OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 20, 2014, 12:45:04 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: ROCOR and the good kind of ecumenism  (Read 1936 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The young fogey
Moderated
Archon
********
Online Online

Posts: 2,643


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« on: December 08, 2002, 05:00:32 PM »

Read this on the Indiana List this morning:

Quote
In the undercroft of Canterbury Cathedral you can see the jewelled cross given the Archbishop of Canterbury in the 1920s by a bishop of the Karlovtsy synod (Serge adds here: the Temporary Higher Administration of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, now known as ROCOR).
 

Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky) of same believed Anglican bishops and priests could be received economically as bishops and priests if corporate reunion ever happened - just like the patriarchates of Constantinople and Romania did in the 1920s and 1930s.

People in ROCOR looked up to Pope Pius XII as an anti-Communist leader after WWII, which may be partly why, shortly after he died, ROCOR sent observers to Vatican II - believe it or not.
Logged

Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2002, 06:19:21 PM »

Read this on the Indiana List this morning:

Quote
In the undercroft of Canterbury Cathedral you can see the jewelled cross given the Archbishop of Canterbury in the 1920s by a bishop of the Karlovtsy synod (Serge adds here: the Temporary Higher Administration of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, now known as ROCOR).
 

Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky) of same believed Anglican bishops and priests could be received economically as bishops and priests if corporate reunion ever happened - just like the patriarchates of Constantinople and Romania did in the 1920s and 1930s.

People in ROCOR looked up to Pope Pius XII as an anti-Communist leader after WWII, which may be partly why, shortly after he died, ROCOR sent observers to Vatican II - believe it or not.

Yet, although invited, the ROCOR has steadfastly declined invitations to join the SCOBA (Standing Conference of [Canonical] Orthodox Bishops in the Americas).  One winces when one see that, as a result of this, an ACROD (American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Diocese of America, Johnstown, PA, under the EP) website describes the ROCOR as "semi-canonical."  I keep wondering which half of the ROCOR that the ACROD considers as being "canonical."   Grin

Hypo-Ortho
Logged
The young fogey
Moderated
Archon
********
Online Online

Posts: 2,643


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2002, 11:07:21 AM »

Might the original reason ROCOR didn't join SCOBA be its claim to have authority over all Russian Orthodox abroad, including the metropolia that is now the OCA? Perhaps according to this view, the canonical church in the US would be the Russian metropolia, under ROCOR, and everybody else would be uncanonical.
Logged

Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2002, 11:48:31 AM »

I would image that to be so, as ROCOR is in the European equivalent to SCOBA.
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
emmaus
Guest
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2002, 12:09:56 PM »

Read this on the Indiana List this morning:

Quote
In the undercroft of Canterbury Cathedral you can see the jewelled cross given the Archbishop of Canterbury in the 1920s by a bishop of the Karlovtsy synod (Serge adds here: the Temporary Higher Administration of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, now known as ROCOR).
 

Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky) of same believed Anglican bishops and priests could be received economically as bishops and priests if corporate reunion ever happened - just like the patriarchates of Constantinople and Romania did in the 1920s and 1930s.

People in ROCOR looked up to Pope Pius XII as an anti-Communist leader after WWII, which may be partly why, shortly after he died, ROCOR sent observers to Vatican II - believe it or not.

C.S. Lewis--according to one professor--has been called "protestant without being Protestant; catholic  without being Catholic; and orthodox without being Orthodox." Certainly, he was an ecumenist.

From the conservative Orthodox (or ROCOR?) pov, what is he?

In Jesus,

Abdur
« Last Edit: December 09, 2002, 12:14:06 PM by emmaus way » Logged
Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2002, 12:20:11 PM »

Might the original reason ROCOR didn't join SCOBA be its claim to have authority over all Russian Orthodox abroad, including the metropolia that is now the OCA? Perhaps according to this view, the canonical church in the US would be the Russian metropolia, under ROCOR, and everybody else would be uncanonical.

My ROCOR friends have told me that the reason the ROCOR has not joined the SCOBA is because it perceives the SCOBA as tainted with too much ecumenism/modernism in its membership.  The view you present here, Serge, is interesting, but it's the first time I've heard it.

Hypo-Ortho

Logged
Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2002, 12:36:56 PM »

I would image that to be so, as ROCOR is in the European equivalent to SCOBA.

