Saint Alexei Trupp: A Roman Catholic glorified by ROCOR

[griego catolico]

ROC and ROCOR are setting up a commission to work out a common calendar of saints:

Moscow, 15 April 2008 (Interfax):

The upcoming Archbishop’s Council of the Moscow Patriarchate in June shall examine the question of the universal glorification of St John Maksimovich of Shanghai and San Francisco of the ROCOR. St John was glorified locally by the ROCOR in 1994.

Fr Georgy Mitrofanov, a former member of the Commission for Canonisation, told Interfax-Religion that a unified list of the New Martyrs of Russia may be issued by the MP and the ROCOR next year. He explained that such a new listing is necessary because the canonisation of the New Martyrs by the ROCOR in the 1980s was collective, adding all of the names to the roll of saints immediately without having the opportunity to investigate all the details of each particular case. Moreover, at that time, the ROCOR did not have access to since-declassified archival materials that gave documentary evidence as to how one or another person acted under interrogation.

“The canonisation of the New Martyrs in the ROCOR in 1980s had a number of steps. Firstly, they glorified the entire Assembly of the New Martyrs of Russia. After inscribing some of the names in the roll of the saints, they had an icon painted, and some of those depicted in it were not objectively saints, and only then did they begin an actual enumeration of the New Martyrs. In the MP, we chose a different path. Each canonisation was handled on an individual basis, we worked slowly and carefully, and we thoroughly studied all the available archival materials on each candidate”, Fr Georgy explained.

Because the process of canonisation in the ROCOR followed such a “reverse” order, now and then there appeared anomalies, Fr Georgy said. For instance, they canonised together with the royal family their servants who died with them, some of whom were not Orthodox Christians (Aleksei Igorovich Trupp, a Catholic, and Mme Schneider, a Lutheran).

However, the most famous name on the list of saints of the ROCOR that is not on that of the MP is Archbishop John Maksimovich of Shanghai, who was the spiritual leader of the Orthodox flock in the Russian emigration in China, Paris, and San Francisco in the years following the Red victory in the Civil War. “A new canonisation of Vladyki John shall not be required, we shall simply introduce his name into the common universal roll of saints”, Fr Gregory related.

It surprised me to read that ROCOR glorified a Roman Catholic as a new matryr. I am assuming that ROCOR thought he was Russian Orthodox at the time of glorification.



In fact, ROCOR also glorified another non-Orthodox Christian,Yekaterina Adol'fovna Schneider, who was Lutheran. 

When ROC glorified the Romanov family, it did not glorify the servants who were murdered with them. 

Also, ROC did not glorify the Grand Dukes who were murdered with Saint Elizabeth Feodorovna and Saint Barbara in Alapaevsk. 

How will ROCOR handle this?    Will these "saints" be "de-glorified"?  Will these glorifications be declared invalid or simply ignored?

Your thoughts. 



 
 

[Elisha]

Why would we know?  Wait and see is about all anyone here can say.

[lubeltri]

Are canonizations infallible in the canonical Orthodox churches?

[Elisha]

Are canonizations infallible in the canonical Orthodox churches?

I don't think it is a question that we think about.  I think the only things "infallible" are the Faith, Scriptures and the decisions of Ecumenical Synods.

[ozgeorge]

St Isaac the Syrian is universally recognized as a Saint by the Eastern Orthodox Church, even though he was canonically a member of the Assyrian Church of the East, and therefore never in Communion with the Eastern Orthodox Church.

[Punch]

There is baptism by water, and there is baptism by blood.  If the torturers of the Saints can be mentioned in the histories as martyrs when they repent and are instantly killed, why should not the servants of the Czar-martyr who died with him?  This is how it was explained to me.  Perhaps the MP is embarrassed that a Catholic and a Lutheran remained more faithful to the Orthodox Czar than did some of their heirarchs?  Their Icon will stay in my prayer corner along with the Royal Family.

[buzuxi]

Last time i read, they and the MP will probably strike them from the record, but their memories will be remembered in the hagiography of the Romannov family.

[griego catolico]

Their Icon will stay in my prayer corner along with the Royal Family.

I have never seen an icon of the servants.  I am interested in seeing one. Is there one available on-line?

Also, is there an icon of the grand dukes and others who were killed with Saints Elizabeth and Barbara?

[griego catolico]

St Isaac the Syrian is universally recognized as a Saint by the Eastern Orthodox Church, even though he was canonically a member of the Assyrian Church of the East, and therefore never in Communion with the Eastern Orthodox Church.

Along those lines...

The Roman Catholic Church officially recognizes Saint Sergius of Radonezh as a saint.  The Roman Catholic Church did not canonize him, but recognized the glorification done by the Russian Orthodox Church.

