ROCOR

PFC Nektarios · Post by **PFC Nektarios** » Mon 19 April 2004 9:08 pm

No problem at all, I was a Curios Catholic too remember.

In Christ
Nektarios

Justin Kissel · Post by **Justin Kissel** » Thu 22 April 2004 12:53 pm

Ben

So, would it be safe to say since ROCOR has no offical opinion on this, that it is open to opinion? You could be pro-union with the MP or anti-union, without really going against any offical statement or position of ROCOR, right?

Well, everyone (I hope!) is pro-union in a certain way, insofar as we all hope for Christian unity among everyone. This has to come without compromises of the faith, though, and that's where the division lies. It's not union with the MP per se that many traditionalists have a problem with, but it's rather the timing of the attempt at union, or the way that ROCOR is going about unity, that is the problem for some. I would not condemn ROCOR, and I would not condemn those who are "pro-union" within ROCOR. Having said that, I may soon be leaving ROCOR, partly because of the way that things are going.

It seems to me like the ROCOR is a huge ship that is about to enter into a very foggy area. The question is, do I trust the captain (Met. Laurus) and his shipmates (the Bishops) to lead us through it? I certainly want to. The part that pulls at my soul is that I believe with all certainty that there are certain icebergs up ahead that we must avoid if we are to arrive safely. Some say that the captain is aware of the icebergs, but I have worries and doubts. I've been told by many that the icebergs are so small that they will be insignificant; I tend to respectfully but strongly disagree. So the question isn't whether I approve of the ship (ROCOR) going to it's destination (union), but whether I think we will get there, or have our faith shipwrecked. I have to ask if perhaps it is time to get onto a different ship, perhaps even going in a different direction.

I'm sorry to give you such a strange and vague answer--I am trying to walk a fine line of not condemning ROCOR but still expressing my worries (with are not a small issue to me). While I do not question the salvation of those in ROCOR, I believe the situation to be of salvific importance, and I fear giving a simple "yes, union is ok" or "no, union should be avoided" answer. I believe that holiness and peace with all men should be sought, as St. Paul said; the trick being that you have to do both at the same time.

Ben Jamin · Post by **Ben Jamin** » Fri 23 April 2004 1:44 am

So if you're leaving ROCOR...where are you off to?

PFC Nektarios · Post by **PFC Nektarios** » Fri 23 April 2004 2:40 pm

My guess either the "Russian Orthodox Autunomus Church" or the "GOC of Greece".

In Christ
Nektarios

Justin Kissel · Post by **Justin Kissel** » Sat 24 April 2004 4:22 pm

Ben,

The GOC under Archbp. Chrysostom (& Met. Paul in America). But nothing is finalized.

Ben Jamin · Post by **Ben Jamin** » Sat 24 April 2004 6:17 pm

Interesting.

For a second there I thought GOC and the Orthodox Church of Greece - synod in ressistance, were the same thing.

Why GOC, and not ROAC?

Justin Kissel · Post by **Justin Kissel** » Tue 27 April 2004 1:00 pm

Ben,

I'm sure you didn't realise this when you asked, but your question could get me into trouble with some friends around here! I guess the question would have come up eventually, though. One reason that I initially started thinking about the GOC was the publically proclaimed faithfulness to God and Orthodoxy, and the piety of her members. The firm stand made by the monks of Esphigmenou on Mount Athos is one example of this. Their faithfulness to God and His Church were not just articulated in words, but were also demonstrated by their actions, quite impressively.

Another point that attracted me to the GOC (as opposed to ROAC) was that the GOC seemed to have a less muddy canonical foundation/formation. I don't want to say that the GOC has a "firmer" foundation, since that would imply that ROAC is built on a shaky foundation, which is not something I believe. Rather, I am only trying to say that the GOC's history is less mirky, and more easily accessible and understandable. Put simply, with the GOC there are less historical and canonical issues to "get past," from a canonical/administrative perspective.

I also found that, after having looked into the various issues, all of my worries about the GOC were of an administrate nature, and did not touch upon problems of any great size. For example, I had some difficulty understanding why the GOC had consecrated a few bishops who were actually below the age bishops are suppose to be (according to the canons.) I didn't understand why the need to bend the canons and rush these priests into becoming bishops; but more importantly, I worried for the salvation of these young men, since being a bishop is probably the heaviest weight in the world, and few can carry it without being crushed (FWIW, my worries about the bishops thing was resolved in time.) In the end, all my worries came down to issues like that, which were not really major stumbling-blocks.

With ROAC, on the other hand, there were certain issues (with the hierarch that I believe I would be under) which were slightly larger problems for me. For instance, Blessed Augustine is thought to be a heretic by some in ROAC America, something I very much disagree with. There are some other specific issues, but I'd rather not go into all of them as I don't want to sound like I'm attacking ROAC.

In the end, based on what I've seen so far at least, the GOC just seems like the best place that my family can best live our lives in Christ. This is not to attack those who took a different path (e.g., ROAC). But we all must choose our paths in life, and my gut feeling--along with the things whirling around in my head and heart--points to the GOC. The fact that the GOC was recently granted autonomy, has a solid monastic foundation, and so forth has only helped solidify it as the place my wife and I have our eyes set on.

And now that I've babbled on about myself, (only!) if you feel inclined, could you tell us a bit about yourself? At one point I thought you were a Catholic inquiring into Orthodoxy, but I've read some things that made me think you were neither but were considering both? I don't mean to put you onto the spot, I'm just curious.