A Pilgrimage of the Russian Church Abroad Visits

[Priest Siluan]

Also about Evlogians:

http://euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5432
http://euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5433

[SouthernOrthodox]

See now I am confused. Traditionalist, hear that allot lately. I agree we have a wonderful tradition in being Russian Orthodox. But by definition, if one claims to living traditional Orthodoxy in the Russian sense, then no one but blood Russians are welcomed in her churches. Where would the Church be, shrived and dead by now, at least here in the States anyway. So what is the common cause, I ask. Yes we can rebel in May and turn our backs on "tradition", but then what. We can't predict the future nor can we live in the past. But we can claim the blessings of say even pre-1917 of what the Holy Fathers envisioned for us. So I see Met Laurus and the Synod right on track.

[Jean-Serge]

by definition, if one claims to living traditional Orthodoxy in the Russian sense, then no one but blood Russians are welcomed in her churches.

You are really telling non sense!!! Who gave the definition that being traditionnalist was being phyletist? In this forum we aremany to be in Traditionnalist jurisdictions without being Greek or Russian etc... Historically speaking, ROCOR had Greek parihes, missions in Indonesia, Haiti etc... So do not tell suc things saying that by definition traditional Orthodoxy is being phyletist.

Traditionalism is rejecting the unorthodox innovation : ecumenism, anti-monachism, new calendar, segianism etc... ROCOR fought against these innovation but it becomes clear that it will join world orthodoxy and its diplomatic compromises with heretics etc... Just read the joint document about ecumenism...

So ROCOR is really on the bad path... I pray that many will be able to save their souls flying from ROCOR-L...

[Liudmilla]

Jean-Serge:

Forgive me, but you are wrong...... Orthodoxy has been phyletist for simply years, they just don't admit it and call it everything else but phyletism.....

Milla

[SouthernOrthodox]

It is very hard for some to believe the history of our Church before 1991. If one looks at the history of the Russian Church even pre-ROCOR it was phyletism. In all do respect, if we are going to live and die by Traditionist ideas, lets not pick and choose which one's we follow. The Russian Church was not established in 1924. ROCOR carried on, not created. A point that is often over-looked. So it's not nonsense at all. It is by today's standards.

[Jean-Serge]

I was simply saying the essence of traditionalism is not phyletism... You can be modernist and phyletist too...

[Liudmilla]

Jean Serge wrote:

I was simply saying the essence of traditionalism is not phyletism...

You are right and I do not disagree with you. Phyletism should have no place in church life.

However, you also wrote:

You can be modernist and phyletist too...

Here I disagree with you....I am neither a modernist or a phyletist. Quite the opposite in fact. I like tradition, it serves to ground us in a fast paced, ever changing world. As to phyletism....I don't feel that it has a place in the church.

The unfortunate thing is that it is very much prevelant amongst its members and in the priesthood. I recall once our sisterhood was raising money to help the monastery in Chili after their fire. A very Russian woman exclaimed..."why are we helping them?!? They aren't Russian!" To which I replied..."But they are Orthodox!" She huffed and walked awy. I do not recall that she purchased anything either. Our previous Bishop of revered memory, had a habit of "discouraging" non-Russians from becoming members of our parish. He would go so far as to send them to the OCA church rather than have them at his church. A sad but true fact. Those impure Russians who persisted in attending were generally those whose services he required (cause no one else would do the work). Phyletism has been allowed to gain ground in our parishes, where it has no business being.

Milla