He is listed in the Martyrologium Romanum. This means that a Roman Catholic Mass can be celebrated on September 25th in honor of Saint Sergius.

If I am not mistaken...

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I recognized the canonization of Saint Stephen of Hungary, which was done by the Roman Catholic Church. I am not aware that His All-Holiness did a formal liturgy of glorification. I am under the impression that he simply recognized the canonization by the Catholic Church.

If I am mistaken about that, please let me know.

Edited to specify "The Church" as the "Roman Catholic Church"

-- Friul

[Αριστοκλής]

If I am not mistaken...

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I recognized the canonization of Saint Stephen of Hungary, which was done by the Roman Catholic Church. I am not aware that His All-Holiness did a formal liturgy of glorification. I am under the impression that he simply recognized the canonization by the Catholic Church.

If I am mistaken about that, please let me know.

You are not mistaken, but St. Stephen of Hungry died pre-schism - we're just late to the party.

[Pravoslavbob]

There is baptism by water, and there is baptism by blood.  If the torturers of the Saints can be mentioned in the histories as martyrs when they repent and are instantly killed, why should not the servants of the Czar-martyr who died with him?  This is how it was explained to me.  Perhaps the MP is embarrassed that a Catholic and a Lutheran remained more faithful to the Orthodox Czar than did some of their heirarchs?  Their Icon will stay in my prayer corner along with the Royal Family.

Yet another difference is that the ROC glorified the royal family as passion bearers, and not martyrs as ROCOR did.

[griego catolico]

Yet another difference is that the ROC glorified the royal family as passion bearers, and not martyrs as ROCOR did.

It will be interesting then how the Romanov family will be classified when the common martyrology is completed. 
Will ROC accept them as martyrs or will ROCOR have to accept them as passion-bearers? 

[griego catolico]

You are not mistaken, but St. Stephen of Hungry died pre-schism - we're just late to the party.

Thank you for your reply.

Yes, Saint Stephen did die before the 1054 Schism but the recognition by His All-Holiness is still significant considering that Saint Stephen was canonized post-schism (1083 AD).

His All-Holiness could have formally glorified Saint Stephen if he wanted (at least that is my understanding). 

This recognition has since been accepted by the other Orthodox Churches.

[Pravoslavbob]

It will be interesting then how the Romanov family will be classified when the common martyrology is completed. 
Will ROC accept them as martyrs or will ROCOR have to accept them as passion-bearers? 

I doubt the ROC will accept them as martyrs.  They did not live their lives like devout Orthodox Christians, but the way that they died, IMHO, certainly justifies their position as sainted passion bearers.  But I suppose we will find out sooner or later. 

[Entscheidungsproblem]

I doubt the ROC will accept them as martyrs.  They did not live their lives like devout Orthodox Christians, but the way that they died, IMHO, certainly justifies their position as sainted passion bearers.  But I suppose we will find out sooner or later. 

Should be interesting to see how members of the ROCOR react if that is the case.

[Αριστοκλής]

Idle speculation at this point on either perspective.

[Thomas]

I have actually seen some ROCOR articles that list them now as Holy Royal Martyrs and Passionbearers perhaps that will be the compromise.

As quoted from  Pravoslavbob "They did not live their lives like devout Orthodox Christians, but the way that they died, IMHO, certainly justifies their position as sainted passion bearers."

I would disagree with this statement. I have read the personal lives of the Passionbearers both before the fall of the dynasty and after the dynasty  and noted that their personal lives were that of devoted Orthodox belief and practice. Recently opened records from the Communist held archives have verified this as well.  Much was done in the name of the Tsar that was never approved by the Tsar. Sometimes their decision were poor decisions but that is why I am drawn to devotion to the passionbearers, they are so much like us in our own daily struggles to be good and obedient to the Lord.  Their closeness and love of family are exemplary to those of us who are parents and have children. Their final martyrdom as passionbearers truely emulated Boris and Gleb who went to their death as lambs.

Thomas

[Didymus]

I don't think it is a question that we think about.  I think the only things "infallible" are the Faith, Scriptures and the decisions of Ecumenical Synods.

I have been informed repeatedly that Orthodoxy does not declare the Holy Scriptures to be infallible because they were written by men.
Rather, The Church declares God to be infallible; then states that God inspired the Holy Scriptures. Nonetheless, because men wrote them, we do not say that the Holy Scriptures themselves are infallible peradventure some might come to think the men who wrote them were also.

St Isaac the Syrian is universally recognized as a Saint by the Eastern Orthodox Church, even though he was canonically a member of the Assyrian Church of the East, and therefore never in Communion with the Eastern Orthodox Church.

