May 17 in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexy II and the First Hierarch of Russia Orthodox Church abroad, the Metropolitan of Eastern America and New York Laurus signed the Act of Canonical Communion. This is definitely historical event puts an end to the 80-year conflict between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, divided by the Civil War. However, the document does not presuppose either unanimity or economic absorption - there is no question of the complete subordination of the Orthodox Church abroad to the Moscow Patriarchate.

How will the churches live?

The signing of the Act of Canonical Communion was important, first of all, for the believers themselves, since this document enables the priests of the ROC and ROCOR to serve together (in all Orthodox churches, and during worship in ROCOR parishes, the name of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia must now be remembered) , and to anyone Orthodox person confess, take communion and baptize their children in any church both in Russia and abroad.

According to the document, the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad becomes "an integral self-governing part of the local Russian Orthodox Church." ROCOR will be "independent in pastoral, educational, administrative, economic, property and civil affairs", will continue to be governed by its own Bishops' Council, which constitutes its "highest spiritual, legislative, administrative, judicial and controlling authority", and by the First Hierarch, elected on the basis of own charter of ROCOR.

The ROC reserved the right to approve "in accordance with the norms of canon law" the metropolitan of the Church Abroad. Important decisions will also be coordinated with the patriarch and the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, for example, the formation or abolition of the ROCOR dioceses, as well as the election of new bishops abroad.

In other words, "foreigners", being "in canonical unity with the fullness of the Russian Orthodox Church," remained autonomous. The hierarchs of both churches will be full participants in the Bishops' Councils, but, in fact, they will not make any personnel or administrative decisions regarding each other's lives.

contradictions

There is one very important provision in the document, which reflects the complexity of the processes taking place in the church environment. It provides for a five-year transitional period for resolving issues with clergy, who are considered apostates and schismatics in Russia, and with disputed parishes of ROCOR, which are located "on the canonical territory" of the Moscow Patriarchate (they must come under the jurisdiction of local ruling bishops).

In addition, it will be necessary to resolve differences with opponents of the unification of churches. Their mouthpiece is the head of the South American Diocese, Archpriest Georgy Petrenko. In his opinion, the ROC did not fully comply with the conditions set by the ROCOR, in particular, it did not condemn the "heresy of ecumenism" (the desire to unite all christian churches, expressed in cooperation with the World Council of Churches) and the "sin of Sergianism" (recognition of the power of the Bolsheviks).

These claims against the Russian Orthodox Church, of course, will be discussed for a very long time, but they are unlikely to "come out" on high level. Back in 2004, the first hierarchs of the churches apologized to each other "for harsh statements", thus removing the topic of mutual insults. However, according to a number of observers, having defended ROCOR's autonomy only delayed its own split, which could occur in the next 10-15 years.

Moreover, there are formal grounds for its appearance. In the ROC, according to the parish charter, the property owner of the parishes is the patriarchate, and in the ROCOR it is the community, that is, the parishioners (this is an example of the Western attitude to property). That is, it is not the synod of "foreigners" who manages the property, so each community will decide voluntarily whether or not to enter a single church. So, for example, Lesninsky Holy Mother of God convent in France, despite the exhortations of Metropolitan Laurus, he said that he did not want to unite with the Russian Orthodox Church.

At the same time, there is an opinion that the current Act of Canonical Communion is only the first step towards the complete unification of the two Orthodox Churches, and all contradictions will be overcome in the coming years.

Association history

The conflict between the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Church Abroad formally began in 1927, when the "white" church accused the "red" church, which was then headed by Metropolitan Sergius, "of compromising with the godless authorities." Since that time, all contacts between the two Orthodox churches have completely ceased, but ROCOR announced that it would "return to the fatherland" when the Bolshevik regime fell.

However, since the 1980s there has been an active "communication" between the laity and the priests. Moreover, all the Orthodox communities and schools that were reviving at that time worked according to books published precisely by “foreigners”. True, the beginning of the unification of churches at the level of the first hierarchs was not even discussed. But since 1990, when Alexy II became Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, the Russian Orthodox Church began to appeal to the head of the Church Abroad, Metropolitan Vitaly, with appeals to "seek ways of reconciliation."

