Looks like ROCOR priest concelebrated with EP and MP priests

[Methodius]

Oh the ever interesting Prot. Alexander Lebedeff

These words refer to the heretics mentioned in the first phrases of the anathema. i.e. the heretics previously identified by the Church, such as Roman Catholics, Protestants, etc. The Anathema therefore denounces those who would have communion with Roman Catholics, for example.

So then you are agreeing that since the EP and MP have shared communion with Roman Catholics, and since the EP has concelebrated with Roman Catholics, and since the MP and Antiochians have communed monophysites and the Antiochian Patriarchate has mandated concelebration and communion with monophysites, that those 3 churches are condemned?

[bogoliubtsy]

So then you are agreeing that since the EP and MP have shared communion with Roman Catholics, and since the EP has concelebrated with Roman Catholics, and since the MP and Antiochians have communed monophysites and the Antiochian Patriarchate has mandated concelebration and communion with monophysites, that those 3 churches are condemned?

If I remember correctly, a certain MP monastic was severely reprimanded by the MP hierarchy for receiving communion from the Roman Catholics. The EP's actions have been sketchy to say the least, but they still have not adopted the official policy that sharing the Eucharist with Roman Catholics is legit. As for the Antiochian Patriarchate "mandating" communion and concelebration with monophysites, I know nothing about this. If you could provide info on this, I'd appreciate it.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to be an apologist for "World Orthodoxy", I just think more leniency and economy needs to be considered and/or applied to the Orthodox Patriarchates/Jurisdictions whose actions have not been condemned by a universal council. As is seen above, all actions taken by ROCOR in regards to ecumenism(in the form of the anathema) are strictly of a local character with the intent of safeguarding its own flock. The character of the anathema is not universal, nor could it ever be unless adopted by the Universal Church. As was stated by Met. Vitaly, ROCOR's lack of concelebration with certain Orthodox bodies is entirely De Facto. This De Facto character seems to allow for the rare type of concelebration which occured in Ireland. And who knows, maybe as we speak the ROCOR Synod is reprimanding the clergymen who participated in this concelebration.

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

...and/or applied to the Orthodox Patriarchates/Jurisdictions whose actions have not been condemned by a universal council.

Peter, I see you are still cracking jokes on the forum. Did I hear someone say communion with Monophysites?

When I get the time tonight or tomorrow, I plan a thorough rebuttal to the minimalist ROCOR views best expressed by Lebedeff's proxy above.

[bogoliubtsy]

By "Lebedeff" are you referring to Protopresbyter Alexander Lebedeff?

Just want to make sure we're on the same page here.

[bogoliubtsy]

Orthodoxordeath wrote:
Not that I am doubting your sincerity, but where can I find a source which says Archbishop Vitaly Maximenko commemorated Patriarch Sergius in the 1940's "simply out of obedience" or when St. John of Shanghai did the same?

As for Vladyka Vitaly-

From the Russian-American Orthodox Messenger:

Vladyka Vitaly expressed great joy and support of that position... introducing into the Divine Service the remembrance of the Most Holy Patriarch Sergi, thus preserving the foundations of church discipline which have governed our Church in America until this day. 'Let them defrock US, let them consider us schismatics, nevertheless we will fulfill our Christian responsibility and pray for our Church in the grave circumstances in which it exists,' said Vladyka Vitaly. (Messenger, Jan. 1944. No. l, New-York)

I'll do my best to find first hand accounts of St.John commemorating Patriarch Sergius. As of now, most of the info I have is from a second hand, yet reliable source. I know that Ania may be able to give you some concrete info on this. I'll ask and see if she can post here.

[Justin Kissel]

Peter,

I can understand, and even agree with, the stuff about the anathema being 1) of a local character, and 2) legislation and not an execution order/sentence. However, one thing I can't figure out is why people keep saying that ROCOR "can't judge others". I feel like I'm at a Unitarian Universalist convention or something. What is meant by this? Of course they can judge others, they are bishops just as much as the Pat. of Constantinople or the Pat. of Antioch. Can you imagine hearing St. Mark of Ephesus say "well I know we're being overrun by corruption, but what can I do? I'm just a lowly bishop... some don't even recognize my legitimacy"? ROCOR is a temporary body, no problem there; ROCOR is the youngest of the Local bodies (except perhaps the OCA), but again, no problem there. What exactly hinders a synod of bishops in Christ's Church from making a judgment? It's not like they are sentencing someone to hell or something; if found guilty, those who are guilty will be found guilty because they had already fallen, not because ROCOR says they aren't good enough. Those who are condemned condemn themselves, for having seen the light they willingly choose the darkness. (cf Jn. 3:16-18) If we are going to say that ROCOR does not want to use the anathema for that larger (church-wide) type of judgment, or if we are going to say that we can't do that since the original authors did not intend it to be used in that way, then let's go from there. I'm not sure what to do with a claim that the hands of bishops are tied, though.

[Daniel]

Peter,

I'm a little confused. Was that Vladyka Vitaly, former First Hierarch of the ROCA, commemorating Sergius who handed the Church in Russia over to the Communists?