And a lot of Roman Catholics yet have to learn that there is actually a link between symbols and doctrine.

Can you please tell me what groups among the priestly Old Believers are considered to posess a valid Apostolic Succession from a Western point of view?

The Priestist Old-Ritualists of the Bielaia Krinitsa Concord (currently headed by Metropolitan Leonty of Bielaia Krinitsa and Metropolitan Cornelius of Moscow) enjoy Holy Orders fully recognized by the Holy See (Metropolitan Andrew took the question to Pope Saint Pius X in the "test case" of Father Evstakhiy Susalev; the Pope agreed that no new ordination was needed).

The much smaller group headed by "Patriarch" Alexander is in a more ambiguous position; their ordinations derive from the "Living Church", which proved to be rather less than pulsing with life and not much of a Church.

Fr. Serge

I have another question.

The Roman Church is reluctant to fully establish an Exarchate or Diocese for Catholics of the Slavonic Rite in Russia, as the Moscow Patriarchate would see that as a hostile attitude from Rome.

Would it be the same if Rome establishes an exarchate but clarifying that its rite will be only the Pre-Nikonian Rite and that all parishes would be of this rite? Wouldn't this be a solution for the problem? Or would this still hurt the MP?

Juan,

I suspect that it would raise hackles, given that the MP has Edinoversty parishes, few though I think they are. Also, there is only a single Old Rite Catholic parish among the Russian Greek Catholics, so I'm unconvinced a case could be made for establishing a jurisdiction.

Many years,

Neil

The Moscow Patriarchate even objects to Greek-Catholic parishes serving Ukrainian Greek-Catholics who live in Russia.

For that matter, I notice that the Moscow Patriarchate's latest complaint is that the President of Ukraine went to the airport in Kyiv to welcome the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople last week, and did not go to the airport to welcome the Patriarch of Moscow. Do the Holy Canons tell us whom we may welcome at an airport, and whom we may not welcome at an airport?

Fr. Serge

Well, it seems to me that he met Patriarch Bartholomew because he was a visitor from outside. But Patriarch Alexis was in his own canonical territory, so technically not a visitor, and if he is not a visitor, he doesn't need to be welcomed?

Nick

Mebbe he had a longstanding prior engagement , and could not get to the airport in time.

That must be it.

Nick

Sometimes all this seems to get so silly and petty, it's no wonder most outside of Ukraine just shake their heads and wonder. There seems to be a game of one-up-manship going on here that the rest of the world doesn't get. Why is that? Is it silly, or are we missing something of substance?

Based on a lot of things that I've seen, read, and discussed lately, it really has struck me that todays bishops, of whatever rank, and denomination for that matter, have lost the focus of their job as servant leaders in favor of a monarchical of their office. It is something to "shake your head and wonder" about,

Actually many bishops seem to think of themselves as CEOs of a sort of religious business enterprise.

Properly, a bishop is my father, and his authority is a paternal authority.

Fr. Serge

Слава Ісусу Христу!

I am not saying you are wrong, but does not charity begins at home? The local affect, or repels more than the far off “Ordinary”.

Just a layman's observation.

Perhaps there is an effect of people addressing one as "Master" over and over again?

Слава Ісусу Христу!

Many years ago and I mean many!!!! I was lucky enough to visit Romania after having visited ( Soviet ) Ukraine. In one small village, the Romanian Bishop ( and I can't remember his name ) was visiting the parish church.

In conversation with the village priest afertwards, I can remember ( and have never forgotten) that Father Gavril referred to the Bishop as "An icon that has left the frame and walks among us".

Wow! that was so long ago, but it is still in my head!

Z Bohom
Nycholaij