Correct me if I'm wrong please as I'm not very well informed on this issue however was there not a period about the seventh centuary when the Assyrian Church affirmed the Orthodox Faith and entered into communion with the Eastern Orthodox?
I'm unsure how the Oriental Orthodox may or may not have been involved however I am aware that we celebrate the recovery of the true Cross which was done by an Eastern emperor about the same time.

Comments please?

Thank you for your reply.

Yes, Saint Stephen did die before the 1054 Schism but the recognition by His All-Holiness is still significant considering that Saint Stephen was canonized post-schism (1083 AD).

His All-Holiness could have formally glorified Saint Stephen if he wanted (at least that is my understanding). 

This recognition has since been accepted by the other Orthodox Churches.

Does not the Eastern Orthodox Church also recognise St. Edward the Confessor of England who departed in 1066?

[PeterTheAleut]

Correct me if I'm wrong please as I'm not very well informed on this issue however was there not a period about the seventh centuary when the Assyrian Church affirmed the Orthodox Faith and entered into communion with the Eastern Orthodox?
I'm unsure how the Oriental Orthodox may or may not have been involved however I am aware that we celebrate the recovery of the true Cross which was done by an Eastern emperor about the same time.

Comments please?

I think this question may be more appropriate for a separate thread.

[A Sombra]

Quote:
           "Perhaps the MP is embarrassed that a Catholic and a Lutheran remained more faithful to the Orthodox Czar than did some of their heirarchs?"


     AT the time of the martyrdom of the Russian Royal Family, the "MP" as it is now was simply not in existence! So, there were no "MP Hierarchs" to be faithful to the Tsar at the time of his martyrdom. Patriarch Tikhon was installed as the First Patriarch in Russia since the early 1700's on November 21, 1917. The Royal Family was martyred on July 04/17 1918. What has come to us as the "MP" now is agreed by many to have been inaugurated by Stalin in 1943 when he met with Metropolitan Sergey (Stragorodsky), Alexei (Simansky) and one or two more Bishops, and the "legalization" of the Church as a way of saving Stalin's regime from the Nazis was hammered out...Sergei was allowed to be "elected " Patriarch (the typical Soviet election-only one candidate to vote for!), and the requirement for Living Church members to return to Orthodoxy was made easier so Sergey could have candidates for Bishops as most of the clergy and all but 4 Bishops were either dead or in the Gulag.

[PeterTheAleut]

What has come to us as the "MP" now is agreed by many to have been inaugurated by Stalin in 1943 when he met with Metropolitan Sergey (Stragorodsky), Alexei (Simansky) and one or two more Bishops, and the "legalization" of the Church as a way of saving Stalin's regime from the Nazis was hammered out...Sergei was allowed to be "elected " Patriarch (the typical Soviet election-only one candidate to vote for!), and the requirement for Living Church members to return to Orthodoxy was made easier so Sergey could have candidates for Bishops as most of the clergy and all but 4 Bishops were either dead or in the Gulag.

You got any primary source evidence to back up this wild claim, or did you just make this up out of some baloney you had in the refrigerator?

[A Sombra]

^Also, perhaps you can explain what you would accept as a "primary" source ... do you read Russian?  If you want "primary sources," you obviously must, of course, but just checking...

[Papist]

I have been informed repeatedly that Orthodoxy does not declare the Holy Scriptures to be infallible because they were written by men.
Rather, The Church declares God to be infallible; then states that God inspired the Holy Scriptures. Nonetheless, because men wrote them, we do not say that the Holy Scriptures themselves are infallible peradventure some might come to think the men who wrote them were also.

This can't be true. 

[Entscheidungsproblem]

Discussion about Edward Michael Cardinal Egan of New York's comments has been split to:  Edward Michael Cardinal Egan on Orthodox Saints

-- Friul

[Asteriktos]

The Church declares God to be infallible; then states that God inspired the Holy Scriptures

This can't be true

Well that's what I believe as well, but then I'm an odd one.

EDIT--Actually, I should say that it depends on how you define "infallibility" (e.g., whether you are equating it with inerrancy). I'm perfectly willing to accept that the Scripture is infallible in some sense--it depends on what you mean by the term.

[griego catolico]

I know it's been over a year since the last post, but I am interested in knowing if the common martyrology between ROCOR and ROC has been completed and published.
At the beginning of this year, ROCOR had reported that Saint John Maximovitch was officially included in the ROC calendar.
Has there been a resolution regarding the servants who were killed with the Romanov family and the Grand Dukes killed in Alapaevsk?

BTW, I found this icon which includes the servants and Grand Dukes alongside the Romanov family and Saints Elizabeth and Barbara:

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion > Orthodox-Catholic Discussion (Moderator: username!) > Topic: Saint Alexei Trupp: A Roman Catholic glorified by ROCOR