www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West What will happen to ROCOR?

Dear OrthodoxEast,

How are you feeling these days, Big Guy?

Not to brag, but you got over 200 prayers to the Theotokos on my prayer rope from me yesterday!

I echo Michael to say that all things Eastern interest us, especially the healing of schisms.

For many of us, ROCOR is our liturgical teacher where we continue to learn so much about the Orthodox church.

But if you rather not have us love and pray for the Russian Churches, well then . . .

Alex

Hi, Alex, "Big Guy!"

Nice to know that you consider the ROCOR to be your liturgical teacher, but, doesn't this approach reduce Holy Orthodoxy to a mere "rite," which it most certainly is not? Indeed, this is the same reduction ad absurdum that ByzCaths rightfully resent when disparigingly referred to as "Uniates" by some insensitive Eastern Orthodox (not including me, of course!), who think of ByzCatholicism as mere Eastern Catholic "Rites" *under* the Pope. Better to let ROCOR teach you to "become" Orthodox than to just follow Orthodox rubrics correctly. "Lex orandi, lex credendi est."

Thanks for the prayers. They are buoying me up, both spiritually and physically. I still cough incessantly at times, and some dime-sized blood clots still occasionally come up in my sputum (ugh!), but the fevers have been reduced considerably, and the "death rattle" in my throat and my raspiness and hoarseness don't scare as many of my visitors anymore. It will be some time though, I'm afraid, before I can resume chanting and reading in church in my stikhar like a good, little psalomchik in my "Russian" OCA parish church with its young, Russian-born priest.

Prayers for all of you on ByzCath.

With much love in Christ,
OrthodoxEast

Dear OrthodoxEast,

Well, you know I have no formal theological training, so my choice of words is my own and I often put my foot in my mouth.

(Although I've known bishops with lots of theological training who also . . .you know ).

ROCOR teaches us more than liturgiology, of course - it teaches Orthodoxy as a way of life.

The issue whether we as EC's may take the train that says "Orthodoxy" and get off at the station that says "Papacy" is one that will continue to be such. But ROCOR is like a father to many of us EC's in a number of respects.

My old Ukrainian Catholic priest, a great admirer of ROCOR, used to keep us updated about events affecting it. He also hired two ROCOR iconographers to write our parish's icons.

There is a closeness some of us EC's feel toward ROCOR and I think it has to do with the fact of ROCOR's sense of traditional purity of Orthodox faith and praxis.

When union with the MP occurs, ROCOR will lose nothing.

But world Orthodoxy has everything to gain.

Now stop trying to outwit me, you know you won't win, especially in your current state, relax and drink plenty of warm fluids - your lungs should be swimming and, judging by your hacking cough, you are probably neglecting to drink the required large amount that you must.

God bless you!

Alex

If there is a division do you think they will call themselves ROCOROCOR [Russian Orthodox Church Outside the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia]?

Dear Orthodox East and other brethren,

You are indeed correct regarding the Moscow Patriarchate's agreement with their child, the OCA. In fact, the agreement does not allow the Patriarch ANY diocese in North America whatsoever. All 30+ parishes currently under the Patriarch of Moscow are officially part of his Archdiocese, not a North American diocese reporting to the Patriarch, as many assume. The Patriarchal parishes are not a "jurisdiction," per se, and thus are not represented by their own representative at SCOBA.

(Now that is true extraterritoriality. Within the OCA there is an overlapping of diocesan territories, but at least all of them are contiguous. In this case, we have the Archdiocese of Moscow reaching across Europe, the Atlantic Ocean, the American continental landmass, and then across the Pacific Ocean!) [I'm not upset by this, just pointing it out.}

The problem with the OCA fulfilling the Moscow Pat.'s request for ethnic Russian dioceses within the OCA to care for the 120(+/-) parishes of ROCOR is that it goes completely against the grain of what the OCA has been striving for since its start in 1970: a completely territorial definition for all dioceses, with no overlaps and no diocese defined "ethnicly."

