NEW ZION in BABYLON the Orthodox Church in the Twentieth Century
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NEW ZION IN BABYLON The Orthodox Church in the Twentieth Century PART 5. THE ZENITH OF ECUMENISM (1964-1990) Vladimir Moss Copyright: Vladimir Moss, 2012 CONTENTS A NEW ROCOR METROPOLITAN ......................................................................3 THE LIFTING OF THE ANATHEMAS...............................................................10 A SECOND ROMANIAN HIERARCHY.............................................................19 THE FALL OF THE SERBIAN CHURCH ...........................................................23 THE FREE SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH..................................................27 THE FALL OF THE BULGARIAN CHURCH.....................................................35 “THE HERESY OF HERESIES”...........................................................................37 MOSCOW AND THE METROPOLIA ................................................................43 THE THEOLOGY OF PEACE ..............................................................................46 THE COUNCILS OF 1971.....................................................................................49 THE ROCOR – GREEK OLDCALENDARIST UNION.....................................53 CAUCASIAN SAINTS...........................................................................................61 GREEK ZEALOTS AND ECUMENISTS.............................................................67 THE THIRD ALL-EMIGRATION COUNCIL.....................................................73 THE FALL OF THE DISSIDENTS .......................................................................84 THE GEORGIAN CHURCH.................................................................................90 “NIKODIMOVSCHINA”......................................................................................93 ARCHBISHOP MARK OF BERLIN.....................................................................99 ORTHODOXY AND PENTECOSTALISM ......................................................102 SUPER-ECUMENISM (1)...................................................................................105 THE ANATHEMA AGAINST ECUMENISM ..................................................108 THE DISINTEGRATION OF THE FLORINITE SYNOD................................116 THE ITALIAN AND PORTUGUESE CHURCHES .........................................125 THE UNION OF 1985 AND THE TSAKOS AFFAIR ......................................128 A NEW FLORINITE ARCHBISHOP .................................................................133 THE ECCLESIOLOGY OF METROPOLITAN CYPRIAN ..............................136 BOSTON SEPARATES .......................................................................................148 SUPER-ECUMENISM (2)...................................................................................156 ROCOR AND THE CATACOMBS ....................................................................161 GLASNOST’ AND PERESTROIKA...................................................................167 2 A NEW ROCOR METROPOLITAN On May 14/27, 1964, Metropolitan Anastasy retired (he died in 1965). His period as first hierarch represents a “holding operation”, a preservation of the status quo in a very difficult period interrupted by the chaos of the Second World War. It left certain important questions unanswered – questions which would have to be answered unambiguously sooner or later. But it at any rate kept the voice of opposition to the MP alive in the West. There was such animosity between the supporters of the two candidates for the vacant post, Archbishops Nicon and John Maximovich, that to avoid a schism Archbishop John withdrew his own candidature and put forward in his place the youngest hierarch, Philaret (Voznesensky), the vicar-bishop of Brisbane, who had arrived at the Council only because his ruling bishop was ill.1 The suggestion was then universally accepted, and Bishop Philaret was enthroned by Metropolitan Anastasy himself in a service that used the ancient text for the enthroning of a metropolitan of Moscow for the first time in centuries. The new metropolitan’s endurance of torture for Christ at the hands of the Japanese pagans in Manchuria has already been described. During the Soviet occupation he continued to show great courage, refusing to accept a Soviet passport or commemorate the authorities, although he unwillingly found himself in the Moscow Patriarchate. Later, the Chinese even unsuccessfully tried to blow up the confessor in the house in which he was living. Archimandrite Philaret left China in 1961, only after almost the whole of his flock had left Harbin. “While striving to guard my flock from Soviet falsehood and lies,” he recounted, “I myself sometimes felt inexpressibly