes sense if those jurisdictions are still considered to be part of the Church and have the authority "to bind and loose", and not to have been already cut off by the said anathema. From here, it is an easy step to make this implied ecclesiology explicit, by declaring that the ecumenist churches were not yet condemned, were still in the Church and still had grace-filled mysteries, i.e. by officially endorsing Cyprianism.

Once this ecclesiology was accepted, that in turned opened the door to union with the same heretics. Therefore, an undecided ecclesiology, at least at the episcopal level, is almost as bad as Cyprianite ecclesiology. Since Met Agathangelus continues to hold Cyprianism as his official ecclesiology, however, then for him and his followers it is even more dangerous.

[Suaidan]

I think there are too many false premises in this essay to take it seriously.