The Shepherd, May 2007
THE CHEQUERED PROGRESS OF THE ROCA-MP RAPPROCHEMENT, 3
The second principle, it appears is collegiality among the Bishops, although this is not spelled out so baldly. One cannot help wondering, if this article expresses the teaching of the present hierarchs of ROCOR, whether it does not deny the legitimacy of their ever separating from the Synod of Metropolitan Sergius and its successor organisation, the present Moscow Patriarchate. Then the article attempts to pass a blanket condemnation on all those who have left ROCOR in recent times: “Those who have gone over to the ‘Suzdalites,’ or the ‘Lazarites,’ or the ‘Mansonvillites’ [even when they base one of their fundamental arguments in the piece on quotes from Metropolitan Vitaly in his ‘Mansonvillite’ period! - ed], or to the “Russian True-Orthodox Church,’ the contemporary false -’Tikhonites’ - they have all fallen away from the canonical Russian Church.” It may be that the article is right in stating this - it would take wiser people than us to ascertain that, and perhaps a Local Council of a future free Russian Church - but the writer of the article seems to forget that it is the present policies of the ROCOR hierarchs and the way that they have pursued them that have caused this mass confusion and exodus. When the Titanic is sinking, people will jump into life-boats, will cling to planks, and attempt to save themselves. One is left, after reading this piece, more than a little apprehensive for the salvation of the persons responsible for it.
An even more curious statement appeared on 19th April: “On [the] invitation of Bishop Mercurius of Zaraisk, Administrator of Patriarchal Parishes in the USA, members of the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad visited St. Nicholas Patriarchal Cathedral and Representation of Moscow Patriarchate in the USA. The ROCOR Synod of Bishops is having a last session in New York, before the signing the Act of Canonical Communion. His Eminence Archbishop Mark of Berlin and Great Britain, His Eminence Archbishop Hilarion of Australia and New Zealand and V. Rev. Archpriest Andrew Sommer, assistant rector of Our Lady of the Sign Synodal Cathedral, participated in a meeting with the representative of Moscow Patriarchate on behalf of the ROCOR.” Much of this short notice consists of conventional pleasantries, but it also contains this odd passage: “Participants of discussion were unanimous in the thought that joint work of hierarchs, clergy, and laity of the united Russian Orthodox Church will accomplish an essential level of the protection of the interests of those faithful who speak Russian language and are not wishing to succumb to a new style English speaking assimilation, that appears to redefine Orthodox Christianity in form of comforting protestant tradition.” Does this mean that non-Russian speaking converts wil no longer be welcome in the united MP-ROCA Church? Does it imply that converts are somehow doomed to “turn to their own vomit again” (2 Ptr. 2:22) if they do not speak Russian? (It certainly seems that the composer of this press-release had not mastered English!) Is it perhaps, as one of our people suggested, a side swipe at the Orthodox Church in America, on whose “canonical territory” many of the ROCA-MP United Church parishes will be operating? Is it simply an expression of the misguided Russian nationalism (I do not wish to demean genuine patriotism) which seems to have played such a major part in the whole rapprochement process, and to which, as we mentioned at the beginning of this summary of events above, one of the apparent prime movers of the process, President Putin alluded to in his address to the Patriarch?
|
