| -Further unfolding of End Times Mass-Apostasy: Stalin's phony, "Russian Church" his MP is absorbing Paris-Russ jurisdiction |
A document on the reunification of the Archdiocese of Orthodox churches of the Russian tradition in Western Europe with the Moscow Patriarchate will be signed on November 3 in the Russian capital. On the same day in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior will be held the first joint worship of the Archbishop of Dubna John (Renneto) with Patriarch Kirill. About this "NGR" said a source close to the archbishopric, but who wished to remain anonymous.True, in the schedule of the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, posted on the official website of the Moscow Patriarchate, these events are not yet available. But in Paris they already pack their bags.
The Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church on October 7 included the West European communities that expressed such a desire in the Moscow Patriarchate. “To determine that the Archbishopric of the Western European parishes of the Russian tradition, performing their salvific service in the historically established totality of its parishes, monasteries and church institutions, is now an integral part of the Moscow Patriarchate. To confirm the acceptance of the Moscow Patriarchate into the jurisdiction as part of the Archbishopric of clergy and parishes who have expressed such a desire, ”the statement said on the Russian Orthodox Church’s website. It is promised that the communities will retain their charter, financial independence, as well as “liturgical and pastoral features.”
On October 21, the head of the parishes of the Russian tradition, Archbishop John (Renneto), who transferred to the Russian Orthodox Church in mid-September with the title Dubninsky, appointed a clergy meeting to consider the decision of the Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate and begin preparations for the next general assembly of his community. “This assembly is important because it will allow us to immediately make significant progress in comparison with our recent situation, which is that we can finally endow our archbishopric with episcopal council and thus elect two auxiliary bishops, which the Patriarchate of Constantinople did not allow us to do ", - quotes the words of Renneto official portal of the former West European exarchate of the parishes of the Russian tradition. The exarchate, recall, was abolished by the decree of the Patriarch of Bartholomew of Constantinople (Ecumenical) in November 2018.
“This is not just a church act - most likely this is the last act that closes the drama of revolution, the Civil War, the drama of the division of our people. Therefore, today our prayer to the Lord is a prayer of thanksgiving for the fact that He, having led our people in Russia and in dispersion through divisions, through unrest, through persecution and upheaval, today opens up the opportunity for us to feel like a single people, united by a single Russian Orthodox Church ” - September 15, declared Patriarch Kirill. After the meeting of the Synod, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church noted that the transition of the archdiocese to his omophorion was possible because “a lot has changed in Western Europe” and “in the life of our country and our church.” Probably, under the changes, the patriarch meant the dismantling of the socialist system and the democratization of Russia.
The situation today with the West European communities of the Russian tradition, partly recalls the circumstances of the reunification of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad with the Russian Orthodox Church in 2007. True, the negotiation process on the possibility of joint participation in the service has been going on for several years, and not 10 months, as in the case of the archbishopric. Then about 30% of the clergy and laity of the ROCOR opposed unification with the Moscow Patriarchate, considering this process "premature." Despite this, the “Act of Canonical Communion” was signed on May 17, 2007 in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior by the then Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexy II and the ROCA’s First Hierarch Metropolitan Laurus (Shkurla) in the presence of Russian President Vladimir Putin. The document provided for the broad autonomy of the ROCA and the status of a self-governing church. It was declared independent "in the affairs of pastoral, administrative, economic, property and civil", while the "Local Church and Bishops' Councils of the Russian Orthodox Church" became the "higher authority of the church authority" for the ROCA. The First Hierarch of the ROCOR is elected by its Council of Bishops and approved by the Moscow Patriarch and the Synod of the ROC.
Those who refused to become part of the Moscow Patriarchate joined other “autonomous” or old-style churches not recognized by world Orthodoxy, or even went into schism: they created their own church structures and synods. A vivid example of this is the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad under the omophorion of Metropolitan Agafangel (ROCOR (A)). This religious association formed around the former and almost the only bishop of the ROCOR at that time, who did not accept reunification with the ROC, Metropolitan Agafangel (Pashkovsky). Along with them there were ROCOR (L), ROCOR (B), ROCOR (BB), etc. Now these organizations are marginalized.
In order not to repeat the fate of the unrecognized “fragments” of the ROCA and not only preserve the archbishopric, but also have the canonical jurisdiction of any of the Orthodox churches of the world, clergy and laity of the former Russian exarchate refused to consider proposals to create their own local Orthodox church in Western Europe. However, they did not reach a unanimous opinion on under whose omophorion the Moscow, Constantinople or Romanian patriarchs go. In 2007, parishes breaking away from the ROCA did not have such a wide choice of jurisdictions. Moscow forbade them to serve, the Orthodox Church of America (OCA) could not take it because of close contacts and support from the Russian Orthodox Church, and the Ecumenical, and all other patriarchates, were not very interested in the life of these communities. And there were no such complications of inter-Orthodox relations, as now, at that time, therefore, there was no reason to take someone to yourself without holiday letters and to the peak.
