Official OCA position

Feel free to tell our little section of the Internet why you're right. Forum rules apply.


Post Reply
bogoliubtsy
Sr Member
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed 16 April 2003 4:53 pm
Location: Russia

Post by bogoliubtsy »

As I mentioned above, a few years ago New Skete got into some trouble for having paintings of Fr. Alexander Schmemann, Dorthody Day, some post-schism pope and a couple other people in the Narthex of their church. Here is a statement about this by Fr.John Matusiak.

Thank you for writing.

The painting of individuals who have not been canonized is not totally
unheard of in the Orthodox Church.

-- For example, at the Serbian Orthodox Monastery of the Mother of God
in Grays Lake, Illinois, as one enters the main church, one finds
iconographic portraits of the former bishops of the New Gracanica
Metropolitanate, including the late Bishop Ireney of New Gracanica, who
was responsible for building the monastery.

-- In the vestibule of the Cathedral of Our Lady of Kazan on Re Square
in Moscow, one finds iconographic renderings depicting the
groundbreaking and reconstruction of the cathedral, clearly depicting
Patriarch Aleksy of Moscow, the Rector of the cathedral, and other
contemporaries.

-- Long before Saint Herman of Alaska was canonized, there were
iconographic renderings of him. [This is not at all uncommon in the case
of individuals who had led a life of holiness and who are especially
remembered by the faithful.] And I might add that long before the
canonization of Saint Raphael Hawaweeny of Brooklyn, iconographic
renderings were also in circulation, although it was clear that they
were not "icons" in the strictest sense of the word.

-- Even in ancient Byzantium, it was often the case that individuals who
had been benefactors of the building of a particular church were
portrayed iconographically, often presenting a model of the church to
Christ enthroned.

At the same time, two things must be clearly stated here:

  1. In no case are these iconographic renderings or portraits "icons,"
    inasmuch as they are not venerated by the faithful, nor do they have
    liturgical commemorations associated with them. [There is no "feast of
    the former bishops of the New Gracanica Monastery" or "Feast of
    Justinian presenting Christ with a model of Hagia Sophia," for example,
    just as before the canonization of Saint Herman was there a feast of
    Saint Herman, even though the pious faithful marked the day of his
    repose, as one would do with any other faithful departed Orthodox
    Christian.]
  1. There is no tradition of including individuals who did NOT belong to
    the Orthodox Church in such renderings. While they may have been
    "persons of faith," as the title on the web site to which you directed
    me states, they were hardly "persons of the SAME faith." To depict such
    individuals as Father Schmemann, Father Men and Mother Maria Skobtsova
    together with Dorothy Day, Archbishop Ramsey, and Pope Paul VI is
    confusing at best, downright deceptive at worst, inasmuch as it implies
    that these "persons of faith" shared the SAME faith which, of course,
    they did not. The danger here comes in the fact that there is a certain
    unity of faith being IMPLIED -- a unity of faith that did not exist in
    the lifetimes of these individuals and does not exist today. Personally,
    I find the renderings in poor taste and reflective of poor judgment,
    inasmuch as rather than bringing about the edification of the faithful,
    they can indeed cause deep confusion. While one might argue that they
    reflect the mind of the New Skete community, they certainly do not
    reflect the mind of the Church universal, nor of the OCA in particular.
    I will make further enquiry into the matter with the proper Church
    officials, however.

As far as your other questions:

  1. What is the official OCA belief about Roman Catholic post-schism
    saints?
    Answer: The OCA's position is the same as that which would be held by
    all other Orthodox Churches, namely they are post-schism Roman Catholic
    saints, period. As such, this in no way implies that they are saints in
    the eyes of the Orthodox Church. None of them, such as Francis of Assisi
    or Clare, are enrolled on the Orthodox calendar, nor to Orthodox
    Christians venerate them liturgically, iconographically, or in any other
    way. While certain writings of such individuals are sometimes read, such
    as the writings of certain Western mystics [Teresa of Avila, for
    example], even in such cases it is fully recognized that they are not
    saints of the Orthodox Church and should not be accorded the same honor
    that would be shown to Orthodox saints.

