Which jurisdiction are you?

Benjamin W. C. Waterhouse · Thu 9 November 2006 4:51 am

ROCOR (at the moment...)

Pensees · Post by **Pensees** » Fri 10 November 2006 3:40 am

Would it really be so bad if ROCOR were to reconcile with the Moscow Patriarch?

Benjamin W. C. Waterhouse · Fri 10 November 2006 5:01 am

Pensees wrote:
Would it really be so bad if ROCOR were to reconcile with the Moscow Patriarch?

Eventually, of course not, we have to.

But is now that moment?

In Him
SB

Sean · Post by **Sean** » Fri 10 November 2006 11:34 pm

I was born a Mormon. My parents divorced when I was very young and I was raised by my Southern Baptist grandparents while my mother finished college. From Kindergarten to 7th grade I attended a Southern Baptist private school. This gave me a solid foundation in traditional Christian beliefs (compared to Mormonism that is). When I was about twelve or thirteen, my Mormon grandparents got me interested in going back to Mormon church, but by age fifteen I had already decided that I completely disagreed with it. It was at this time that I learned about the Greek Orthodox Church through studying about Byzantium in high school history class. At first I was just curious as to what Orthodoxy was, because I had never heard of it before. At the time I didn't know anything about Old Calendarism or ecumenism, but just started attending a Greek Old Calendarist (Kiousis) parish because they were the only ones who would give me a ride to Church on Sunday.

I immediately fell in love with the faith. Six months later, when I was still only fifteen, I was made a catechumen, and was baptized at age seventeen. I'm now thirty-two and will be celebrating my sixteenth year of converting to Orthodoxy in April. I've literally been Orthodox my entire adult life.

In 1992, my priest left the GOC (Kiousis) and our parish was accepted into the ROCOR. After the sad events that began in October of 2000, my conscience wieghed on me, as I saw people who were once such zealots slowly embrace a pro-Sergianist, pro-World Orthodox stance, including the priest who taught me WHY ecumenism is wrong, and WHY we can't be in communion with World Orthodoxy. It finally came to a head for me in late 2004, when this same priest told me ROCOR no longer had any canonical basis for its existence and that World Orthodoxy was "the Church."

I had been voicing my frustrations for years to my good friend Paul Azkoul, and partly through the witness of him and his father, made the difficult but necessary decision to leave ROCOR for HOCNA. It wasn't something I did quickly, but made sure I was convinced that the Synod of Blessed Abp. Afksentios was the True Orthodox Church of Greece. Our Lord told his Apostles that if they were of this world, then the world would love its own. But since the world hated Him, it would also hate them. Consequently everyone hates HOCNA; Old Calendarists and ecumenists alike, although they have the most united witness of all the Old Calendarist groups, and are the most sober and level-headed.

Pensees · Post by **Pensees** » Sat 11 November 2006 1:24 am

If you consider your particular group to be the last true remnant of the Orthodox Church, it's reasonable for other Orthodox Christians to not have good feelings toward you. Is a calendar really that important, to seperate yourself from other Orthodox Christians? God is love, am I right?

This HOCNA looks rather shaky to me...

"In January 1986, four former members of Holy Transfiguration Monastery came forward with allegations of sexual misconduct against the monastery's superior, Fr Panteleimon. In response to these allegations, the synod of bishops of the ROCOR set up a commission to investigate HTM; the commission consisted of Archbishop Anthony (Sinkevich) of Los Angeles and Bishop Alypy (Gamanovich) of Chicago and Detroit.

The commission presented its findings to the next meeting of the Synod, held in Mansonville, Canada. Six accusers presented testimony to the Synod. Fr Ephraim, Dean of the New England Deanery, spoke in defense of Fr Panteleimon. Fr Panteleimon was questioned, denied the allegations, but agreed to be relieved of his duties as superior. On May 16/29, 1986, the Synod suspended Panteleimon and appointed Fr Isaac as temporary administrator. In a subsequent meeting of the Synod, on November 12/25, 1986, the Synod suspended both Panteleimon and Isaac, and ordered a commission to investigate allegations against Isaac. Fr Justin was appointed as administrator.

