OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 01, 2014, 12:59:59 AM *
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 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: ROCOR and Russian Orthodox Church  (Read 10326 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
countrymouse
cyberklutz
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 115

OC.net


« Reply #45 on: May 16, 2004, 11:32:20 PM »

(Forgive me for posting this twice.)

It is my understanding that the OCA is in full communion with the other Orthodox jurisdictions, even though the EP does not recognize its autonomy (or autocephalous status?).  I suppose it may take a while, but surely it can be resolved.  If full communion is restored between Moscow and the ROCOR, I wonder what that will mean in terms of the EP's opinion.  I have read somewhere, a few months ago, that under canon law the American continents are supposed to be under the EP's jurisdiction.  Is that true?
Logged
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #46 on: May 16, 2004, 11:34:55 PM »

Thank you for the explanation, Bogoliubsty.   Like you, I couldn't find a reason actually stated on the OCA site.  Looks like a matter of politics and circumstances.

It is my understanding that the OCA is in full communion with the other Orthodox jurisdictions, even though the EP does not recognize its autonomy (or autocephalous status?).  I suppose it may take a while, but surely it can be resolved.  If full communion is restored between Moscow and the ROCOR, I wonder what that will mean in terms of the EP's opinion.  I have read somewhere, a few months ago, that under canon law the American continents are supposed to be under the EP's jurisdiction.  Is that true?

As far as I know, the canon you mention refers to lands inhabited by "heathens". The EP has attempted to use this canon to try and extend their governing rights to America, a "heathen" land. Seems silly to me, and many others.
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
countrymouse
cyberklutz
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 115

OC.net


« Reply #47 on: May 16, 2004, 11:38:15 PM »

That's interesting... makes it a bit less "cut and dry."
Logged
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #48 on: May 17, 2004, 12:12:31 AM »

[As far as I know, the canon you mention refers to lands inhabited by "heathens". The EP has attempted to use this canon to try and extend their governing rights to America, a "heathen" land. Seems silly to me, and many others.]

It is silly since it also referenences three specific provinces or areas outside the boundaries of Greece  -

Chalcedon  A.D. 451

Canon XXVIII:

 The Bishop of New Rome shall the same honor and priveleges of Old Rome, on accout of the removal of the empire.  FOR THIS REASON THE (METROPOITANS) OF PONTUS, OF ASIA, AND OF THRACE, AS WELL AS ALL THE BARBARIAN BISHOPS SHALL BE ORDAINED BY THE BISHOP OF CONSTANTINOPLE.

In those days any non Greek speaking land was considered as barbarian by them.

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #49 on: May 17, 2004, 12:18:09 AM »

Ah, barbarians....not heathens. Sorry about that.  Smiley
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #50 on: May 17, 2004, 03:29:01 PM »

My understand is that, typically, when an Orthodox presence first appears in a nation, that church is responsible jurisdictionally for the development of the mission church in the new country.  In this case, we would seem to go back over to Russia by default.

If ROCOR and MP reconcile (may God grant!), which group would retain "primacy," as it were, of the church in America -- the OCA or the ROCOR?
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #51 on: May 17, 2004, 04:40:54 PM »

[If ROCOR and MP reconcile (may God grant!), which group would retain "primacy," as it were, of the church in America -- the OCA or the ROCOR?]

Depends on what you mean by primacy. Personnally I don't like narrowing it down to who has primacy over whom.  I see it as twin brothers finally ending a family feud and returning home to work together for the good of the family which they never gave up their love for.  Most probably the OCA will retain its 'autocephally' and  what is now ROCOR will become a 'Russian' self governing diocese within it as the Albanian, Bulgarian, and Romanian dioceses are.

Either that or, with the approval of the OCA (to help prevent further division), both the OCA & the MP will agree to modify the statutes of the 'Tomos of Autocephally'  to allowall the ROCOR parishes to have an individual choice on whether they want to be part of the OCA or temporarily under the MP.

With all the Russian immigrants coming here the MP is concerned about their welfare.  Prior to all this, he was in discussion with the OCA about setting up a separate Russian diocese for them.  From what I understand he even offered to supply the OCA with a Bishop & priests if necessary.

ROCOR could very well take over this much needed function.  That is IF WE ALL DECIDE TO PUT PAST DIFFERENCES ASIDE AND ACT LIKE THE BROTHERS AND SISTERS WE ARE!

And look at it all as providing  the much needed building blocks needed to further build a united church for Orthodox here in America!

Both the OCA and ROCOR each have strengths and weaknesses that could be offset if they become one again!  But, infortunately, I'm sure there are some on both sides that would rather shift through all the garbage rather than bury it for the sake of some fresh air!

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #52 on: May 17, 2004, 04:41:00 PM »

My understand is that, typically, when an Orthodox presence first appears in a nation, that church is responsible jurisdictionally for the development of the mission church in the new country.  In this case, we would seem to go back over to Russia by default.

