ROCOR Western Rite Charter

[PilgrimMichelangelo]

Comments from Catholics on the new Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russian Western Rite Charter:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[CathBoy1]

Catholics have Eastern Catholicism and the Eastern Orthodox have Western Orthodoxy…

…IMHO the EO should have Western Churches in communion with the rest of Orthodoxy, just as Catholicism has Eastern Churches in communion with them…

…however as an aside, the EO have in the past called Eastern Catholics uniates (as a derogatory description) yet Western Orthodoxy seems to present a similar situation from the other side of the coin, so perhaps it comes across as a bit hypocritical, all things considered.

 

[Genesis315]

Interesting, some years back ROCOR suppressed their Western rite (or at least new ordinations to it) after having problems with some of its clergy. This looks like they’re trying again.

For what it’s worth, and with a grain of salt, this conservative Anglican site accuses them of “scraping the bottom of the vagante barrel in its effort to pretend to be a universal church” citing some questionable histories of their clergy and a lack of real background checks, etc. for who they ordain on relatively short notice. The charter does read like something you’d see on a vagante type site (whether a Catholic- or EO-style group). At least this article’s author says they have not really changed the ordination practices which led to their problems the first go around. Some of this could also be some sour grapes as ROCOR’s Western Rite seems to attract mostly conservative Anglican and PNCC-types from what history I can find on them (disaffected Catholics less so, surprisingly).

https://virtueonline.org/rocors-anglican-scandal-continues-and-it-gets-worse-part-2

 

[Bithynian]

conservative Anglican

There’s a lot of odd factors at play here Anglicans vis-a-vis EO.

(1) As the author pointed out, there is an increasing narrative amongst many Anglophone EO that pre-Great Schism UK was Orthodox, and hence all its prior heritage (including architecture such as Westminster Abbey) is only rightfully considered the patrimony of Orthodox, not Catholic or Anglicans. There is also the narrative of the ‘death of the West’ providing opportunities for the East to regain its inheritance by ‘reclaiming’ the West.

(2) From my reading of GO and RO literature, there is - I think - a latent impression amongst EO that Anglicans are Hellenophiles/Russophiles who are deeply, secretly and perhaps even unknowingly desiring to return to Orthodoxy.

(3) The above is not a self-invented fantasy of EO. For most of the 20th century, I think many learned Anglicans concocted an overly-romanticised image of Russian Orthodoxy (and other EO churches) as that mystical landscape of yurodivje (holy fools) and polychromatic onion domes. That sort of fetishisation of EO resulted in a few generations of scholars and clergy like Rowan Williams (previous Abp. of Canterbury) whose career was established on interpreting RO theologians such as Bulgakov and Lossky.

(4) Relations between Anglicans and ex-Anglicans (i.e. those received into the Catholic Church and the EO churches) are incredibly toxic. Worse than the enmity between those Catholics who embrace V2 and those Catholics who repudiate it. There’s an endless litany of blogs and websites featuring Anglicans and ex-Anglicans trading the most poisonous of barbs, and it makes the arguments on this forum look like a polite disagreement about whether the milk or the tea should be first added to the cup.

I’m a former Anglican, but my departure was on good terms and I’m fortunately able to maintain some distance from all the prevailing nastiness.

 

[Dovekin]

My reaction:

ROCOR still exists? Why?

 

[CathBoy1]

disaffected Catholics less so, surprisingly

I’m not really surprised by this…

…it seems to me that “disaffected Catholics” that look towards Eastern Orthodoxy are drawn in by the eastern (Byzantine) traditions, therefore “disaffected Catholics” that head East, (for the most part) head for one of the many EO churches instead of the much smaller Western community’s within Orthodoxy.

 

[PilgrimMichelangelo]

ROCOR still exists? Why?

Short story: Communism, jurisdictionalism, impaired communion with most of Orthodox Church except with Serbian and Jerusalem Patriarchates, and reunification with the Moscow Patriarchate in 2007.

Oddly enough, here in the U.S. they are usually the most traditionalist, and broadest tradition of Orthodoxy that we have.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

…IMHO the EO should have Western Churches in communion with the rest of Orthodoxy, just as Catholicism has Eastern Churches in communion with them…

Orthodox follow principle of Territory = Bishop… or at least in theory they do. So if one Eparchy had Western Rite Bishop there wouldn’t be any Eastern Rite Bishop. At this point there are no Western Orthodox Bishops to my knowledge. Anyhow, their claim to be as First Western Christians is somewhat funny even from Orthodox perspective. If Orthodox truly believe that it is Western to use leavened bread for Eucharist then why do Western Orthodox use something that is meant to look like unleavened bread while being leavened? Why not just use leavened bread? Same thing happens with most practices… they take Catholic practices and Hellenize them- they don’t really try to revive the Western tradition of Pre-Schism Church as Orthodox hold it to be.