However, he rejected any negotiations, even despite the fact that the executed royal family was canonized as a saint, and in 2000 the Russian Orthodox Church adopted the "Fundamentals social concept"Church ministry, which observers then regarded as the most independent of secular authorities in the entire history of the church. Metropolitan Laurus, who replaced Vitaly, was less cold - he visited Russia, and shortly before that, Russian President Vladimir Putin also came to him.

The situation began to change when in 2003 Putin again came to the Lavra, but not empty-handed, but with a letter from Alexy II. This visit took a long time to prepare, but after it active contacts began between representatives of the ROC and ROCOR, the result of which was the signing of the Act of Canonical Communion in Cologne on November 1, 2006. Then he was endorsed by the heads of the reconciliation commissions of the two churches. After that, the document had to be approved by the first hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church and ROCOR - this solemn and, in general, already formal ceremony was scheduled for the day of the Ascension of the Lord.

Results

Apparently, the initiator of the association was the ROC, which, having received about 400 parishes and 500 thousand ROCOR believers in 40 countries, expanded not only its representation, but also its influence in the world. However, for the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, this step was also important, because last years both her flock and financial possibilities were somewhat reduced.

It is worth noting the active participation of Vladimir Putin in the unification of the two churches. Some observers believe that with the strengthening of the influence of the ROC (especially in recent times, when the clergy were engaged not only in the spiritual nourishment of believers, but also "spoke out" on the widest range of issues of domestic life in Russia), its role as "an important element of the social and political structure" will also be strengthened. " country.

So, according to the first vice-speaker of the State Duma, a deputy from United Russia, Oleg Morozov, "the role of the Orthodox Church as essential element civil society as a non-state institution is growing." According to him, the reunification of churches certainly works for this, but the ROC should still remain out of politics. Independent deputy Vladimir Ryzhkov, in turn, believes that in "the politicization of relations between church and state, one should blame the state, not the church."

In the meantime, the first hierarchs of the ROC and ROCOR intend to demonstrate the strength of the union. On May 19, Alexy II, together with Metropolitan Laurus, will consecrate the Church of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia in Butovo, which they founded three years ago at the former NKVD training ground, where clergymen were shot. And on May 20, another joint service will take place in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin.

Ruslan Kadrmatov

	Favorites	Correspondence	The calendar	Charter	Audio
	Name of God	Answers	divine services	School	Video
	Library	Sermons	The mystery of St. John	Poetry	Photo
	Publicism	Discussions	Bible	Story	Photobooks
	Apostasy	Evidence	Icons	Poems of Father Oleg	Questions
	Lives of the Saints	Guest book	Confession	archive	site `s map
	Prayers	Father's word	New Martyrs		Contacts

Two documents

ROCOR and ROC MP on the death of Stalin

ROCOR DOCUMENT

TO THE DEATH OF THE Executioner of the RUSSIAN PEOPLE STALIN

“Church Life”, Publication of the ROCOR Synod of Bishops,
Nos. 3-4, March-April, 1953, ss. 63-65.

The death of Stalin is the death of the greatest persecutor of the faith of Christ in history. The crimes of Nero, Diocletian, Julian the Apostate and other wicked people pale in the face of his terrible deeds. No one can compare with him either in the number of victims, or in cruelty to them, or in craftiness in achieving their goals. All satanic malice seemed to be embodied in this man, who, even more than the Pharisees, deserves the title of the son of the devil.

The Orthodox person is especially shocked by his truly satanic, cruel and crafty policy towards the Church.

First, an attempt to destroy it, both through the murder of prominent pastors and believers, and through its internal decomposition with the help of artificially created schisms. Then the compulsion of its artificially selected leaders to bow to him and the entire godless system led by him. And not only to bow, but also to praise the persecutor of the Church, as allegedly her benefactor, before the face of the whole world, calling black white and satanic God.

When this worst persecutor of the Church was praised by the archpastors and pastors who fell under the weight of persecution during his lifetime, this was a sign of the greatest humiliation of the Church. It could be a consolation for us that this lie was put to shame by the feat of countless fearless martyrs and secret Christians who rejected all the temptations of Satan.

Ancient persecutions also caused the downfall of both hierarchs and laity. And in those days there were people who, being unable to endure the torment for Christ, either were obviously baptized by Him, or pretended to offer sacrifice to idols, in a roundabout way receiving a certificate of offering a sacrifice that they did not actually offer (libellatics ). The Church condemned not only the former, but also the latter for their crafty cowardice and renunciation of Christ, if not in the heart, then before people.

