|
ST. PETERSBURG:
Deacon Nikolai Savchenko clarifies the text of the Seminar
of the Office of External Church Affairs of the Moscow Patriarchate
on the relationship between the Russian Church and the State
The Relationship of the Russian Orthodox Church and the State
in the 1920’s and 30’s.
The official website of the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian
Orthodox Church (http://www.russian-orthodox-church.org.ru/nr207196.htm)
published a report on the seminar on the relationship of the
Russian Orthodox Church and the State in the 1920’s and
30’s, paying close attention to the relationship between
the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside
of Russia. This seminar was organized by the Synodal Theological
Committee of the Office of External Church Relations of the
MP on 27 May 2002. The Minutes of the conference were confirmed
by the Synod of the MP on 18 July 2002. Unfortunately, this
theological conference, touching upon the question of the
relationship between the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian
Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of
Russia did not examine or take into consideration the following
important points, which were always paramount and decisive
for the the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia in its
attitude towards the the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian
Orthodox Church:
1. Metropolitan Sergius was not the First Hierarch of the
Russian Church, but had the authority from the First Hierarch,
Metropolitan Peter of Krutitsa to conduct current ecclesiastical
affairs. The First Hierarch Metropolitan Peter himself, along
with two other locum tenenses protested some of the actions
of Metropolitan Sergius, including the formation of a Synod
of the Moscow Patriarchate. Breaking off relations with Metr.
Sergius but remaining in communion with Metr. Peter, the Russian
Orthodox Church Outside of Russia did not separate itself
from all of the Russian Church but only from that part which
permitted canonical and moral sins.
2. The Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate, created not by a
Council of the entire Russian Church and not even by an ukase
of Metropolitan Peter of Krutitsa, but by the decision of
Metropolitan Sergius alone, having no basis in authority,
is the supreme ecclesiastical authority only over those dioceses,
parishes and communities which are under his rule, but not
over the entire Russian Orthodox Church, which includes in
itself the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. The
parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia
within Russia and the parishes of the True Orthodox Church
do not violate the canonical territory of the Russian Orthodox
Church, since they belong to the other part of the local Russian
Orthodox Church and canonically follow the many New Martyrs
and Confessors of Russia.
3. The Russian Orthodox
Church Outside of Russia accused Metr. Sergius and the Moscow
Patriarchate not for their effort to improve relations with
the state, but for their agreement to sacrifice the Church
to enslavement of the State and for their demand to support
the state according to conscience. The events of 1927 led
to the handing over of the Church’s authority to atheists,
whose primary goal was the rooting out of the Faith. This
violated one of the main principles of the Church: its God-given
freedom from hostile powers.
4. The Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia and those
who separated from Metr. Sergius rejected not the principle
of transferring bishops, but the fact that these transfers
were manifested by order of those fighting against God and
in their interests.
5. The decisions and appeals of the Councils of the Russian
Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, directed against communism,
were not political statements but statements on fundamental
religious and spiritual/moral questions. For the Orthodox
Church, God-fighting communism is Antichristianity, not plain
politics.
6. The interrelationship of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside
of Russia and the authorities in Germany and other countries
were always founded upon the principles of the freedom and
independence of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia
from these authorities, in contrast to the enslavement by
the Soviet state of the leadership of the MP of the Russian
Orthodox Church.
7. The Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia became somewhat
isolated from the Local Orthodox Churches solely as a result
of pressure on the part of the Soviet state and the coerced
leadership of the MP of the ROC, therefore, recriminations
for the isolation from the Local Churches in which the Russian
Orthodox Church Outside of Russia found itself must be directed
towards the Soviet state and the executors of its will. From
Point 4 of the Seminar of the OECA: “Suspensions imposed
by Metr. Sergius did not assume the character of sentences
by ecclesiastical court, but were preliminary decisions in
accordance with the canon rules for ecclesiastical court,
a fact confirmed by the subsequent canonization of some of
those who were suspended (including some of the so-called
“non-commemorators”).” Wonderful words! In
other words, the suspensions by Metr. Sergius of the hierarchs
of the True Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church
Outside of Russia were not proper suspensions recognized by
the whole Church. It might even be said that they did not
exist. From Point 15 of the Seminar, “The fears connected
to the fact that Metr. Sergius and his successors on the first
hierarch’s cathedra of Moscow sinned somehow against
the truth of Christ cannot be dispelled through purely historical
or canonical arguments. This is a matter of Christian conscience,
but all Christians, both in abroad and in the homeland, are
called upon to manifest this judgment.” More wonderful
words! This is an admission that it is impossible to refute
the accusations of Metr. Sergius. One can only speak of the
force of accusation or about condescension. At the end of
the document, however, there is a step backwards. In the final
phrase are the words: “reunification of the church communities
abroad with the Mother Church.” Yet in the Brotherly
Epistle of the Synod of the MP it states that the children
of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia are already
the children of the Mother Church, so what is the Mother Church?
It is not only the MP of the ROC, but the entire Russian Church,
that is, the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia and
the True Orthodox Church.
Deacon Nikolai Savchenko
|
