http://orthodoxengland.org.uk/ocarocor.htm

ROCOR and the OCA

Introduction

Recent concelebrations between the Metropolitans of ROCOR and the OCA have surprised some. It seems surprising to us that some should be surprised: both Metropolitans are hierarchs of the Orthodox Church, therefore they are free to concelebrate. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile considering the three areas which cause some to be surprised.

Why Surprise?

Firstly, there is the fact that the OCA (not then called that) broke away from ROCOR over sixty years ago. That it did so in highly politicised circumstances naturally caused scandal at the time, but since then the situation has changed. The breakaway was caused by different attitudes towards the Mother-Church in Russia, which at the time was not free. However, today it is free: therefore we should leave historians to mull over the rights and wrongs that caused the scandal at the time. Today, they are not relevant.

Secondly, as regards the canonical status of the OCA, the fact is that even the Local Churches that do not recognise the autocephaly of the OCA still concelebrate with it. The fact of concelebration does not mean that we necessarily have the same view of that ‘autocephaly’. For example, we know many clerics, including hierarchs of the Patriarchate of Moscow, the institution which granted that autocephaly in very different political circumstances over forty years ago, who consider that it was a mistake. That does not stop them from allowing the OCA to concelebrate with them.

Thirdly, there is the calendar problem: over three-quarters of OCA parishes use the Catholic (so-called ‘new’) calendar for the fixed feasts. This is not a problem, as the concelebrations with ROCOR took place on the Orthodox (so-called ‘old’) calendar. In the Western European Diocese of ROCOR we ALWAYS allowed those who used the new calendar for the fixed feasts to concelebrate with us (though we did not concelebrate with them, thus ensuring that we never used the new calendar). Such concelebrations in Western Europe concerned mainly those who had broken away from ROCOR and formed the Paris Jurisdiction, a situation in many ways parallel to the OCA, only the Paris Jurisdiction is centred in France, the OCA centred in North America and the Paris Jurisdiction broke away from ROCOR for political reasons even before the OCA did so. In other words, there is nothing new in such concelebrations.

The Identity of ROCOR

Beyond these three considerations, there are those who pose the question: If ROCOR and the OCA concelebrate, then what is the difference between the two, what is the distinctive identity of each? It is not for me to define the exact identity of such a diverse organisation as the OCA. However, it generally tends to be the case that the OCA mainly uses a rather modern form of liturgical English, it generally refuses to acknowledge the Russian Orthodox origins of most of its parishes and people, and it has largely adopted many American Protestant customs, for example, a certain liberal and ecumenical ethos, communion without confession, lack of vigil services, the ‘new’ calendar, pews in churches and a ‘democratic’, anti-episcopal lay outlook. I will say no more: it is for OCA members to say more.

As regards the distinctive identity of ROCOR, I can however make three points:

Firstly, ROCOR unashamedly proclaims that we confess the unadulterated Russian Orthodox Tradition, without any admixtures from the Protestant, or any other, world. It is important to know this because the above is also true in ROCOR parishes that use only or at least partially English, French, Spanish, German, Indonesian etc. Faithfulness to the authentic, universal Tradition which we have inherited counts for us and we refuse to modernise ourselves ‘American-style’, ‘Western-style’ or any other ‘style’.

Secondly, and following on from the first point, ROCOR unashamedly proclaims that we confess the universal Orthodox Tradition of the Russian Orthodox Church. We have not narrowed ourselves into a particular set of customs of a small minority of the Orthodox world. For instance, we are not narrowly ‘American’, with a set of ethnic, ‘autocephalist’ values. We are part of the now free Russian Orthodox Church, not 90,000, or even 9 million, but 164 million, strong.

Thirdly, and following on from the second point, ROCOR unashamedly proclaims that we are linked to the Centre, to the Russian Orthodox Church, whose direct canonical territory covers one sixth of the planet, and more if we count territories like China, Japan or Thailand, where Russian Orthodoxy is the only Orthodox Tradition which has historic roots and can build a future. We believe that in the modern world, it is very important for us to be linked, although remaining politically independent, with the Church of the New Martyrs, and not cut off from it in isolation.