The reality is that were such Russian dioceses created, perhaps one third to one half of the parishes in the current OCA territorial diocesan structures (West, South, Northeast, New York-New Jersey, Eastern Penna, Western Penna, and Mid-West) would clamour to be included in same, although their current bishops would have the canonical right to deny any transfers.

Currently, the OCA has approx. 440(+/-) parishes, but 82(+/-) of these are ethnic Romanian, Bulgarian, or Albanian parishes inside of their respective "ethnic" dioceses. This leaves 358 inside of the territorial dioceses (named in the previous paragraph). Add 120 to 358 and we have 478, a full 25% of which would be the former ROCOR parishes.

The conservative influence and voting power of these former ROCOR bishops on the Holy Synod would reverse many of the things that I outined in my previous post and certainly squash the attempts to remove ethnicity (any ethnicity except "American") from the OCA's glossary.

This combination, OCA and ROCOR, would be quite a bowl of soup to drink.

With love in Christ, prayers for your health, and that His will would be done in all things,
Andrew

Dear Cantor Andrew,

With all due respect, Sir, but I think you can use to have some ROCOR in your theological soup!

(Did I hear someone just say "touche?")

Alex

Dear Alex,

Of course, you are off-subject and you are not referring to my "theological" opinions but to my "soteriological" opinions regarding the inappropriateness of dogmatizing the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of the Theotokos.

It is good to make a borshcht. And it is good to drink a borshcht. But one need not put everything into the borshcht. The borshcht that the Orthodox have right now is just right.

With love in Christ,
Andrew

ROCOR has done exactly that for myself and many of us, and continues to do so. I've been an enormous devotee and unofficial salesman of the Jordanville Unabbreviated Horologion for years. Still haven't found anything better for home or parish use.

The ROCOR liturgical works have precisely allowed many of us to much more fully live out "lex credendi, lex orandi" (St. Prosper of Aquitane, pray to God for us!) in English. Many of their works, such as the Oktoechos, are the most comprehensive liturgical texts available in English in the Slavic tradition.

This is much more than just an emotional or superficial attachment to "high church" rubrics. This is a much fuller partaking of the life-giving sweetness of the wellspring that is the prayer of the Church in the Slavic Byzantine tradition. These treasures have brought myself and others innumerable blessings and richness of spiritual life and may they continue to do so.

Dear Andrew, those are some good points. I can't see the disdain for the OCA that many of the ROCOR clergy and laity (and especially the monastics) harbor leading towards a rapid and peaceful settlement.

I see rather perhaps a union between the ROCOR and the Patriarchal parishes under a bishop or exarch akin to the separate diocese for the Bulgarians within the OCA, separate but in a sort of communion with the OCA. Some ROCOR priests have flatly stated they would not commune those from the OCA.

Right now while the ROCOR may be leaning towards reunion with the Patriarchal Church, there is much less unity within the ROCOR ranks in her position towards the OCA.

Andrew, very off-topic but I love Bishop +Fan Noli's English Epistle book!

Dear Diak,

Certainly, the OCA has in place the mechanism to accept the ROCOR parishes as an archdiocese within their structure. Article 12 of their Constitution allows for the reception of "ethnic" or non-territorial dioceses, until such time when they can be absorbed into the regular territorial structure of the OCA. It is this promise of an ultimate absorbtion that would probably (and ought to) worry them. The ethnic dioceses currently in the OCA are already amply suspicious of it.

It is interesting to note that the OCA accepted into her jurisdiction Romanian and Albanian (1971) dioceses, then adopted Article 12 some three days later.

I think that we and others who place great value upon the ROCOR's strict adherence to tradition, at the same time, see the quickness with which they declare a break in communion with fully canonical bodies, such as the OCA, as disturbing.

In one way, they are a group that was defined by whom they were NOT in communion with, historically the Moscow Patriarchate (due to communist infiltration and adulteration). In a sense, their raison d'etre. I can't see the validity of extending that to the OCA, albeit MP's child.

Certainly, their problems with the OCA, which does have some liberal or modernist tendencies, should not be taken to the point of denying communion to the faithful.