If ROCOR and MP reconcile (may God grant!), which group would retain "primacy," as it were, of the church in America -- the OCA or the ROCOR?

Did you get my email?

Logged
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #53 on: May 18, 2004, 01:53:13 AM »

 

More on the OCA/ROCOR split from the perspective of Fr. Michael Polskii of ROCOR, written in 1952. Fr. Michael compiled the lives of many New Russian Martyrs in the book The New Martyrs of Russia.

For full article:
http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/english/pages/articles/mpolski.html

If one was in unity, but then fell away, then he has sinned against truth, and therefore, against love. But we must remain faithful to this law of God and of the Church. As it always is, at first, unity and love reigned among us in the diaspora—but then, the enemy came and sowed the seeds of weeds, of schism and enmity. Since the end of the civil war, in 1920, old Russian +¬migr+¬ dioceses and parishes and those of the new emigration, of exile communities, which quickly formed dioceses and parishes all over the world were separated by the “iron curtain” of bolshevism from the central Church administration in Russia and, with the agreement of the entire episcopacy abroad, united under the Supreme Authority of its Council and a single Church Administration Outside of Russia. This temporary united Church administration, until the reunification with the emancipated Russian Church, was an equally necessary and canonical administration for the entire Russian Orthodox Church Abroad as the very central Church authority was in Russia. This was established by the Ukase of the Moscow Patriarchate (No. 362, 1920) on the administration of other parts of the Russian Church in the event that they become separated from it, and confirmed by all the canons of the Church on the principle of unity and conciliarity of the Church authority. This unity existed for five years, until 1926, when the American diocese, now called the “Metropolia,” under the leadership of Metropolitan Platon, along with the Western European diocese, violated that unity, fell away from communion with the other archpastors and dioceses of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, all for the sake of self-determination and the arbitrariness of their leadership. Were there, could there have been Russian Orthodox people who desired to preserve our original and crucial unity in accordance with Church law and Christian conscience? There must have been. It couldn’t be that there were no Orthodox Christians in North America who knew the truth of the Church. The Mother of God “Joy of All Who Sorrow” parish in San Francisco, and the parish of All Saints in New York were at the time the first witnesses and spokesmen for the truth in America.

An unwilling witness to this canonical and moral truth of our unity is the history of the Metropolia over these last 32 years. Metropolitan Platon, choosing the path of schism in 1926, himself participated in the organization of the Supreme Ecclesiastical Authority Abroad in 1920 and together with Metropolitan Anthony and the other hierarchs requested permission of the Constantinople Patriarchate to organize the same on the latter’s territory. Being sent to America in 1922, he was appointed by the Synod of Bishops Abroad to head the American diocese, and in leaving the Synod Abroad after that, in 1927, he declared the autocephaly of the American church, which was recognized by no one. After his death, in 1935, Metropolitan Theophilus restored unity with the Synod of Bishops Abroad, a unity that lived on for 11 years, until the end of 1946, when he switched his allegiance to the Moscow Patriarchate. A year later, he rejected this unity, and the Metropolia was left without canonical leadership, its bishops in isolation, separate from the Council and the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, under which it had twice before existed. This attempt at autocephaly or permanent separation from the Russian Church occurred in a difficult moment in its life, and the attempt to gain communion with the Moscow Patriarchate, with that unfortunate agent and ally of the godless bolshevik authority, is a witness to the errors made every time during its separation from the Synod of Bishops Abroad, for which such ways are foreign. The advice of the entire episcopacy abroad, under the guidance and lawful leadership of the eldest bishops, would have guaranteed a better path for the American part of the church in the diaspora. The same belonging to the Mother Russian Church of all of its parts abroad, the same conditions of its breaking of communion with her, the temporary situation of all in expectation of its emancipation and its expression of free will in the matters of the church, and finally the demands of the Christian conscience and Church laws and regulations persistently and in every way require unity within our Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia.

But still, a great deal of effort is expended in creating impossible, artificial and very unsubstantial reasons for the continuation of the schism, which will continue for the unforeseen future. Still, one cannot but celebrate and rejoice that the canonical path within our American Mission-diocese, from its establishment in 1794 until this day was never broken. At the crucial moment in our Mission, in 1926-1927, when by separating from the canonical ecclesiastical authority of the Council and Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, loyal to its Mother Russian Church, and by unilaterally establishing an autocephalous administration, the canonical thread of its existence could have been torn—and yet caught and restored. The North American Diocese of the Council continues the canonical jurisdiction of the Council and Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia in America after the departure of Metropolitan Platon. The path of truth on the territory of our old Mission was preserved. It continues even now in the Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia "[n.b. The North American and Canadian Dioceses were often viewed as a single diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, even though it was divided by region.]."
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
Brendan03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



« Reply #54 on: May 18, 2004, 06:11:56 AM »

[As far as I know, the canon you mention refers to lands inhabited by "heathens". The EP has attempted to use this canon to try and extend their governing rights to America, a "heathen" land. Seems silly to me, and many others.]