But the history of the Church does not know of another example of the creation of an entire church organization, headed by a Patriarch and a Council, which would be based on kneeling before a clear enemy of God and glorifying him as an alleged benefactor. The blood of millions of believers cries out to God, but the hierarch, who calls himself the Patriarch of All Russia, does not seem to hear this. He humbly thanks their murderer and defiler of countless churches.

The death of Stalin brought this temptation to its highest blasphemous manifestation. Newspapers reported not only about the veneration of Patriarch Alexei to the ashes of the godless enemy of Christ, but also about the celebration of memorial services for him.

Is it possible to imagine anything more blasphemous than a memorial service for Stalin? Is it possible to pray without hypocrisy that the Lord would make the greatest persecutor of the faith and enemy of God "in paradise, where the faces of the saints and the righteous shine like luminaries." Truly, this prayer is a sin and lawlessness, not only in essence, but also formally, for Stalin, along with other people's Commissars, was excommunicated from the Church His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon and Patriarch Alexei himself, no matter how much he bowed to Stalin, never dared to announce the removal of this anathema from him.

The prayer for the repose of an unrepentant sinner excommunicated from the Church with the saints is a blasphemous heresy, for it is a confession that it is supposedly possible to acquire the Kingdom of God in heaven by persecuting and exterminating his sons on earth in the name of destroying the very faith in God. This is a mixture of the Kingdom of God with the kingdom of darkness. This is no lesser sin than a clear renunciation of Christ, faith in Whom thus. confessed as optional for communion with His Kingdom.

In this act of Moscow ecclesiastical authority, the underlying sin, which since 1927 has been so convincingly distinguished by our confessors in Russia, and which is still denouncing our Church abroad, received the most vivid manifestation of that underlying sin.

DOCUMENT ROC MP

SPEECH OF THE "HOLY" PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW AND ALL RUSSIA
ALEXIA BEFORE THE PANIKHIDA FOR J.V. STALIN, SAID
AT THE PATRIARSH CATHEDRAL ON THE DAY OF HIS FUNERAL (March 9, 1953)

Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate. 1953, No. 4. C.3

The great Leader of our people, Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, is gone. A great, moral, social force has been abolished: a force in which our people felt their own strength, by which they were guided in their creative labors and enterprises, by which they consoled themselves for many years. There is no area where the deep gaze of the great Leader does not penetrate. People of science were amazed at his deep scientific knowledge in the most diverse fields, his brilliant scientific generalizations; the military - to his military genius; people of the most diverse work invariably received powerful support and valuable instructions from him. As a man of genius, in every case he discovered something that was invisible and inaccessible to the ordinary mind.

About his intense worries and exploits during the Great Patriotic War, about his brilliant leadership of military operations that gave us victory over strong enemy and in general over fascism; about his many-sided boundless daily works in management, in the management of state affairs - were spoken at length and convincingly in the press, and, especially, at the last farewell today, on the day of his funeral, by his closest colleagues. His name, as a champion of world peace, and his glorious deeds will live on through the ages.

But we, having gathered to pray for him, cannot pass by in silence of his always benevolent, sympathetic attitude towards our church needs. Not a single question with which we addressed him was rejected by him; he granted all our requests. And many good and useful things, thanks to his high authority, have been done for our Church by our Government.

His memory is unforgettable for us, and our Russian Orthodox Church, mourning his departure from us, accompanies him on his last journey, "on the path of all the earth," with fervent prayer.

In these sad days for us, from all sides of our Fatherland from bishops, clergy and believers, and from abroad from the Heads and representatives of Churches, both Orthodox and non-Orthodox, I receive many telegrams in which they report prayers for him and express condolences to us on this sad loss.

We prayed for him when the news came of his serious illness. And now that he is gone, we pray for the peace of his immortal soul.

Yesterday our special delegation consisting of His Eminence Metropolitan Nicholas; representative of the episcopate, clergy and believers of Siberia, Archbishop Pallady; representative of the episcopate, clergy and believers of Ukraine Archbishop Nikon and Protopresbyter Fr. Nicholas, laid a wreath at his coffin and bowed on behalf of the Russian Orthodox Church to his dear ashes.

