Change in ROCOR?

[Lounger]

From the Paradosis List:

"When I first joined The ROCOR more than 20 years ago, I was warned
about a small pro-Moscow Patriarchate contingency of clergy that
existed in the ROCOR, that were responsible for a constant spirit of
dissension. Furthermore, I couldn't understand why these clergymen
didn't simply join the MP churches that existed in The United States
and Europe.

As a matter of course, this group grew and eventually gained control
of the ROCOR in 2001. Personally, I had been reading up on Greek Old
Calerdar groups, trying to prepare for this change in ROCOR
direction, because I also was fearful that something might happen ..."

[rebecca]

I'll believe it when I see it. I won't leave the church until I hear "His Holiness Alexey, Patriarch of Moscow" commemorated at the Liturgy.

[Savva24]

I'll believe it when I see it. I won't leave the church until I hear "His Holiness Alexey, Patriarch of Moscow" commemorated at the Liturgy.

Would that really be so bad if there was a clear rejection of Ecumenism and Sergianism in the MP?

[Seraphim Reeves]

physicsgirl,

I'll believe it when I see it. I won't leave the church until I hear "His Holiness Alexey, Patriarch of Moscow" commemorated at the Liturgy.

Well, December is coming up quickly.

Would that really be so bad if there was a clear rejection of Ecumenism and Sergianism in the MP?

That as of yet has not happened, and honestly I doubt it will. I'd like to be pleasantly surprised in this regard, but I am also trying to be realistic.

Also, such a clear rejection of ecumenism, would have to include a severance of ecclessiastical ties with ecumenist "churches". Do you really believe the MP is at all of a penitential mind, and will in fact do such a thing?

However, the house has already fallen in this regard, since the modern ROCA itself has repudiated it's own anathema (which condemned not only ecumenists, but also maintaining communion with ecumenists) by formalizing in public statements what had up until relatively recently been a local abbheration and lack of ecclessiastical discipline - that is to say, by maintaining that they (ROCA) are in fact in communion with both Jerusalem and Serbia. The former is in open ecclessiastical communion with ecumenists, and the latter is not only in such communion, but is currently involved in heretical ecumenism (even receiving schismatic/heretical prelates into their temples, and letthing them liturgize on their altars.) By these acts, let alone the formal acceptance of Cyprianite "ecclessiology" in the mid 90's, ROCA has already fallen under it's own anathema.

While the current ROCA line is to say "well, this anathema is of local provenance", even this is problematic - for even if this were true (let's say for the sake of argument it is), it condemns the ROCA for their leadership maintains now, that the events of 1965 did not happen, and that ecclessiastical communion does exist between ROCA and ecumenists.

Seraphim

[Alexis in Alaska]

Dear friends:

Ecumenism in Eastern Churches is a manifestation of an old complex that developed in Slavic lands that the Western Approach was superior to the Eastern which was seen as less sophisticated. It seems that modern Jurisdictions don't really involve themselves in the ecumenist movement except to really appear relevant and not to appear as ecclesial neandrothols. This need for approval by Western Churches has been common by Eastern hierarchs and faithful. The unias were really just the logical outgrowth of this notion that Latin ways and dogmas were superior. It was about power and recognition. Why did Orthodox bishops hobnob with Anglicans for so many years, because of the need for acceptance and validation by the British Empire. Politics! Politics! and more Politics!

Contemporary Orthodox "theologians" who tried to emulate a neo-Thomistic approach to academia were took off guard by the New Ecumenism. What was this "new thing?" they said. Originally this new theology began under the pretext of a restoration of all Churches based on the Creeds et al, until about the middle of the 20th Century when Creeds were refered to as archaic notions of a mythogical God-Savior who in imitation of previous religious myths came to save and redeem man. All Christian Dogmas were regarded as metaphoric as the bible was. The Jesus of History was held up and against the Christ of Tradition.

But nevertheless Orthodox prelates were seen shoulder to shoulder with overt heretics. Why? To satiate the self-imposed Eastern subconscious attraction to be accepted by Latins and Protestants. Rarely I think you will find a 33rd degree mason masquerading as a Orthodox bishop who is trying to usurp the Orthodox Catholic Church. Rather, you have mindless power hungry hierarchs who want to hang out at the ecumenical country club. They rarely think out the false theology of the Ecumenical Movement; the whole novelty of the thing interests them.