In November 2018, according to official statistics, the West European archbishopric had about 110 parishes, 123 priests and 42 deacons. According to the statements of John (Renneto), so far “almost 60 parishes” and about 90 clergy have joined the Moscow Patriarchate. In the Russian Orthodox Church, these figures were called the "absolute majority." Most of the reunited communities are located in France and Italy. During the time that the clergy of the archbishopric reflected on their future and assembled assemblies, almost all the parishes in Scandinavia passed into the jurisdiction of the Constantinople, Serbian, Bulgarian and Romanian churches. There were approximately 15 communities and communities.
According to information provided by the Greek website Romfea, on October 8, at least 7 out of about 20 parishes of the dean’s office in the UK and Ireland have already announced that they remain under the protectorate of Constantinople. This decision is understandable if we recall the so-called Sourozh schism of 2006. Then, by the decision of the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, the special status of the Diocese of Sourozh was allegedly abolished, which, it was alleged, was originally spelled out in its charter from the time it was formed in 1962. True, the Moscow Patriarchate emphasized that this charter was never recognized by Moscow, and in some points contradicted the ROC’s charter. Because of this, the then head of the parishes, Bishop of St. Sergius Vasily (Osborne) moved with part of the clergy and laity to the Patriarchate of Constantinople, and they joined the West European exarchate of the parishes of the Russian tradition. Fears that this time again Moscow would violate its promises of broad autonomy for the archbishopric, apparently, forced the British priests of the Russian tradition to remain under Constantinople.
It is known that on October 5, the head of the Gallic Metropolis of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, Metropolitan Emanuel Adamakis met with believers of those parishes who refused to follow John (Renneto). According to orthodoxie.com, the meeting was attended by “just over 50 people representing 20 parishes in France”. Some other clergymen who could not come in person expressed "their support and solidarity with the participants in the meeting." This was the first conversation with the French metropolitan since the decision to abolish exarchate. By the way, Adamakis himself advocated the liquidation of the archdiocese as a special administrative-territorial unit.However, at the meeting, he once again confirmed his proposal to create a special “Russian Vicariate” for all the parishes that came under his jurisdiction within the metropolis. True, this applies only to the communities of France.
Despite the fact that no official documents have yet been signed, the issue of redistribution of real estate is already on the agenda. According to the charter of the former exarchate, each parish included in it was an independent legal entity, which owned movable and immovable property. For example, Alexander Nevsky Cathedral on Darou Street in Paris is likely to be under the Russian Orthodox Church, since most of its clergy have expressed a desire to reunite with Moscow. But in relation to the St. Sergius Compound in the capital of France, on the territory of which the Orthodox Theological Institute and the temple building are located, friction has already begun. Adherents of Constantinople have accused the archbishop of Dubninsky in the "raider" capture of the complex. On October 8, on the day of the memory of Sergius of Radonezh, Renneto, at the invitation of the Dean of the Theological Institute, Archpriest Nikolai Chernokrak arrived at the courtyard to participate in the feast day. However, the parish rector Archpriest Vladislav Trembovelsky did not know the probability of this visit. Moreover, rumors appeared that morning that he had allegedly been removed from his post because he opposed the idea of moving under the omophorion of the Moscow Patriarch. The video of their meeting shows how Trembovelsky tells Renneto that his visit to the temple is “not very appropriate,” because the community has not yet decided whose omophor to choose.However, Archbishop John, repeating several times: “This is my property, this is my church!”, Still passes to the cathedral. The Paris clergyman declined to comment on the situation in a conversation with “NGR”, explaining that “most likely this case will not be considered between the parties, but in the justice authorities”. Trembovelsky added that "he has not yet received official confirmation of his resignation." As for the future parish, then most likely "it will go under Constantinople." At the same time, the administration of the theological institute, headed by the dean, supported the transition to the Russian Orthodox Church. A communiqué published on October 10 on the website of the Gallic Metropolitanate of the Patriarchate of Constantinople states, in particular, that "Archbishop John exerts pressure on the clergy" and that Metropolitan Emanuel Adamakis, who is considered the locum tenens of the archbishopric (as part of the Patriarchate of Constantinople), "strongly condemns these actions."
For some clergy and parishioners of the former exarchate loyal to Moscow, the transition of the structure, albeit not in its entirety, to the omophorion of the Moscow Patriarch is the first but already real step towards the further creation of a separate metropolitan district of Russian Orthodox jurisdictions. Such an idea hovered back in 2003, Archpriest Nikolai Balashov, deputy chairman of the Department for External Church Relations (DECR) of the Moscow Patriarchate, recalled “NGR”. “Then Patriarch Alexy II turned to all the bishops of the Russian Church or Russian tradition, who carry out their ministry in the countries of Western Europe, with a proposal to create a single metropolis. This was four years before the reunification of the Moscow Patriarchate with the Church Abroad, when there was still no canonical and Eucharistic communion between us. And even meaningful negotiations on the restoration of such communication began later, at the end of 2003. And the appeal of the patriarch was April 1, 2003. We had relations with the archbishopric, we served with them. But then a real rapprochement did not occur due to the position taken by the newly elected new head of the archbishopric Gabriel (de Wilder). And the offer of the late patriarch was based on the negotiations that were held for several years with Archbishop Sergius (Konovalov) and his representatives. Then the creation of a single Russian metropolitanate in Western Europe was discussed. There was an idea that the then head of the Diocese of Sourozh, Metropolitan Anthony (Bloom), as the eldest and most respected hierarch, will head this metropolis. But in the end, the project was never realized, ”said Balashov.