Prayer filled with Christian love reaches God. We believe that our prayer for the deceased will be heard by the Lord. And to our beloved and unforgettable Joseph Vissarionovich, we prayerfully, with deep, ardent love, proclaim eternal memory.

On May 17, 2007, in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior (Moscow), a solemn ceremony of signing the Act on the reunification of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad with the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate took place

The act of canonical communion was signed by Patriarch Alexy II and Metropolitan Laurus, First Hierarch of the Russian Church Abroad. Then the first joint liturgy after the restoration of the unity of the Russian Orthodox Church took place.

By church calendar May 17 of this year, just like in 2007, is the celebration of the Ascension of the Lord. Participants in the events of 11 years ago recall with slight irony that the coincidence of the signing of the Act with the celebration of the Ascension was then perceived as something almost providential. After all, originally the signing was planned during the celebration of Easter. The fact is that foreigners have preserved the pre-revolutionary tradition to serve on Easter in vestments white color, in contrast to the clergy of the Moscow Patriarchate, who serve in red during this period. Imagine an impressive picture - two columns of clergy are stretching across the entire Cathedral of Christ the Savior: one is the Russian Orthodox Church, the other is the ROCOR, one is in red, the other is in white. Thank God, they caught on in time and postponed the date.

Long-standing strife and distrust between Orthodox Christians were overcome

11 years have passed. Not everything turned out to be as easy to fix as the color of the vestments. The very signing of the Act of Canonical Communion was the crowning achievement of a long and difficult process of establishing interaction between the two parts of the Russian Church. After decades of bitter opposition, which reached its peak in the 1990s, when ROCOR began to take under its care the patriarchal parishes in the territory former USSR, the time has come for a not simple, but still real dialogue. The cynical tone of most analytical materials of the early 2000s, which considered these events exclusively from a political point of view, could not spoil the joy of the gradual restoration of unity and completely overshadow the ecclesiastical meaning of the event. The long-standing strife and distrust between Orthodox Christians were overcome. And this, whatever you say, indicates the presence of life: in a dead body, such wounds do not heal.

First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia Metropolitan Laurus, President of Russia Vladimir Putin and Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexy II (left to right) in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior during the solemn ceremony of reunification of the Moscow Patriarchate and ROCOR. Photo: Dmitry Astakhov/RIANovosti

The undeniable positive result of the reunification was the restoration of Eucharistic communion. The Church Abroad, having broken off the once Eucharistic communion with all local churches, except for the Jerusalem Patriarchate, was in a very difficult spiritual situation. Essentially, on the border of universal Orthodoxy. Thanks to her reunification with the Russian Orthodox Church, she returned to full Eucharistic and canonical communion with the entire Orthodox world.

Parishioners of the Church Abroad act as an active, organized and initiative component of the church

Foreigners, however, which was absolute news for many of us, were able to implement to a large extent the Definitions on Diocesan and Parish Administration of the Local Council of 1917-1918. Of course, not always consistently, but still managed. Moreover, they did it in the conditions of a modern pluralistic, secularized society of mass consumption. As the Russian Exarchate of the Patriarchate of Constantinople and as the Diocese of Sourozh under Metropolitan Anthony (Blum).

Moreover, the unprecedented happened: the Moscow Patriarchate, having departed from its previous demands that in 5 years from the moment of signing the Act, the parish charters of the ROC and ROCOR should become unified, left the former charter to foreigners, which continues the parish charter adopted at the Local Council of 1917– 1918. The parishioners of the Church Abroad act as an active, organized and initiative component of the church. They largely determine the situation in the parishes, feel their responsibility for parish affairs. And the priest carries out his ministry, often proceeding from the interests, wishes, and sometimes the requirements of the parishioners. For their part, parishioners perceive the priest as a person who has the right to expect help from them. With a chronic shortage of clergy in the Church Abroad, priests are valued there.

However, those who have taken the Act of Restoring Canonical Unity seriously are now experiencing a sense of dissatisfaction. According to Archpriest Georgy Mitrofanov, an active participant in the negotiation process, the Act basically did not justify their hopes. It was expected that the experience of the Church Abroad in organizing parish life on a truly conciliar basis would gradually spread to at least some parishes of the ROC MP. It didn't work out.