When the "True" or "Traditional" Orthodox Churches (I parethesize "true" and traditional" because in Orthodoxy there really in no such thing or a liberal Orthodox Christian vs. a traditional Orthodox Christian or a true Orthodox Christian vs. a heterodox Orthodox Christian; there are Orthodox Christians and there are Heterodox Christians, period) thought through the thesis of the Ecumenical Movement they immediately understood that it was the sythesis of heresies and anathematized it. The modern jurisdictions with their so-called concern with "other faith communities" have really tabled a serious thought out analysis of Ecumenist theology so they could still hang out at the "country club."

The other problem in the movement to preserve the pleroma of Orthodox life is the rampant sectarianism. This is just as dangerous as the ecumenical movement. If we have 20, 000 Orthodox Jurisdictions we have thrown our witness out the door. Never in the history of our Church have we needed an Ecumenical Council then now, but we are so divided it would end up a disaster to say the least if not worse. On a more practical level I would say inter-Orthodox dialogue should be encouraged. If the MP repudiates it's communist past and ROCOR enters communion with it then great. My only criticism of groups that cut themselves off from any conversation toward Orthodox unity is that if they don't discuss and work toward unity then they will be reduced by schism after schism as is clearly seen in these small "true" Orthodox Synods. Synods birthed in schism are reduced by schism and ultimately dis-credited as is seen by history.
Our concern for Orthodox unity must be pre-eminent. We must also come together to agree on ecclesiological issues and to work things out thelogically.

To be very frank the Orthodox Church was not prepared for the modern world and now she is split into two camps. One that seeks to co-exist by using the new ecumenical model and the other to utterly repudiate modernism in every form and all who subscribe thereto. I think the real mental work has yet to be done on these important theological issues and we must remain open to solutions not one-sided rhetoric. Clearly, the Orthodox Church in it's various Jurisdictions must be united; it is un-Orthodox to not work for the healing of the Church. In fact it is the Devil who desires what is happening in Orthodoxy worldwide. He rejoices in Schism and the Sectarianism plaguing our Church. Through the prayers of the Theotokos may we all be one.

In the Theanthropos,

Alexis

[away]

In my opinion, much of what you say is true.

Although I would not rule out actual longterm, masonic or otherwise conspiracy, I do think that most of the mess grows out of a desire to be accepted and other vain things such as politics. Or as my priest used to say, "its just the way some people think". He didnt like the idea of conspiracies.

I have one question though, about this:

"I think the real mental work has yet to be done on these important theological issues and we must remain open to solutions not one-sided rhetoric."

Do you refer to the theological issues of division within Orthodoxy itself or the theological issues of eccumenism? Obviously the theological issues of ecumenism are non-issues and quite stupid. I do not think the theological issues of Orthodox division require mental work, but martyrdom.

It is the lack of simple Love and Humility that divides a small group of Christians, and the lack of true repentance that divides them further, and I would submit that this also applies to larger groups, and even worldwide and in unseen realms, up to the division between demons and angels, God and man, man and woman, my idea of myself and the reality.

I am so pessemistic, and long to be cured. I am in a town with three Orthodox priests (of the same juristiction) who do not even talk to each other, and a handful of Orthodox Christians, most of whom speak to none of these priests, and who are divided amongst themselves. Sadly, almost all of them seem to truly believe that they have excellent reasons for splitting each other or avoiding one another and cannot percieve the weakness of the enemies webs in the face of God's Grace. I think the main problem is that ignorence, like Saint maximos says, is double edged. It is ignorence of both human weakness and Divine Power. Put simply, will he find faith? There is no human solution to this. In my own situatuion, by God's grace, I am on good terms with every priest and Christian I know. Sometimes I feel bad because i am the only one to benefit from the division of others, since the struggle to not be drawn into the nets of scandal and intriuge has taught me to pray, and revealed to me the un-reality of the enemies illusions.

Division is the outgrowth of fallenness. Fragmentation. I do not see how this can be reversed on a large scale when it is not being conciously reversed on the simple person to person scale. And the Orthodox often resemble the humanists who lament the steate of humanity, and claim to love the whole world, but hate the neighbor. But my experience is extremely limited, and so I have no real idea of what is going on. And if I do my prayers at night and morning and stay out of trouble, it doesnt worry me too much, although I fear I may perish for lack of guidance so please pray for me and my estranged brothers and sisters.

[away]

i just wanted to say that i posted that last rant unintentionally, by hitting submit instead of preview and i intended to edit out some bits that were stupid generalisations or just useless and vain.

please forgive me I said some of these things.