It is silly since it also referenences three specific provinces or areas outside the boundaries of Greece  -

Chalcedon  A.D. 451

Canon XXVIII:

 The Bishop of New Rome shall the same honor and priveleges of Old Rome, on accout of the removal of the empire.  FOR THIS REASON THE (METROPOITANS) OF PONTUS, OF ASIA, AND OF THRACE, AS WELL AS ALL THE BARBARIAN BISHOPS SHALL BE ORDAINED BY THE BISHOP OF CONSTANTINOPLE.

In those days any non Greek speaking land was considered as barbarian by them.

Orthodoc

It's not only silly it is very dangerous.  If the EP actually has jurisdiction in all non-Orthodox countries, he is starting to get closer to being an Orthodox Pope.  

Brendan
Logged

B
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #55 on: May 18, 2004, 07:27:54 AM »

As far as I know, the canon you mention refers to lands inhabited by "heathens". The EP has attempted to use this canon to try and extend their governing rights to America, a "heathen" land. Seems silly to me, and many others.

Heathens, barbarians, whatever...the EP seems actually to be trying to extend this canon to cover just about anywhere where a national church- autocephalous or autonomous, does not yet exist (conveniently ignoring his role in recognizing that very status). Yes, he is clearly out of bounds here.
Some "one" of the Russian jurisdictions here surely has precedence in North America. My read is the OCA; but until the Russians work out their problems, that is problematic and allows the problem to fester.

Demetri
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Orthodoc
Supporter & Defender Of Orthodoxy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 2,526

Those who ignore history tend to repeat it.


« Reply #56 on: May 18, 2004, 10:41:13 AM »

He, along with some Hellenists already think he is. Excerpt from an article posted on one of the Orthodox discussion groups put out by a Hellenist organization  and my response -

-------

The Vatican is the heart of Roman Catholic Christianity. The Ecumenical
Patriarchate of Constantinople, is the heart of Orthodox Christianity.
In other words the so called heart of Orthodoxy Christianity is located in a city which -

1)  Is no longer Christian
2)  Which is no longer Constantinople
3)  Which contains less than 3000 Orthodox Christians
4)  Whose leader is picked by, and approved by, a non Christian anti Orthodox government
5)  Who must be a natural born Turkish citizen to be elected & consecrated
6)  Who can't travel without the permission of that government
7)  Whose residence is so controlled that it can't even fix a toilet without permission

HELLENISM IS DEAD!  CONSTANTINOPLE IS NO MORE!  And its about time the people who write this drivel stop trying to live off the glories of the past and see things as they really are.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate IS NOT THE POPE OF THE ORTHODOX!  He never was, and he never will be.  It's time the title of 'first amongst equals' be dropped.  It brought about a schism in the church in the beginning of the 2nd millenium and it may just do it again in the beginning of the 3rd millenium if  articles like this which are centered around cultural pride rather than Christian history and ideals are perpetuated.

The heart of Orthodoxy lies in its only head which is Christ himself!

--------

Orthodoc
Logged

Oh Lord, Save thy people and bless thine inheritance.
Grant victory to the Orthodox Christians over their adversaries.
And by virtue of thy Cross preserve thy habitation.
romanbyzantium
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 479


OC.net


« Reply #57 on: May 20, 2004, 07:36:21 PM »

He, along with some Hellenists already think he is. Excerpt from an article posted on one of the Orthodox discussion groups put out by a Hellenist organization  and my response -

-------

The Vatican is the heart of Roman Catholic Christianity. The Ecumenical
Patriarchate of Constantinople, is the heart of Orthodox Christianity.
In other words the so called heart of Orthodoxy Christianity is located in a city which -

1)  Is no longer Christian
2)  Which is no longer Constantinople
3)  Which contains less than 3000 Orthodox Christians
4)  Whose leader is picked by, and approved by, a non Christian anti Orthodox government
5)  Who must be a natural born Turkish citizen to be elected & consecrated
6)  Who can't travel without the permission of that government
7)  Whose residence is so controlled that it can't even fix a toilet without permission

HELLENISM IS DEAD!  CONSTANTINOPLE IS NO MORE!  And its about time the people who write this drivel stop trying to live off the glories of the past and see things as they really are.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate IS NOT THE POPE OF THE ORTHODOX!  He never was, and he never will be.  It's time the title of 'first amongst equals' be dropped.  It brought about a schism in the church in the beginning of the 2nd millenium and it may just do it again in the beginning of the 3rd millenium if  articles like this which are centered around cultural pride rather than Christian history and ideals are perpetuated.

The heart of Orthodoxy lies in its only head which is Christ himself!

--------

Orthodoc

can you provide a weblink to the source of that article.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   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 0.074 seconds with 40 queries.