Conclusion

We believe that those who would criticise the concelebrations between ROCOR and the OCA (and also with the Paris Jurisdiction) are mistaken. First of all, concelebration - just like friendship - does not mean that we agree about everything. The concept that because we do not agree we cannot be friends is utterly unChristian. Secondly, we believe that it is the duty of ROCOR to witness to our uncompromised Church, Faith and Tradition as ambassadors to the outside world (that is, to the world outside Russia). And we can do this by inviting others to concelebrate with us. Through us, the OCA, like parishes of the Paris Jurisdiction, enter into canonical concelebration with the wider and deeper Tradition of the Russian Orthodox Church. And that is an essential part of our missionary witness.

30 November/13 December
Holy Apostle Andrew


To those of you who follow such things, this is an incredible "softening" of viewpoints previously held. May such occurrences happen more often, Dai Bozhiye!

Alexandr

Well-said.

Many years,

Neil

I thought most of the OCA originated not from Russian Orthodoxy, but Slavic Greek Catholicism.

Is this priest of the Old-Rite and does ROCOR only practice the pre-Nikonian Old Rite? If not, does that mean it is because of "admixture" with the Hellenic world or Greek-style?

I find this unusual to say the least. How can these two jurisdictions claim to be in full Communion and NOT concelebrate? Shouldn't it be a given? I would expect this language when it comes to Catholics or Oriental Orthodox, not those within the same Communion

Two observations:

1. History is a lie agreed upon.

2. (to paraphrase) A Church is a community united by shared misconceptions about their common past.

Are we doomed, then, to misconceptions about ourselves, or is there someone who can unravel it all for us?

I believe, as does Father Robert Taft, that (1) can be transcended, assuming that one is devoted to truth, is willing to work hard to unravel the sources from the interpretations that have wound themselves around the sources, and is willing to let the chips fall where they may. Only by transcending (1) can we change (2)--or as Taft puts it, "History can liberate us from the shackles of the past".

Don't want to lead this thread too far afield, but, how can history liberate us from the shackles of the past if it is an agreed upon lie? Or am I being too literal and missing the implied cynicism? Do we unravel the sources from the interpretations they have been wound in only to wind our own interpretations around them? I guess we have to agree what the agreed upon lie is and transcend that, and hope we've discovered the right history.

Like the unadulterated Russian Orthodox Western Rite!



Fr. David

^ Good one! ROTFL!

Yes. Was something funny?

I don't get it. We offer a miniscule number of former Protestants a rite that they are more comfortable with to bring them into the Church, and we are laughed at. What if I had the same sort of chuckle about the Eastern Rites under Rome's pastoral care or those that recently entered Orthodoxy from the mantle of Rome? What, Rome can have an Eastern Rite and it's Hunky-Dory, but we have a infinitesimally smaller Western Rite and we are the subject of derision? From fellow Orthodox? And for those under the omophor of Constantinople and Johnstown to laugh at the liturgical practices of ROCOR? Ἰατρέ, θεράπευσον σεαυτόν!

Alexandr

I'm fond of γνῶθι σεαυτόν. Rome doesn't have an Eastern Rite; the Catholic Church is a communion of churches, some of whom use Eastern Rites. Are the Orthodox, ROCOR in particular, in communion with any churches that are of a Western Rite? Furthermore, the Catholic Church (recognized as those in communion with the sister church of Rome) has always been a communion that has included the Eastern Church.

From the Orthodox viewpoint, when the West fell into error, all the West fell as well as some in the East, some of which fell at the same time as Rome, others accepted error later. So to answer your question, no Orthodox Church is in communion with any Western Church. But to get back to the subject at hand, what if the Sarum Rite does grow and develop into a full Western Orthodox Church? Granted, I am unfamiliar with Western Rites, and don't fully understand the attraction, but I am an Easterner, and view things through the eyes of one. But if it is God pleasing, who am I to cast obstacles in their way? At least they have left Protestantism behind and have entered the Church.

I should not have chuckled at the reference made by Ctetc. It was uncharitable and wrong to have expressed my feelings so harshly. However, the irony of the juxtaposition of your comments along with those of Ctetc just struck me as amusing.

There are two reasons why we find it amusing. We undoubtedly view the Western Rite Orthodox from our unique perspective as the descendants of Uniates. Now I know there are differences in the 'raison d'etre' of the Western Rite folks vis a vis the Greek Catholics, yet somehow the pictures of them and what we see of the services constructed for them have an eerie sort of reverse resonance with us. Hard to explain, I suppose. I guess it is not unlike the reaction your ROCOR forebearers had when confronted with Bishop Orestes dressed like a Greek Catholic prelate upon his 1938 return from Constantinople.