The same can be said about diocesan administration, which in the Church Abroad is determined to a much greater extent by the position of the clergy and parishioners than by the bishops. Again, the cathedral beginnings are present there. This facilitates the activities of the bishops themselves. Although it limits their arbitrariness. And it didn't happen.

The legacy of the soviet region has not only not been overcome yet, but is flourishing in full bloom.

It seemed very important that we receive a clear understanding from foreigners: in 1917, our country experienced a catastrophe. Moreover, much more obvious than the collapse of the Soviet Union, which was doomed to collapse precisely because of what happened in 1917. And that contacts with foreigners, communication with them, will help us overcome the legacy of communism, the legacy of Sovietism. But it has not only not been overcome yet, but is flourishing in full bloom. One view of grandmothers in caps with red stars at the recent consecration of a church in Levashov (the site of mass executions near St. Petersburg) is worth something!

Metropolitan Laurus and Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Russia (left to right in the foreground) in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior during the solemn ceremony of reunification of the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR). Photo: Dmitry Astakhov / RIA Novosti

It was expected that thanks to foreigners, the dead end of the path of church development proposed by Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) would be realized. It only partially worked out. That will develop the veneration of his opponents. And not just on a ritual level. And at the level of studying their heritage, understanding that their advocacy for a free church in the most unfree state was the best way to preserve church life. All of this was wishful thinking.

There was hope that they would help us to a large extent to direct the processes that were taking place in our country, in the direction of the revival of the historical and cultural traditions of old Russia ( Russian Empire), the memory of which we have always highly honored. But now it’s more customary to think about what we could keep from the Soviet period, well, supplement it with something from Muscovite Russia. So, culturally, as well as ecclesiastical, the result of the reunification also turned out to be insignificant.

They are set to dissolve in the environment in which they find themselves: culturally, religiously, socially, whatever

At the same time, alas, the real state of affairs is such that the Church Abroad is losing its positions more and more. She, as well as all Western Orthodoxy of the Russian tradition, cannot cope with the last wave of Russian emigration. The ever-increasing infiltration of our emigrants of the last wave into their parishes, the appearance of priests there from this environment, in essence, destroys the way of parish life that they had preserved. We see how the negative elements that our church life suffers from are gradually being introduced into church life: ritualism, irresponsibility of parishioners, consumerism towards the church, etc., which are brought by new emigrants (or, if you like, migrants).

The Russian diaspora is coming to naught. Although the Russian diaspora is growing quantitatively, it is growing at the expense of those people who are not going to remain Russians, who remember their Russianness until they have truly adapted to Western society. Who dream that their children were truly natural citizens of the country to which they moved. They do not feel like refugees, Russians in exile, bearers of the Russian mission, and, accordingly, what the emigration of the first wave lived for does not matter to them. They are set to dissolve in the environment in which they find themselves: culturally, religiously, socially, whatever. Those are the majority.

On the other hand, none of the foreigners returned to Holy Russia. As said about. To Georgy Mitrofanov, a priest of the Church Abroad: “My children cannot live in Moscow. Unbearable. We cannot live in such conditions as in a third world country.” Here they seem to be the successors of the emigrants of the first wave, but in essence they are no longer such. No "spring campaign" took place.

“All attempts to reconstruct the church life of a particular era in certain ethno-cultural conditions doom the church to rebirth and degeneration”

What does this state of affairs indicate? Father Georgy Mitrofanov believes that the Russian Church both in Russia and abroad is currently experiencing a serious crisis: “I am convinced that the share of influence of the ROCOR on the Russian diaspora and the ROC on Russian society is becoming less and less significant. As a storehouse of ritual and folklore heritage, we are still interesting. But no one hears our words about Christ. And no one expects these words from us. And this means a deep crisis for both the ROC and ROCOR.”

According to Fr. George, the main result of our association may be the following: “The acute awareness that the crisis that the church is experiencing is not due to external circumstances - in the West or in Russia. But it exists within the church and can be overcome only by internal efforts. The church must return to Christ. All attempts to reconstruct the church life of this or that epoch in this or that ethno-cultural conditions doom the church to rebirth and degeneration.”

Perhaps I agree.

Thursday morning at Orthodox holiday Ascension of the Lord, the solemn signing of the Act of Canonical Communion, reuniting the Russian Orthodox Church in Russia and abroad, took place in the church. The document, the content of which was read out in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in the presence of all those gathered, was signed by the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and the First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR), Metropolitan Laurus.