Nicholas, I'm not understanding your statement here.  How can the ROCOR be the European equivalent to the SCOBA?  I don't believe that the ROCOR has ever claimed any exclusive jurisdiction in Europe.   In fact, how could it legitimately claim jurisdiction over non-Russian jurisdictions in countries outside Russia which were there before the ROCOR existed?

Hypo-Ortho
Logged
Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 09, 2002, 12:41:47 PM »

DOH! "be in" is what I meant. DOH! They are in the European equivalent to SCOBA.
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 09, 2002, 12:43:54 PM »

I went back to change it at it made sense to me that they were in the European equivalent to SCOBA. I just assumed that I had made a mistake in the above post, (Since I made so many Cheesy) but I guess I didn't. Sorry if it wasn't completely clear to you Hypo.
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #9 on: December 09, 2002, 01:10:08 PM »

DOH! "be in" is what I meant. DOH! They are in the European equivalent to SCOBA.

Ah, now I think I understand you, Nicholas.  Does the European equivalent of SCOBA to which the ROCOR belongs have a name?

Since the ROCOR is physically headquartered in Manhattan in the good ole US of A though, Nicholas, is there any statute or canon which prevents the ROCOR from having a dual membership in *BOTH* the "European equivalent to SCOBA" as well as in the actual SCOBA itself?

Hypo-Ortho
Logged
Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 09, 2002, 01:40:23 PM »

I must admit I know very little about this, but here is a quote from the SCOBA list, :

Quote
As an aside, I would like to mention that in Europe, specifically in Germany, there also exists a Conference of Orthodox Bishops, led by a bishop from the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which includes episcopal representatives from a variety of jursidictions, including the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia and the Moscow Patriarchate. Somehow, in Europe, no one expresses any doubt about the canonicity of the Synodal Russian Church, while some members of the SCOBA group, including some of its administrators, express exactly that thought, trying very hard to define SCOBA as the Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in America, with the clear implication that if you are not a member of this august group, you are "uncanonical." It is unclear to me why the ROCOR can be considered "canonical" [while not in communion with one] in Europe by churches in communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate and by the Ecumenical Patriarchate itself, while the very same church, under the same Metropolitan, is somehow considered to be "uncanonical" here, solely because it chooses not to be a member of SCOBA.
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #11 on: December 09, 2002, 09:56:03 PM »

Nik,

What you write is news even to me.  However, I don't find it surprising or disconcerting.

I think a lot of the vitriolic debate between ROCOR and "world Orthodoxy" is more a scrap between ROCOR and the OCA (and obviously, ROCOR and the MP).  If one keeps it in this perspective, it makes it very easy to see why it is the ROCOR can (oddly enough) be in communion with the JP or Serbia.

However, it is a confusing situation.  Along with the mess of North American Orthodoxy (in which strictly speaking no one is "canonical"), I think the only thing that can be done to fix the situation (and many other problems) would be for another Oecumenical Synod to be called.  There certainly are enough grounds for it, as disicplinary and doctrinal controversies have certainly posed a huge problem in modern times.  Only then will the consience of the Church be put at ease again (in so far as there will be a clear line in the sand as to where the proper position lies.)  At this point, one is only taking "a side" (as right as we all may think we are) - whether it be "philo old calendarist" or "philo modernizing", etc.

Seraphim
Logged

Hypo-Ortho
Guest
« Reply #12 on: December 09, 2002, 11:19:50 PM »

<snip>
I think a lot of the vitriolic debate between ROCOR and "world Orthodoxy" is more a scrap between ROCOR and the OCA (and obviously, ROCOR and the MP).  If one keeps it in this perspective, it makes it very easy to see why it is the ROCOR can (oddly enough) be in communion with the JP or Serbia.
<snip>
Seraphim

This may be so, Seraphim, and yet I see inconsistencies in the ROCOR's position in that both the Patriarchate of Jerusalem and the Serbian Patriarchate are in full, undiluted communion with both the OCA and the MP.  Technically, this puts the ROCOR in "indirect" communion with both the OCA and the MP via the communion it has with Jerusalem and Serbia.  No wonder there are those hard-liners among the True (Old Calendar) Orthodox Churches that scream about the ROCOR's [indirect] involvement in ecumenism.   Lips Sealed

Hypo-Ortho
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.076 seconds with 41 queries.