The real reason that the sentiment is amusing is when it is read with your bold statement that ROCOR "unashamedly proclaims that we confess the unadulterated Russian Orthodox Tradition." Perhaps they do, I don't know as the Russian tradition is not mine - nor the only one within Orthodoxy. ROCOR in the past was incredibly dismissive of the other Orthodox and how all of us, not just ACROD but everyone else, never met their standard of being Orthodox in terms of external pieties, rubrics, singing....you name it. In other words, if you didn't meet some idealized expectation of accepting traditionalistic Russianism as the norm you were never good enough. Now I know that by the will of God, that extremism has changed, but the hurts of the past are still fresh.

Somehow the Antiochians coming up with a Western Rite seems less, how shall I say it, incongruous with the sponsoring organizations 'mission statement', for lack of a better word.

I hope that my feeble effort to explain my reaction puts some perspective into my initial comments. Healing is a long process that works both ways and we all will stumble from time to time.

My brother David, I am not chastising you or Chtec, it is just that I see this proffered across other forums as well. Yes, I admit, we in ROCOR can be stubborn. Bullheaded if you will. It is because we have had to be, just to survive. But unfortunately, our reputation in the English speaking world was irreparably harmed from 1965 to 1987, when Holy Transfiguration Monastery and associated parishes were under Metropolitans +Philaret and +Vitali's omophor. That is when the rancor in America started. Were you aware that Archbishop Iakovos of the GOA performed a Parastas over the remains of Metropolitan Anastassy in 1965? Were you aware that almost the entire original brotherhood of Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville New York were in exile in Ladomirova, Czechoslovakia from 1924 until 1944, and of the great love and friendship that blossomed between the local Carpatho-Russian peoples and the simple monks? (Just as a side note, I remember once seeing Archmandrite +Cyprian, the great iconographer walk up to a group of visitors, and greeting them with a "як ше маш"! I didn't know what to think!) A lot of the rancor that existed through the 70's and 80's was due to the simple naivety of the Russian bishops, not speaking English, were really caught unaware as to what the Panteleimonites were doing. With the Boston monastery going off into schism and the very small, but vocal reactionary wing leaving after the rapprochement with the MP, things have again returned to the way they were pre-65. The Jordanville Prayer Book is still unmatched in the English speaking world. ROCOR has printed the vast majority of Orthodox texts and translations into English in the English speaking world. Yes we love what Russia was and what we hope will be again, but we love Christ and His Church more. That is why we start more missions than any of the other Orthodox jurisdictions in this country, even though, numerically, we are one of the smallest jurisdictions. I keep hearing of the Russianess this and the Russianess that, but is that not the same of any ethnic Church? Can you honestly say that we are more ethnic than say the Ukrainian Church, or the Greek? Of the last 7 bishops consecrated by ROCOR, only 2 were ethnically Russian. Probably 50%, maybe more, of our parishes here are English only or majority. And with the emphasis now on missionary work as opposed to simply preserving the Church, this number will grow. The only thing that we simply refuse to change, alter or manipulate is the Faith itself. We have been, at least here in the West, the guardians of Orthodoxy. One does not have to even ask what the position of ROCOR is on any given subject. It will be what the Orthodox Church teaches. That is a given.

If you have been hurt by the actions of some ROCOR people in the past I ask for your forgiveness. We have had some members say and do some stupid things, and we let Boston carry on far too long in my opinion. But know that we accept you and ACROD as brother Orthodox. Fully and completely. As a matter of fact, the last time The Kurskaya Mother of God was in Pittsburgh, I got a frantic phone call one Sunday afternoon, could I direct Bishop +George's cell attendant to the Cathedral in Johnstown, so that the ailing Metropolitan Nicholas of Blessed memory could venerate the Wonder Working Icon of the Theotokos. All the packed parishes in Pittsburgh waiting for Her were put on hold so that Vladika Nicholas, who was so sick, could venerate Her.

Yes, my Brother, some of the things that happened in the past were regrettable. And the hurt has gone both ways. I remember the case of where an elderly ROCOR member died, and the priest at the only local Orthodox Church would only say the Trisagion over him, as that particular priest viewed the ROCOR as being schismatic. We flew an elderly hieromonk 1200 miles to bury that poor man.

But I digress...

Not knowing which Calendar you are on, I wish you either a fruitful and spiritually edifying Fast, or a big Christos Razdajetse if you are celebrating the Nativity of our Lord this weekend.

Your Brother in Christ,
Alexandr