The church diplomat also added that not so long ago, when negotiations were underway to reunite the archdiocese with the Moscow Patriarchate, the question of creating a metropolitanate was again raised: “The idea requires further discussion. But it will not be so simple to implement, because decades have passed and during this time not only separate administrative structures have developed, but also many peculiar traditions. Speaking from the point of view of canon law, it is certainly logical that there should be not three structures on one and the same territory in Western Europe, but one. But while we took as a basis the principle that guided us when we were reunited with the Church Abroad, we must not break what has gradually matured for decades. Mutual understanding between the three historically established Russian structures is needed now. And over time, when the conditions prevail, they will be able to find complete unity. "
Now in Western Europe, the Moscow Patriarchate is represented by the diocese of the ROCOR with almost 30 communities, the patriarchal exarchate, formed in December 2018 and includes five dioceses, a vicariatry and 120 parishes, and now several dozen communities of the archdiocese. First Vice-President of the Center for Political Technologies Alexei Makarkin believes that for a long time all three structures will “live their own lives”: “How to unite, for example,“ foreigners ”and“ Eulogians ”(based on the founder of the archbishopric Evlogii (Georgievsky). -“ NGR ")? These are very different traditions. One is associated with the Jordanville Seminary in the USA, the other with the St. Sergius Institute in Paris. They do not have a single ideology. For example, back in the 1930s, ROCOR officially condemned the views of Archpriest Sergiy Bulgakov, one of the founders and professor of the St. Sergius Institute in Paris. Therefore, I think that they are unlikely to strive for unification themselves, but will live their own inner life. Moreover, this is no reason. When, for example, the Orthodox Church of America (OCA) was formed, there were all sorts of interests, starting with the fact that it was a big project that was significant not only for the Russian Orthodox Church, but also for the entire Russian state, including on political issues . Moreover, in exchange for autocephaly, the American Church recognized that the Japanese Orthodox Church is part of the Moscow Patriarchate. After all, the Japanese Church had a small clergy group oriented toward Moscow, and there were a majority under American church jurisdiction. And then this majority joined the Moscow Patriarchate on the basis of autonomy, while the small group did not reunite with the large Japanese Church and remained part of the Russian Orthodox Church. In the case of the unification of the ROCOR, the archdiocese and the patriarchal exarchate, there is nothing of the kind. Maybe in a few generations they will come closer, when the topic of ideological confrontations becomes the property of church history, but even that is not a fact. ” “Of course, we differ both from the Church Abroad and from the Moscow Patriarchate. We all have special incarnations. But they all express one nature. I am sure that there will be a union, but not so soon, ”Archbishop Archpriest Zhivko Panev assured NGR.
Makarkin believes that there is no need to fear the transformation of the archdiocese into an ordinary diocese.“Here we can recall the experience of 2007, when the reunification of the Russian Church with foreigners raised many questions. Will Moscow dominate? Would she put her man at the head of the ROCA? More than 10 years have now passed, and Metropolitan Laurus has already died, and at the head of the ROCA is his successor Metropolitan Hilarion. Moreover, a funny story happened recently when a paper came from the Church Abroad on the ordination of two bishops. And one of them, the ordination of Archimandrite Alexander (Bel), was then disavowed. And Moscow simply stamped what came from there. That is, it shows that Moscow is not imposing anything on anyone, ”the political scientist says.
According to the expert, it is not necessary to consider that the accession of the parishes of the Russian tradition occurred only "in spite" to Patriarch Bartholomew for the creation of the PCU. “Perhaps, in spite of Bartholomew's form of accession - without holiday letters and with a demonstration, as if the Ecumenical Patriarchate did not exist.But Moscow had long had plans for reunification with the Eulogians, and Constantinople only helped them to implement them. ” Makarkin suggested that the accession of the archbishopric, including the St. Sergius Theological Institute, is very beneficial for Moscow. “The St. Sergius Institute is a brand that the Greeks were not very interested in. For them, the names of Zenkovsky, Bulgakov, Florovsky are not so great. And in the modern Russian Church, a tendency has emerged to return to the traditions of the Council of 1917-1918. The demonstrative reactionaryness of some priests is actually an answer to the trauma of the 1990s, when the temples began to return, and the great country collapsed. And just this tradition, the guardian of which the archbishopric is today, can become an alternative to it. ”
Comments
# RE: Moscow future of Parisian churches - Metropolitan Agafangel 10/16/2019 09:58
The review article, and, probably, therefore, there is not a word about the reasons that cause these divisions and rapprochements, unfortunately.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Guest comments MAYBE can be made by email.
joannahigginbotham@runbox.com
Anonymous comments will not be published. Daniel will not see unpublished comments. If you have a message for him, you need to contact him directly.
oregdan@hotmail.com