Metropolitan Laurus was the first to arrive at the signing to the solemn ringing of bells, followed by Alexy II. The ceremony was also attended by the president.

An official ROCOR delegation flew from New York to Moscow to complete the process of reunification with the ROC on Tuesday. In addition to the delegation headed by the metropolitan, singers from the joint choir, representatives of the clergy and pilgrims from the United States came to Moscow to sign the unifying document.

On the day of the unification of sister churches, during the entire solemn service, royal doors Cathedral of Christ the Savior, which usually happens only on Easter week. “The laity want to see with their own eyes how this will happen for the first time, when Metropolitan Laurus and foreign priests will partake of the same cup together with ours for the first time,” said archpriest, secretary of the Department for External Church Relations of the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate.

On May 19, Alexy II, together with Metropolitan Laurus, will consecrate the Church of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia in Butovo (in this place, during the years of Stalin's rule, big number clergy). The temple was jointly laid by the first hierarchs three years ago. And on May 20, another joint service of the first hierarchs will take place in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin.

All these events will draw a line under the three-year negotiation process on the reunification of the ROC and ROCOR.

Attempts to establish contacts between the two branches of the Russian Church have been made repeatedly since the 1990s. But only since 2003, meetings between delegations have become regular. Over the next three years, the unification process gained momentum. First in Russia, in October 2004, the highest clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church, having gathered at the Council of Bishops, voted for the restoration of unity with the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad. And then abroad - in May 2006, the Council of Bishops approved the resolution of the IV All-Diaspora Council on the consent of ROCOR to begin the process of reunification with the ROC.

True, the matter never came to the adoption of a canonical act that would officially determine the new status of ROCOR.

It was assumed that the “Act of Canonical Communion” between ROCOR and the ROC would be adopted by the Council of Bishops of the Church Abroad in San Francisco on May 15-19, 2006. What happened at the cathedral remained unclear for some time. But since the approval of the document seemed like a matter of course, the media began to report on it even before the cathedral closed.

However, it soon became clear that nothing had actually been done: the canonical act was not adopted, but only sent for revision by commissions to overcome differences. As a result, the document was approved only in September, at a meeting of the ROCOR Synod of Bishops in New York. And on December 7-10, 2006, an expanded meeting of the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Church Abroad was held, at which the date and place of signing the act of canonical communion were set and the document “On the results of the joint work of the Commissions of the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Church Abroad” was signed. December 26, 2006 and Holy Synod The Russian Orthodox Church approved the procedure for signing the "Act on Canonical Communion".

Under what conditions the reunification will take place was outlined a year ago: the foreign Orthodox Church made it clear that it sees itself as a "self-governing part of the local Russian Church."

This implies the joint participation of church hierarchs in bishops' councils, but does not imply any personnel or administrative decisions concerning each other's lives. In the coming years, as experts suggest, there will be no administrative unification of churches, and the parties will indeed communicate on an equal footing.

But this autonomy is unlikely to be permanent. It is possible that the stage of ROCOR self-government will not last longer than 10-15 years, and after that different scenarios are possible, says the director of the Institute for the Study of Religion in the CIS and Baltic States. In his opinion, either a calm final merger or a schism of ROCOR will take place.

At the same time, it was only the agreement on the autonomy of ROCOR that made it possible to smooth over many controversial issues that hindered the reunification process, including those relating to real estate. The issue of disputed church property was one of the most acute in the negotiation process. In the Russian Orthodox Church, according to the parish charter, the owner of real estate Orthodox parishes is the Patriarchate, in ROCOR it is the parishioners. Another alignment for the parishioners of ROCOR will be, in fact, an attack on the values ​​of Western democratic society.

Some "foreigners" openly spoke of fears that the administrative unification would lead to the fact that ROCOR's churches would be taken away from ROCOR - therefore, the decision on autonomy became a compromise.

There were also less painful, although also fundamental, differences. Foreign Orthodox hierarchs have stated, for example, that they are embarrassed by the participation of the Moscow Patriarchate in the activities of the World Council of Churches, the governing body of the ecumenical movement, which now includes more than 300 churches from 100 countries, mostly Orthodox and Protestant. The problem is that Protestants in ROCOR are disliked, equating them with sectarians.