oppressed – to the point that I several times came close to the decision to leave altogether – to cease serving. And I was stopped only by the thought of my flock: how could I leave these little ones? If I went and stopped serving, that would mean that they would have to enter into service to the Soviets and hear prayers for the forerunners of the Antichrist – ‘Lord, preserve them for many years,’ etc. This stopped me and forced me to carry out my duty to the end. “And when, finally, with the help of God I managed to extract myself from red China, the first thing I did was turn to the First Hierarch of the Russian Church Abroad, Metropolitan Anastasy, with a request that he consider me again to be in the jurisdiction of the Russian Church Abroad. Vladyka Metropolitan replied with mercy and love, and immediately blessed me to serve in Hong Kong already as a priest of the Synodal jurisdiction, and pointed out that every church server passing into this jurisdiction from the 1 According to one source, Archbishop John’s candidature was especially opposed by Archbishop Anthony of Geneva. The two men had never been friends… 3 jurisdiction of Moscow must give a special penitential declaration to the effect that he is sorry about his (albeit involuntary) stay in the Moscow jurisdiction. I did this immediately.” Soon Fr. Philaret flew to Australia and arrived in Sydney. The ruling Archbishop of Australia accepted him with joy and love, and already in the first weeks of Fr. Philaret’s stay in Australia began to speak about the possibility of ordaining him as a Bishop. In 1963 he was ordained Bishop of Brisbane, a vicariate of the Australian diocese. In his sermon at his nomination as Bishop Archimandrite Philaret said to the Archpastors who were present: “Holy Hierarchs of God! I have thought and felt much in these last days, I have reviewed and examined the whole of my life – and… I see, on the one hand, a chain of innumerable benefactions from God, and on the other – the countless number of my sins… And so raise your hierarchical prayers for my wretchedness in this truly terrible hour of my ordination, that the Lord, the First of Pastors, Who through your holiness is calling me to the height of this service, may not deprive me, the sinful and wretched one, of a place and lot among His chosen ones… “One hierarch-elder, on placing the hierarchical staff in the hands of a newly appointed bishop, said to him: ‘Do not be like a milestone on the way, that points out for others the road ahead, but itself remains in its place…’ Pray also for this, Fathers and Archpastors, that in preaching to others, I myself may not turn out to be an idle slave.” The new metropolitan faced a daunting task. For he had, on the one hand, to lead his Church in decisively denouncing the apostasy of World Orthodoxy, communion with which could no longer be tolerated. And on the other, he had to preserve unity among the members of his own Synod, some of whom were in spirit closer to “World Orthodoxy” than True Orthodoxy… The first Official Epistle of a Hierarchical Council of ROCOR under her new metropolitan was dated June 4/17, 1964, and appeared to continue the line adopted by Metropolitan Anastasy in relation to the MP: “They [the God- opposing Communists] have contrived a new, truly diabolical plan in their war against the faithful: it is now forbidden by the godless government of the USSR for children and young men and women from the ages of 3 to 18 to be allowed into God's churches and to be communed with the Body and Blood of Christ. And in order to mock the Church even more, this directive by the authorities has to be enforced by the clergymen themselves – they are the ones who must prohibit youth from approaching the Chalice of Christ and demand the removal of children and youth from the churches"…. 4 "But the true situation is this: not many clergymen are left in the USSR, not many open churches are left, the faithful rarely can attend services And now even at these rare services, which Christians, if they are not extremely old men and women, attend at the risk of being tagged by the active Soviet "watchers" and thus lose their jobs--parents cannot bring their young children, who, in their tender childhood and youth, so need graceful communion to the Fountain of life--to Christ the Savior, just as young little saplings need the light and the warmth of the sun." This Epistle appeared to accept the MP as a grace-bearing institution – nearly thirty years after the leading hierarchs of the Catacomb Church had rejected that position. However, in his 1965 Epistle “to Orthodox Bishops and all who hold dear the Fate of the Russian Church”, Metropolitan Philaret gave the first signs that he was going to adopt a more uncompromising approach in relation to the MP. This Epistle is also significant for the much more prominent position