In December 1986, despite the decisions of the Synod, the Holy Transfiguration Monastery elected Isaac as its superior. Then, on December 12, 1986, the monastery notified Metropolitan Vitaly (Ustinov) of New York that it was leaving ROCOR because of modernism and ecumenism."
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Holy_Orthodox_C ... th_America

Holy Orthodox Church of North America (HOCNA) -
A website created by victims of Holy Transfiguration Monastery - Boston
The purpose of this website is to bring innocent people to the awareness that Holy Transfiguration Monastery, and its associates forming the organization known as HOCNA, is a CULT.
The objective of HOCNA is primarily the protection of certain members of Holy Transfiguration Monastery, and certain other clergymen, from answering for their sexual crimes.
http://www.hocna.info/

Peace.

Грешник · Post by **Грешник** » Sat 11 November 2006 11:43 am

The site you list above, HOCNA.info is a very devicive website with alteior motives, not in Orthodoxy but in negative campaigning by the CO monks of Dormition Skete. I would take all their words with a grain of salt and much more prayer.

Sean · Post by **Sean** » Sat 11 November 2006 12:16 pm

Pensees wrote:
If you consider your particular group to be the last true remnant of the Orthodox Church, it's reasonable for other Orthodox Christians to not have good feelings toward you. Is a calendar really that important, to seperate yourself from other Orthodox Christians? God is love, am I right?

This HOCNA looks rather shaky to me...

"In January 1986, four former members of Holy Transfiguration Monastery came forward with allegations of sexual misconduct against the monastery's superior, Fr Panteleimon. In response to these allegations, the synod of bishops of the ROCOR set up a commission to investigate HTM; the commission consisted of Archbishop Anthony (Sinkevich) of Los Angeles and Bishop Alypy (Gamanovich) of Chicago and Detroit.

The commission presented its findings to the next meeting of the Synod, held in Mansonville, Canada. Six accusers presented testimony to the Synod. Fr Ephraim, Dean of the New England Deanery, spoke in defense of Fr Panteleimon. Fr Panteleimon was questioned, denied the allegations, but agreed to be relieved of his duties as superior. On May 16/29, 1986, the Synod suspended Panteleimon and appointed Fr Isaac as temporary administrator. In a subsequent meeting of the Synod, on November 12/25, 1986, the Synod suspended both Panteleimon and Isaac, and ordered a commission to investigate allegations against Isaac. Fr Justin was appointed as administrator.

In December 1986, despite the decisions of the Synod, the Holy Transfiguration Monastery elected Isaac as its superior. Then, on December 12, 1986, the monastery notified Metropolitan Vitaly (Ustinov) of New York that it was leaving ROCOR because of modernism and ecumenism."
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Holy_Orthodox_C ... th_America

Holy Orthodox Church of North America (HOCNA) -
A website created by victims of Holy Transfiguration Monastery - Boston
The purpose of this website is to bring innocent people to the awareness that Holy Transfiguration Monastery, and its associates forming the organization known as HOCNA, is a CULT.
The objective of HOCNA is primarily the protection of certain members of Holy Transfiguration Monastery, and certain other clergymen, from answering for their sexual crimes.
http://www.hocna.info/

Peace.

Dear Pensees,

I have addressed all these issues in previous threads. I will provide the links to them here:
http://euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6822
http://euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6219
http://euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewto ... sc&start=0

As regaurds the calendar, if the contention really were over a mere thirteen days, it would be a foolish dispute indeed. However, if you study the REASONS the papal calendar was adopted, then you will discover that it was done in the spirit of false union, and the adoption of the Anglican Branch Theory. This is evident in the notorious Patriarchal Encyclical of 1920. It is the first documented case of the Church of Constantinople showing signs of enslavement to this abominable zeitgeist:

PATRIARCHAL AND SYNODICAL
ENCYCLICAL OF 1920
"Unto the Churches of Christ everywhere"
"Love one another earnestly from the heart."
(I Peter 1. 22)
Our own church holds that rapprochement between the various Christian Churches and fellowship between them is not excluded by the doctrinal differences which exist between them. In our opinion such a rapprochement is highly desirable and necessary. It would be useful in many ways for the real interest of each particular church and of the whole Christian body, and also for the preparation and advancement of that blessed union which will be completed in the future in accordance with the will of God. We therefore consider that the present time is most favorable for bringing this important question and studying it together.