By the way, the forthcoming unification has already provoked a split in ROCOR. Some of the clerics of the Church Abroad are still afraid that the unification will turn into a mere takeover, so they prefer to go into schism. And although the majority of "foreigners" is still for unification, the situation on the eve of the signing of the document is not the most calm.

But despite all these difficulties, the ROC and ROCOR need a friend.

The Moscow Patriarchate is firmly committed to reunification as a win-win. The merger, analysts believe, will enable the ROC to solve a serious geopolitical problem - in fact, to have representations on all the globe, and the Orthodox Church Abroad is aware of the need for such a step, knowing full well that since the first wave of emigration, both the ROCOR flock and its financial capabilities have noticeably decreased.

The text was prepared within the framework of the project “Dynamics of the Religious Situation and Confessional Identity in the Moscow Region”. When implementing the project, state support funds allocated as a grant in accordance with the order of the President are used Russian Federation dated 05.04.2016 No. 68-rp and on the basis of a competition held by the National Charitable Foundation.

Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia(“Karlovchane”, “Church Abroad”, “Foreigners”) is an Orthodox church organization that arose in the 1920s. 20th century among Russian emigrants who left the country as a result of the revolution and civil war; since 2007, after reunification with the ROC, it has been a self-governing part of the ROC. The name "Russian Orthodox Church Abroad" is also used.

Story

Organizationally, ROCOR took shape in 1921 during the “Meeting of Russian Churches Abroad”, which took place in the city of Sremski Karlovci, Yugoslavia (now Serbia), at which, in accordance with Decree No. Patriarch Demetrius of Serbia and Met. Anthony (Khrapovitsky), a Provisional Higher Church Administration was created, which took an active monarchist and anti-Soviet position in a situation of persecution of the church in the USSR; some bishops of the new church had previously participated in the white movement. Therefore, from the very beginning of its existence, one of the goals of ROCOR was to denounce Soviet power in the international arena and upholding the rights of Russian believers. In 1922, Tikhon was forced to condemn the activities and dissolve the VVTsU, but instead of him a Synod of Bishops was created, the canonicity of which was subsequently not disputed either by him or his successors.

The formal split and cessation of canonical communion between the ROC and ROCOR took place in 1927 after the publication of the "Declaration" of Met. Sergius (Stragorodsky), who took a course towards cooperation with the Soviet authorities; The "foreigners" did not recognize her and declared that they recognized as the locum tenens of the patriarchal throne not Stragorodsky, but the one whose duties he temporarily performed - Metropolitan. Peter (Polyansky), who was imprisoned at that time. In 1934, in connection with this, Sergius was forced to ban their entire clergy from serving, and in 1935 ROCOR decided that it was temporarily moving to self-government, and that after the fall of the "godless regime" it would be abandoned. For all its negative attitude towards the "official" church, ROCOR approved of the "underground" church - i.e. various structures of the CPI, which for the time being were recognized by it as canonical; despite mutual sympathy, contacts between them until the mid-70s. was, for obvious reasons, quite a bit. For the first time, the "Karlovites" accepted under their omophorion a small Russian catacomb community in 1975, and a little later they appointed a bishop - Lazar (Zhurbenko) - over all true Orthodox, with the title of Tambov and Morshansky.

Hatred of the Soviet government and a suspicious attitude towards the “servile” Moscow Patriarchate encouraged individual clergy and bishops during the Second World War to build plans for cooperation with the Germans in the occupied territories, where they hoped to form their parishes, but these plans were not destined to come true. After the end of the war, in the mid-40s. the ROCOR leadership migrated to Munich, and then, in 1950, to New York.

ROCOR in Russia

In 1990, ROCOR adopted the "Regulations on Free Parishes", in connection with which Russia was designated as a "missionary" territory in which parishes, deaneries and dioceses should be formed. It was in connection with this act that, as a result of his transfer to ROCOR, Archim. Valentina (Rusantsova), the Russian Orthodox Free Church (later - ROAC) arose. Around the same time, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the “Church Abroad” began to gain popularity in Russia and many clerics and laity moved into it, among which were, for example, Mikhail Ardov, Gleb Yakunin, Alexander Nezhny and others. In 1994, during a new short-term union after the conflict, ROCOR and the ROCA adopted the Lesno Act, which meant the rejection of the mission to Russian territory and the reorganization of local dioceses.