As an aside, one might speculate on the following: The Vatican recently
announced its desire to canonize Cardinal Stepinac, a World War II era
figure from Croatia. Cardinal Stepinac is seen by the Vatican to be a
defender of the Catholic Faith, one who was responsible for the
conversion of literally thousands of Orthodox Serbs to Roman Catholicism
during the war. The Orthodox, on the other hand, remember him for his
hatred of Orthodox Christianity and his practice of forcing Orthodox
Christians to convert to Catholicism under the pain of death. When and
if the Vatican does proclaim him a saint, would it be appropriate for
Orthodox Christians to recognize this status or to accord him honor in
any way? The same might be asked with regard to the Catholic saint,
Josephat Kuntzevich, who struggled to impose uniatism on the Orthodox
population in what is today western Ukraine. Surely, to depict these
post-schism Roman Catholic saints in an Orthodox context would be
controversial, if not downright provocative and scandalous, to many
Orthodox Christians. And one might well wonder to what end doing this
would point -- surely not the edification of the faithful.

  1. Is there a cause for concern here?
    Answer: In my own opinion, yes indeed, especially in light of the
    confusion and possible temptation and doubt it can cause to the
    faithful.

At the same time, it would seem that one should not make too much of
this, since to do so is of little spiritual benefit and hardly
profitable to our souls. It would seem best to call it to the attention
of those in a position to address the matter directly, and I will make
further enquiry on the matter.

  1. Is New Skete considered on the fringe?
    Answer: While I'm not sure that I would say they are on the fringe, I
    would say that New Skete has little visibility within the typical OCA
    community and that it is hardly a reflection of the "mainstream" life or
    thought or practice of the OCA.

Hope this helps.

In Christ,

Father John Matusiak, OCA Communications Office

User avatar
Natasha
Sr Member
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat 22 March 2003 2:52 pm

RE:

Post by Natasha »

Peter wrote: " Is New Skete considered on the fringe?
Answer: While I'm not sure that I would say they are on the fringe, I
would say that New Skete has little visibility within the typical OCA
community and that it is hardly a reflection of the "mainstream" life or
thought or practice of the OCA. "

So, basically, there are not any standards that they have to uphold. Crazy.

bogoliubtsy
Sr Member
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed 16 April 2003 4:53 pm
Location: Russia

Post by bogoliubtsy »

Actually,
It wasn't I who posed the questions. I do think that there is more reprimanding of odd behavior in the OCA than people are aware of. I think for the most part it's kept under wraps so as not to scandalize the faithful.

User avatar
Methodius
Member
Posts: 254
Joined: Tue 25 February 2003 5:50 pm

Post by Methodius »

Yes OCA does keep secrets well unlike slavic churches. I agree with the New Skete=New Age New Ostrog. Married monastics? Novus Ordoized Liturgy? Sheesh!

Nektarios14
Member
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri 10 January 2003 7:48 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Post by Nektarios14 »

Yes OCA does keep secrets well unlike slavic churches. I agree with the New Skete=New Age New Ostrog. Married monastics? Novus Ordoized Liturgy? Sheesh!

New Skete is the very very very fringe of the OCA. And the OCA is a Slavic church...

If you want to see a good OCA monastery check out Saint Tikhon's which is traditional. New Skete is not considered normal or mainstream by the everyday person in the OCA by a long shot. Saint Tikhon's is.

Nektarios14
Member
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri 10 January 2003 7:48 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Post by Nektarios14 »

and to think I was amazed when I found out that the Greeks did not have to stand through services!

Monastics don't even stand 100% of the time of services. Also the practice of the GOA often doesn't reflect what the State Church of Greece does. But keep straining at gnats and missing the big picture....

User avatar
尼古拉前执事
Archon
Posts: 5127
Joined: Thu 24 October 2002 7:01 pm
Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Non-Phylitist
Location: United States of America
Contact:

Huh?

Post by 尼古拉前执事 »

Since when did the canons become gnats?

I agree with your other point of that sentence, let us NOT lose sight of the big picture of what is happening in the EP's churches.

Post Reply