EO have in the past called Eastern Catholics uniates (as a derogatory description) yet Western Orthodoxy seems to present a similar situation from the other side of the coin, so perhaps it comes across as a bit hypocritical, all things considered.

That one is easy to explain. Eastern Catholics are insulted for Schisming from Orthodoxy- True Church in their sense. Western Orthodox are not Schisming. Uniate is just somehow different word for Schismatic… and at times Eastern Catholics have actually embraced this word to identify themselves (it might have been even invented by Eastern Catholics as it signified they are in union- that they are One with Latins and it carried great meaning for them)… however later this word was viewed as an insult.

To clarify my above comment, after Council of Florence there were proponents of Union in Constantinople- basically Eastern Catholics. Some word like “Unionists” or something was used to refer to them, so term Uniate might be just that.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

If Orthodox truly believe that it is Western to use leavened bread for Eucharist then why do Western Orthodox use something that is meant to look like unleavened bread while being leavened? Why not just use leavened bread? Same thing happens with most practices… they take Catholic practices and Hellenize them- they don’t really try to revive the Western tradition of Pre-Schism Church as Orthodox hold it to be.

Just asking out of sheer ignorance, could it be that the Orthodox view it as intrinsically wrong, and possibly even invalid, to use azyme (unleavened) bread, and thus, they recreate the Western liturgy as closely as they can, by using pressed, rounded leavened bread in its place? In other words, might using azyme bread just be “a bridge too far” for them to accept?

Uniate is just somehow different word for Schismatic… and at times Eastern Catholics have actually embraced this word to identify themselves (it might have been even invented by Eastern Catholics as it signified they are in union- that they are One with Latins and it carried great meaning for them)… however later this word was viewed as an insult.

To paraphrase Forrest Gump, an insult is as an insult does. If someone were to call me a “papist”, my reaction (at least internally) would be something like “yes, I’m subject to the Pope, and you should be too, so should everybody”. Ditto for “Romanist”. The term “Jesuit” was originally a somewhat insulting nickname. Some marginated groups in our society take offensive terms used to describe them, and “reclaim” them, saying “we now own this term, we can use it, but the rest of you can’t”.

I have never seen what is so terrible about the term “uniate”, but I can see why Orthodox would view it this way.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Just asking out of sheer ignorance, could it be that the Orthodox view it as intrinsically wrong, and possibly even invalid, to use azyme (unleavened) bread, and thus, they recreate the Western liturgy as closely as they can, by using pressed, rounded leavened bread in its place? In other words, might using azyme bread just be “a bridge too far” for them to accept?

It is a bit complicated… afaik, as with many things, Orthodoxy doesn’t actually have official proclamation. But from what I’ve read, their theologians tend to be quite against the idea of unleavened bread being “licit” (in our terms) in use for Eucharist. They symbolize leaven with Salvation and Christ. It isn’t just about Latin Church- this critique is also aimed at Armenian Church. There might be those who don’t care or have Catholic view of the matter too.

To paraphrase Forrest Gump, an insult is as an insult does . If someone were to call me a “papist”, my reaction (at least internally) would be something like “yes, I’m subject to the Pope, and you should be too, so should everybody ”. Ditto for “Romanist”. The term “Jesuit” was originally a somewhat insulting nickname. Some marginated groups in our society take offensive terms used to describe them, and “reclaim” them, saying “we now own this term, we can use it, but the rest of you can’t”.

Funnily enough, term “Christian” was insult at first. I quite like “Papist”… has nice ring to it. I get that Eastern Catholics don’t like term “Uniate” at this time and that’s all fine and good and nobody should be using it… I am just kind of acknowledging that term wasn’t even taken as offensive when it came to be.

But then… many terms became insults over time and not when they were born.

 

[Angel_Gabriel]

Don’t the Antiochians have a Western Rite too? IDK…my honest opinion is that it’s a sort of reverse uniatism…except made up of mostly former Anglicans instead of Roman Catholics. Instead of latinizations you have byzantinations (is that even a word? well, it is now )

We have a minuscule ROCOR parish here …out of the 5 Orthodox parishes they are the only ones on the Julian calendar…they seem to be made up entirely of converts although there may be 1-2 actual Russian Orthodox. To me they are like the Orthodox version of the SSPX…way too legalistic and rad traddy for my taste.