Back in the late 1980s, the ROC and ROCOR spoke in official documents about their differences: the Moscow Patriarchate called the "Church Abroad" "schismatics-Karlovites", and they, in turn, pointed to three main grounds for reunification: the Orthodoxy of the New Martyrs and Confessors, victims of the Soviet regime; renunciation of Sergianism; finally, the recognition of "foreigners" by the canonical church. In 2000, after the change of the ROCOR primate and the transfer of power from Met. Vitaly (Ustinov) to Met. Lavra (Shkurla), counter steps began to be made from both sides. Negotiations on the reunification of the two churches began in 2003, and on May 17, 2007, they ended with the signing of Patriarch Alexy II and Met. Laurel of the Act of Canonical Communion, according to which ROCOR became a self-governing part of the ROC.

Such a decision was made, however, by no means by all the "Karlovatian" hierarchs. Back in 2001, the aforementioned Met. Vitaly (Ustinov). After 2007, one of the main opponents of the "uniy" was Bishop. Agafangel (Pashkovsky), previously ordained in the ROCA and then recognized in the ROCA. In the same year, Agafangel convened the ROCA VVTsU, in 2009 he was banned from serving, he did not recognize the ban. ROCOR (Agafangel) has Eucharistic communion with the Old Calendarist churches of Greece, Bulgaria and Romania.

Administrative device

The administrative center is in Manhattan, New York. Primate - Mr. Eastern American and New York Hilarion (Corporal, since 2008) In connection with ROCOR association and the Russian Orthodox Church, the actual head is the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia. The Church has 9 dioceses and 14 bishops and is represented primarily in the US, but also in the UK, Germany, Switzerland, Argentina, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

Doctrine and practice

The dogmatic doctrine of this confession is no different from the Orthodox, adopted by the local Orthodox churches.

An important event in the history of ROCOR was the canonization of the New Martyrs of the Soviet period and the glorification of the family of Nicholas ΙΙ (Romanov) as saints. It was the non-recognition of these saints by the ROC-MP that made it difficult to negotiate the unification of churches (as well as loyalty to the Soviet regime).

In ideological terms, this denomination recognizes ecumenical activity as a heresy. Also among the believers of this church, eschatological mindsets are popular, associated with the belief in the especially significant role of this denomination in preserving the purity of the Orthodox faith and propagating the ideas of monarchism. The parishioners strongly condemn Soviet Union with its atheistic ideology and persecution of the church (to the extent that in some parishes they refuse to use red liturgical vestments, associating them with communist symbols).

public importance

Representatives of this confession consider themselves the heirs of the "other Russia", "white Russia", the Russian Empire. They were integrated into Russian culture until 1917. Their assessment of the Soviet period is fundamentally different from the official one. In connection with this, in recent years, Patriarch Kirill has been making attempts at the level of rhetoric to reconcile the “two Russias”, having developed a common understanding of history that is also acceptable to ROCOR.

Literature

Grabbe G., bishop. The Truth about the Russian Church in the Homeland and Abroad. Jordanville: Holy Trinity Monastery, printing house of St. Job of Pochaevsky in Jordanville (USA), 1961.

Mitrofanov G.N.. Russian Orthodox Church in Russia and in emigration in the 1920s. On the question of the relationship between the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian church emigration in the period 1920–1927. - St. Petersburg, 1995. - 144 p.

Kostryukov A.A.. The Russian Church Abroad in the First Half of the 1920s: The Organization of Church Administration in Emigration and Its Relations with the Moscow Patriarchate During the Life of Patriarch Tikhon. - M.: Publishing House of PSTGU, 2007. - 398 p.

Kostryukov A.A.. The Russian Church Abroad in 1925–1938: Jurisdictional Conflicts and Relations with Moscow Church Authorities. - M.: Publishing House of PSTGU, 2011. - 624 p.

Kostryukov A.A.. Russian Church Abroad in 1939–1964: Administrative Structure and Relations with the Church in the Fatherland. - M.: Publishing House of PSTGU, 2015. - 488 p.

Legislation of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia: (1921–2007) / Comp. D. P. Anashkin. - M.: Publishing House of PSTGU, 2014. - 620 p.

A. Zygmont and E. Voinov