Even if in this case, owing to antiquated prejudices, practices or pretensions, the difficulties which have so often jeopardized attempts at reunion in the past may arise or be brought up, nevertheless, in our view, since we are concerned at this initial stage only with contacts and rapprochement, these difficulties are of less importance. If there is good will and intention, they cannot and should not create an invincible and insuperable obstacle. Wherefore, considering such an endeavor to be both possible and timely especially in view of the hopeful establishment of the League of Nations we venture to express below in brief our thoughts and our opinion regarding the way in which we understand this rapprochement and contact and how we consider it to be realizable; we earnestly ask and invite the judgment and the opinion of the other sister churches in the East and of the venerable Christian churches in the West and everywhere in the world.

We believe that the two following measures would greatly contribute to the rapprochement ' which is so much to be desired and which would be so useful, and we believe that they would be both successful and fruitful:

First, we consider as necessary and indispensable the removal and abolition of all the mutual mistrust and bitterness between the different churches which arise from the tendency of some of them to entice and proselytize adherents of other confessions. For nobody ignores what is unfortunately happening today in many places, disturbing the internal peace of the churches, especially in the Exist. So many troubles and sufferings are caused by other Christians and great hatred and enemity are aroused, with such insignificant results, by this tendency of some to proselytize and entice the followers of other Christian confessions.

After this essential reestablishment of sincerity and confidence between the churches, we consider,

Secondly, that above all love should be rekindled and strengthened among the churches, so that they should no more consider one another as strangers and foreigners, but as relatives, and as being a part of the household of Christ and "fellow heirs, members of the same body and partakers of the promise of God in Christ" (Eph. 3. 6).

For if the different churches are inspired by love and place it before everything else in their judgments of others and their relationships with them, instead of increasing and widening the existing dissensions, they should be enabled to reduce and diminish them. By stirring up a right brotherly interest in the condition, the well-being and stability of the other churches; by readiness to take an interest in what is happening in those churches and to obtain a better knowledge of them,and by willingness to offer mutual aid and help, many good things will be achieved for the glory and the benefit both of themselves and of the Christian body. In our opinion, such a friendship and kindly disposition towards each other can be shown and demonstrated particularly in the following ways:
By the acceptance of a uniform calendar for the celebration of the great Christian feasts at the same time by all the churches.
By the exchange of brotherly letters on the occasion of the great feasts of the churches' year as is customary, and on other exceptional occasions.
By close relationships between the representatives of all churches wherever they may be.
By relationships between the theological schools and the professors of theology; by the exchange of theological and ecclesiastical reviews, and of other works published in each church.
By exchanging students for further training between the seminaries of the different churches.
By convoking pan-Christian conferences in order to examine questions of common interest to all the churches.
By impartial and deeper historical study of doctrinal differences both by the seminaries and in books.
By mutual respect for the customs and practices in different churches.
By allowing each other the use of chapels and cemeteries for the funerals and burials of believers of other confessions dying in foreign lands.
By the settlement of the question of mixed marriages between the confessions.
Lastly, by wholehearted mutual assistance for the churches in their endeavors for religious advancement, charity and so on.

Such a sincere and close contact between the churches will be all the more useful and profitable for the whole body of the Church, because manifold dangers threaten not only particular churches, but all of them. These dangers attack the very foundations of the Christian faith and the essence of Christian life and society. For the terrible world war which has just finished brought to light many unhealthy symptoms in the life of the Christian peoples, and often revealed great lack of respect even for the elementary principles of justice and charity. Thus it worsened already existing wounds and opened other new ones of a more material kind, which demand the attention and care of all the churches. Alcoholism, which is increasing daily; the increase of unnecessary luxury under the pretext of bettering life and enjoying it; the voluptuousness and lust hardly covered by the cloak of freedom and emancipation of the flesh; the prevailing unchecked licentiousness and indecency in literature, painting, the theater, and in music, under the respectable name of the development of good taste and cultivation of fine art; the deification of wealth and the contempt of higher ideals; all these and the like, as they threaten the very essence of Christian societies are also timely topics requiring and indeed necessitating common study and cooperation by the Christian churches.