Some of this hesitancy to fully accept OCA faithful at the chalice has to do what they perceive as laxity in "preparation." Indeed, many OCA faithful have been given half of the story. They are told to commune frequently and to keep a pre-eucharistic fast from midnight, but they are never schooled in ascetical practices which are also integral parts of proper preparation. Are the OCA clergy instructing the faithful that a fasting day is a day of "no eating" until approximately 3:00 PM? While the OCA encourages confession as part of communion, are they instructing the faithful that certain sins have canonical pennances that include periods, even years, of abstension from the eucharist?

I believe that in an attempt to appeal to American cultural norms of regular self-indulgence and individualism, the OCA and, even more so, the Antiochians and larger Greek parishes, have sometimes discarded the very salt that makes our faith so vibrant and reinvigorating.

These are gaps in teaching that should cause ROCOR to pause, but not stay away.

They would make much more progress toward bringing the OCA and others closer to their own traditional understandings were they to engage them more closely in dialogue. In the process, however, they might be challenged on and have to reassess some of their own practices.

Back in 1995, I saw the beginnings of this when Deacon Andrew from their Jordanville Monastery attended a Conference on Monasticism held at St. Vladimir's Seminary. An excellent conference, the hosts went out of their way to recognize Dn Andrew's presence and he went out of his way to express his joy at being a participant. I don't recall anything said or presented during the conference which would have caused ROCOR traditionalists any consternation.

Let's pray for more interaction between them and a solution which glorifies God.

With love in Christ,
Andrew

Dear Andrew,

Actually, my OCA priest friend was recently directed to confess a number of Ethiopians.

What is the relationship between the OCA and Ethiopian Christians?

Is intercommunion permitted?

Alex

And yes, there is a solution to this current impasse (the MP being not allowed to have dioceses in North America by prior agreement with OCA and the incompatibility of the ROCOR and OCA sitting on the same synod).

Establish the ROCOR parishes as a distinct Russian jurisdiction, seated on SCOBA, under the Patriarch of Constantinople.

In Christ,
Andrew

How many of the ROCOR faithful are likely to go along with this? Many will not even recognise the Ecumenical Patriarchate as fully Orthodox.

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

Dear Alex,

Good question, but nothing to do with ROCOR, big guy . However, a lot of rain today, not so busy.

I personally believe that the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox should restore full communion. Most Orthodox theologians agree that the Chalcedonian dispute has no real "pith and substance."

There are two ecclesiological concerns:

Who is to be Patriarch of Africa and have full jurisdiction there, the Patriacrh or Alexandria or the Pope of Cairo?

There are saints on one side's calendar who are heretic's on the other's calendar and vice versa.

These need to be reconciled, but not necessarily prior to the reestablishment of communion. Probably, "Pat of Africa" should stay with the Greeks in Alexandria since they have done the bulk of the missionary work in sub-saharan Africa, but leaving Cairo & All Egypt and also Abysinia-Ethiopia as separate Patriarchates. There would ultimately be some compromises or overlapping of titles.

However, the current approach of the Antiochians and some OCA bishops is highly problematical. They are proivately instructing their clergy even to commune the Oriental Orthodox on a regular basis while publicly maintaining the schism by declining to serve with Oriental clergy.

Now if the communion is purely pastoral, such as Orientals living hours away from an Oriental Orthodox Church, I still don't agree with it, but can understand and excuse it.

But if the intercommunion is an attempt to restore full communion from below, I feel that it is an affront to our synodal system. The bishops together need to sort out the reestablishment of communion, not individual bishops and priests at the parish level. This is purely congregationalism (a protestant disease), where each community decides who is in the body of Christ and who is not.

If we are in back in communion, then the FIRST people to serve and share the eucharistic meal together should be the bishops!

With love in Christ,
Andrew

Dear Fr. Mark,

You are correct, but I believe that their problem with Ecu Pat is largely a "personal" one over style and ecumenism.

If need be, I think that they would accept a serious offer at regularization from the Ecu Pat over a union with the OCA.

In Christ,
Andrew