Polish Orthodox church made a copy of the Lesna icon

[Jean-Serge]

The information and the video (in Russian but try using the Youtube subtitles if needed) dates back 2 year. A diocese of the Orthodox church of Poland ordered a copy of the Lesna icon (the original is currently in the Lesna monastery in France, currently under STOC -ROCOR Andronik affiliation). The copy that looks 1 to 1 in terms of dimensions was done by some specialists (not by the monastery) and looks really good.

Following the making of the copy, a delegation of the Orthodox church of Poland went to France to Lesna monastery to bless the copy. They blessed the copy alone (no attendance from the STOC-ROCOR Andronik members), sang an Akathist and a moleben (no attendance from the STOC-ROCOR Andronik members). The big issue and uncanonical thing, according to me, is that the Polish clergy was allowed to use the monastery church to do so (well it confirms my very negative opinion about the STOC-ROCOR Andronik).

Funnily, the video does not tell about this lack of communion between the monastery and the Orthodox Church of Poland. Following this, the delegation went back to Poland with copy that is now in Poland where the copy can be venerated.

Video link below:

Link:

[Jean-Serge]

After some search, allowing the Polish clergy to use the church reminded the incident when Archbishop Averky in Jordanville allowed Coptics to use one of the churches of Jordanville, even if the 2 events are not identical. There are 2 letters from Metropolitan Philaret to Archbishop Averky about it :

https://goctoronto.org/two-letters-to-a ... op-averky/

The Metropolitan mentions the Canon Forty-five (45) of the Holy Apostles: "Let any Bishop, or Presbyter, or Deacon that merely joins in prayer with heretics be suspended, but if he has permitted them to perform any service as clergymen, let him be deposed."

According to me, the second part " but if he has permitted them to perform any service as clergymen, let him be deposed" fis exactly the circumstances here, just as they fit them in the case of Archbishop Averky.

[Stylite Nous]

I'm surprised that Abp Averky did any such thing

[Suaidan]

I'm surprised that Abp Averky did any such thing

The letters that Jean-Serge provided give the context. Abp Averky was trying to be kind to foreigners by allowing them the use of an unconsecrated Chapel; St Philaret pointed out said foreigners were heretics and such use was forbidden. In that sense it was similar; however in the case of the Copts it was worse, as some seminarians were present and participated in the Coptic "liturgy".

His reference to the 45th canon was a kind warning that this was a deposable offense.

Were I a lawyer for the Poles I would say that they officially rejected the 1920 encyclical and the New Calendar a decade ago, but the counter I presume would be that they are still involved in the World Council of Churches.

[Suaidan]

I'm surprised that Abp Averky did any such thing

The letters that Jean-Serge provided give the context. Abp Averky was trying to be kind to foreigners by allowing them the use of an unconsecrated Chapel; St Philaret pointed out said foreigners were heretics and such use was forbidden. In that sense it was similar; however in the case of the Copts it was worse, as some seminarians were present and participated in the Coptic "liturgy".

His reference to the 45th canon was a kind warning that this was a deposable offense.

Were I a lawyer for the Poles I would say that they officially rejected the 1923 "council" and the New Calendar a decade ago, but the counter I presume would be that they are still involved in the World Council of Churches.

[Suaidan]

I'm surprised that Abp Averky did any such thing

The letters that Jean-Serge provided give the context. Abp Averky was trying to be kind to foreigners by allowing them the use of an unconsecrated Chapel; St Philaret pointed out said foreigners were heretics and such use was forbidden. In that sense it was similar; however in the case of the Copts it was worse, as some seminarians were present and participated in the Coptic "liturgy".

His reference to the 45th canon was a kind warning that this was a deposable offense.

Were I a lawyer for the Poles I would say that they officially rejected the 1923 "council" and the New Calendar a decade ago, but the counter I presume would be that they are still involved in the World Council of Churches.

[Jean-Serge]

Were I a lawyer for the Poles I would say that they officially rejected the 1923 "council" and the New Calendar a decade ago, but the counter I presume would be that they are still involved in the World Council of Churches.

The Orthodox Church of Poland is indeed member of the WCC (since 1961) : https://www.oikoumene.org/fr/member-chu ... dox-church

Moreover, they are also in communion with the rest of world orthodoxy, including the Moscow Patriarchate and the Serbian official church.

If you follow the logic (not member of the WCC and using the old calendar, in order to identify if a church is acceptable), the Church of Georgia fits these 2 criteria and would become acceptable.