Finally, it is the duty of the churches which bear the sacred name of Christ not to forget or neglect any longer his new and great commandment of love. Nor should they continue to fall piteously behind the political authorities, who, truly applying the spirit of the Gospel and of the teaching of Christ, have under happy auspices already setup the so-called League of Nations in order to defend justice and cultivate charity and agreement between the nations. For all these reasons, being ourselves convinced of the necessity for establishing a contact and league (fellowship) 1 between the churches and believing that the other churches share our conviction as stated above, at least as a beginning we request each one of them to send us in reply a statement of its own judgment and opinion on this matter so that common agreement or resolution having been read, we may proceed together to its realization, and thus "speaking the truth in love; may grow up into Him in all things, which is the head, even Christ; from whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love." (Eph.4: 15,16).
In the Patriarchate of Constantinople in the
month of January in the year of grace 1920.
[ -END- ]

This betrayal and denial of the truth of Orthodoxy is in stark contrast to the Pan-Orthodox Synod of 1583:

To all the genuine Christian children of the Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Christ of the East in Trigovyst and in all places, be grace and peace and mercy from Almighty God. Not a little distress took possession of that Ark of Old, when storm-tossed, it was borne upon the waters; and if the Lord God, remembering Noah, had not in His good will calmed the water, there would have been no hop of salvation in it. In a like manner with the new Ark of our Church, the heretics have raised up a relentless war against us, and we have deemed it well to leave behind the present tome against them so that with the things written in it, you may be able more surely to defend your Orthodoxy. But in order that the document may not be burdensome to simpler people, we have decided to set forth the entire subject to you in simple speech as follows:

From old Rome have come certain persons who learned there to think like Latins; and the bad thing is that from being Byzantines (that is, Greeks) born and bred in our own parts, they not only have changed their faith, but they also battle the Orthodox and true dogmas of the Eastern Church which Christ Himself and the divine Apostles and the Holy Councils of the Holy Fathers delivered to us. Whereupon, having cut them off as rotten members, we order:

VII Whosoever does not follow the customs of the Church which the seven Holy Ecumenical Councils have decreed, and the Holy Pascha and calendar which they enacted well for us to follow, but wants to follow the newly-invented Paschalion (method of fixing the date of Pascha) and the new calendar of the atheist astronomers of the Pope; and, opposing them, wishes to overthrow and destroy the doctrines ansd customs of the Church which we have inherited from our Fathers, let any such have the anathema and let him be outside of the Church and the Assembly of the Faithful.

VIII We exhort all pious and Orthodox Christians: remain in those things which you learned and in which you were born and bred, and when the times and circumstances call for it shed your very blood in order both to keep the Faith given us by our Fathers and to keep your confession. Beware such people and take care that our Lord Jesus Christ help you. May the blessing of our humility be with you all. Amen.
The 1,583rd year from the birth of the God-man,
Indiction 12, November 20th.
Jeremias, of Constantinople; Sylvester, of Alexandria;
Sophronios of Jerusalem; (and the rest of the
Bishops of the Synod who were present).
Complete text found in Against False Union, pgs.92-93

The papal calendar was adopted by the Church of Constantinople under the auspices of Meletios Metaxakis, of evil memory; a notorious freemason, who was uncanonically appointed to the Oecumenical See by the Greek Foreign Ministry, an entity which continues to appoint primates for all of the Greek patriarchates to this day.

The Synodicon of Orthodoxy, which is read in the Church every year on the Sunday of Orthodoxy states that not only are the decisions of the Seven Oecumenical Councils binding on all members of the Body of Christ, but also those local councils which have a universal significance for the Church. In other words, if the Bulgarian Church has a local problem with a revival of the Bogomil sect, and holds a local council, anathematizing them, this doesn't carry the weight of the Seven Councils, because this heresy did not grow beyond a local problem. However, if a pan-heresy, such as ecumenism, threatens the entire Body of Christ, then the decisions of a local council is binding on all Orthodox Christians. Keep in mind that an anathema is not a guideline. It is an excommunication, and a curse. In 1983, just such a local council was held in Mansonville, Quebec, by the Synod of Bishops of ROCOR, under the auspices of St. Philaret, the New Confessor:

Solemn Anathema Against Ecumenism

Pronouncement of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, 1983, signed by all the Bishops, to be permanently added at the end of the Anathemas listed in the "Rite of Orthodoxy," celebrated on the First Sunday of the Great Fast, the Sunday of Orthodoxy:

"To those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christ's Church is divided into so-called "branches" which differ in doctrine and way of life, or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future when all "branches" or sects or denominations, and even religions will be united into one body; and who do not distinguish the Priesthood and Mysteries of the Church from those of the heretics, but say that the baptism and Eucharist of heretics is effectual for salvation; therefore, to those who knowingly have communion with these aforementioned heretics or who advocate, disseminate, or defend their heresy of ecumenism under the pretext of brotherly love or the supposed unification of separated Christians, Anathema!"