I’ve never been to a Western Rite Orthodox liturgy…if I wanted a Western liturgy I’d go to the Latin Church. But to be fair, I feel the same about the Eastern Catholics too in as much as I’d prefer going to an actual Orthodox Liturgy ; Eastern Catholicism is too much of a hybrid.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

But to be fair, I feel the same about the Eastern Catholics too in as much as I’d prefer going to an actual Orthodox Liturgy ; Eastern Catholicism is too much of a hybrid.

Depends where and which. From my experience Latinizations are subsiding… Western Orthodoxy basically lives because of Hellenizations. Anyhow, I am not against idea of “Uniatism” itself because it shows that each Church is trying to be more than just Western or Eastern… only thing is that Orthodoxy has been fighting against “Uniatism” as a movement while embracing it on the other side. Well, time will tell how this goes but they still remain controversial minority. There are many arguments from Orthodox side against existence of Western Orthodoxy itself;

 

[HomeschoolDad]

We have a minuscule ROCOR parish here …out of the 5 Orthodox parishes they are the only ones on the Julian calendar…they seem to be made up entirely of converts although there may be 1-2 actual Russian Orthodox. To me they are like the Orthodox version of the SSPX

Yep, that pretty much nails it.

We have a very traditional continuing Anglican church in my town, and I explain to my family that they are basically “the Anglican SSPX”.

 

[ReaderT]

We have a minuscule ROCOR parish here …out of the 5 Orthodox parishes they are the only ones on the Julian calendar…they seem to be made up entirely of converts although there may be 1-2 actual Russian Orthodox.

That’s typically the way it is in all US Orthodox parishes - my home parish has 2 or 3 ethnic Russians, but everyone else (35 people including the Priest and Deacon) are converts to Orthodoxy. (Me too.)

 

[Angel_Gabriel]

We have a very traditional continuing Anglican church in my town, and I explain to my family that they are basically “the Anglican SSPX”.

I’d love to go to an Anglican Ordinariate Mass just to experience some Anglican traditions…there’s a parish a few hrs from where I live that has one but the opportunity to travel there is rare at the moment. Of course what I’d REALLY like to see is a Rood Screen!

That’s typically the way it is in all US Orthodox parishes

Do you mean US ROCOR parishes or US Orthodox parishes of ALL jurisdictions? Both the local OCA and Antiochians still have a number of “cradles” but their parishes are pretty “American” and have a healthy number of converts as well.

 

[ReaderT]

Do you mean US ROCOR parishes or US Orthodox parishes of ALL jurisdictions? Both the local OCA and Antiochians still have a number of “cradles” but their parishes are pretty “American” and have a healthy number of converts as well.

Exactly - I’d say “all”. It seems to be the normal status of an Orthodox parish (of any jurisdiction) in America that the majority of parishioners are converts (ours is over 90% convert)

 

[CathBoy1]

I’d love to go to an Anglican Ordinariate Mass just to experience some Anglican traditions…there’s a parish a few hrs from where I live that has one but the opportunity to travel there is rare at the moment. Of course what I’d REALLY like to see is a Rood Screen!

I don’t know where you live in the US but Our Lady of the Atonement in San Antonio is part of the Anglican Ordinariate the Mass is beautiful and they do have a beautiful Rood Screen.

Our Lady of the Atonement Catholic Church - San Antonio, Texas

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

We have a very traditional continuing Anglican church in my town, and I explain to my family that they are basically “the Anglican SSPX”.

I’d love to go to an Anglican Ordinariate Mass just to experience some Anglican traditions…there’s a parish a few hrs from where I live that has one but the opportunity to travel there is rare at the moment. Of course what I’d REALLY like to see is a Rood Screen!

This is a non-Canterbury Anglican continuing parish, not an Anglican Ordinariate parish. They are not in union with Rome (unfortunately).

 

[Angel_Gabriel]

I don’t know where you live in the US but Our Lady of the Atonement in San Antonio is part of the Anglican Ordinariate the Mass is beautiful and they do have a beautiful Rood Screen.

If ever I find myself in Texas I’ll pop in for a visit I love Rood Screens!

 

[PilgrimMichelangelo]

Yep, that pretty much nails it.

Roger that. When I try to explain the SSPX to a fellow Orthodox Christian, I always liken them to ROCOR. They are tidily analogous in both traditions.

the Anglican SSPX”.

As a former Anglican, and out of sheer curiosity, do you know which denomination of continuing Anglicanism they are? You have piqued my interest.