Barbara wrote: ↑Sat 5 October 2024 11:16 pmReader JoJa [what does that mean ?],
Fr Peter could only have meant himself because he never mentioned Archbishop Peter of Rocor - as far as I have gotten watching the video.
He didn't correct himself that time, but the next, he did.
Maybe he subconsciously wants to be a 2nd Archbishop Peter !
Niles_the_New, welcome to the Forum :
You mixed up 2 different jurisdictions inadvertently. Fr Peter was assigned a parish in the MP's Patriarchal Parishes in the US, under Bishop John of Naro-Fominsk and later Bishop Matthew.
The latter MP hierarch seems to have been quite indisposed to Fr Peter, taking 9 MONTHS to respond to his simple request to be transferred out of the MP. Then Bp Matthew wrote a bunch of strange comments and requests, making it sound as though Fr Peter had never been on the MP's Clergy Directory [Fr Peter showed viewers the entry with his picture that he had taken for that occasion]. Or had a St Seraphim of Sarov parish briefly in Florence, Arizona.
The lecture trip to Australia and New Zealand was also while Fr Peter was under the MP. He received a blessing for that missionary trip, which he seems to have spent mainly with Rocor people such as Bishop George, formerly of Jordanville. Note that Rocor has always been very strong in Australia due to the anti-Communist nature of the Russian emigres who settled there in the 1950s and 60s.
Does anyone know how many MP parishes are in Australia and New Zealand these days ? Not many, I would think, but perhaps the MP has made inroads in the past decade or two. There was that one beautiful golden-domed Cathedral the MP built in [Brisbane ? Melbourne ?] to replace an old Rocor Church.
Fr Peter showed this letter of blessing for the trip to the viewers.
WHY Bp Matthew played dumb and refused to acknowledge Fr Peter, I don't have a clue. If anyone does, please tell us.
Speaking of your remark about Fr Peter's Archpriest title, that was bestowed by his former hierarch, Met Seraphim of the Greek state church, is that right ? No subsequent hierarch would have given him that title, as it sounds like both the MP and Rocor-MP were running as fast as they could away from him !
There WAS the implication that Fr Peter's stance on that flu controversy was an obstacle. In that case, Archbishop Peter of Chicago [Rocor] MIGHT have influenced events behind the scenes, as he was known to be very pro-flu shot. As I recall, this hierarch went so far to post on his Diocesan website a photograph of himself receiving the dreadful injection in a bared shoulder [appalling!]
Comments on any of this or other parts of the video ? I want to finish it as soon as possible, but 2 hrs 45 minutes is a long time to watch document after document displayed with accompanying narration of what milestone event for Fr Peter and his Matushka happened in what year
Thank you for welcoming me!
I must have thought that his teaching at Jordanville, and with Bishop Luke going to bat for him meant that there was some transfer, but looking back it was only the MP.
I don’t know who gave him that title, just that he was addressed as such. The people who addressed him as such also said he was never in the MP, when they recognized him just months prior, so who knows what holds water.
I highly doubt Metropolitan Seraphim gave him that title, because in the Greek tradition (as far as I am aware) it is not a formal rank as in the Slavic tradition. There is the head of a parish, the Proistamenos, but this is simply the priest in charge. If he was made archpriest, then it would have to be by the MP.
