“I think there is so much variety of praxis out there that it’s hard to generalize.”

Yes, that’s a problem. From what I understand and have observed, usually ROCOR parishes have no pews, most all the women cover and the genders are separated. Except for no pews, I have not been in an OCA parish that has these characteristics. However, I’m sure they exist. I just think ROCOR parishes are much more likely to operate that way. That’s what I mean by “average”.

“What we want to promote is a maximal, humane expression of the faith in a joyful resurrectional key which is neither a ‘dry biscuit’ not a gloomy penance.”

I agree with you. We need both orthopraxis and “maximal, humane expression of the faith in a joyful resurrectional key”, not one or the other. Otherwise we are saying that traditionally Orthodoxy has always been a “dry biscuit” and/or “gloomy penance”.

I’m glad we’re on the same page, Fr. John

Private orthopraxis does determine religious identity as does liturgical praxis. The two are closely intertwined and inextricable. Weak liturgical piety (effectively griped about on our OCA clergy list recently by Fr Andrew) minimizes the special character of Orthodoxy and diminishes our witness. But then the almost mechanistic legalism of some pieties is repugnant (to me, an SVS grad). But then I have been in OCA parishes as just as ‘old world’ as any Serb or ROCOR parish.

WHat is the ‘average’OCA or AOCNA or ROCOR parish like? I think there is so much variety of praxis out there that it’s hard to generalize. We have to also admit that along with what appears to be very strict enforcement of canonical rules in some quarters comes a high degree of nominal Orthopraxis. What we want to promot is a maximal, humane expression of the faith in a joyful resurrectional key which is neither a ‘dry biscuit’ not a gloomy penance.

The OCA and ROCOR have much in common with respect to the origins of their respective practices (both from the Slavic tradition). However, with respect to their actual average level of orthopraxis, the OCA is closer to the AOCNA. ROCOR is more like the Serbian Orthodox or even the Old Calendar Greeks (except that ROCOR does not see it as an issue warranting schism).

The unity I would most like to see is OCA/ROCOR (with ROCOR practices increasing in prevalence). However, the one that seems less of a stretch given current practice is OCA/AOCNA.

Good point, Father. I agree, the OCA and ROCOR have the most in common, and I think the best thing that could happen to speed Orthodox unity in this country is the OCA and ROCOR at least moving toward reconciliation. I do buy into the “unity myth” of the Church in this country under Saint Tikhon. An OCA/ROCOR renconciliation would, in my mind, erase the fog which prohibits the Russian missionary roots of this country from being seen clearly. I think it would also point the way to eventual unity among all the Orthodox. My two cents anyway.

THe way I see it, coming from the West, is that ROCOR and the OCA have more in common than any other two jurisdictions. Maybe it doesn’t look that way in Jersey City. But Western Diocese OCA life will eventually come to be seen as the norm because of its fidelity to the best of our Tradition. Hewing close to the center of tradition helps make a better case for merger by allowing trust to develop.
Look how the suggestion of renovationism and ecumenism associated with SVS, no matter how spurious the charges may be, prevents trust from forming. But all these issues can be resolved by a Church in prayer.

I can’t imagine how anyone would imagine, based on OCA historical example, that anything like an “English Only” rule would apply to any future American Autocephalous Church to which we were party. To posit such betrays an ignorance of the latitude always expressed in OCA liturgical life. Even the Calendar Issue is not a credible concern, outside of minority cases of contention e.g. EPA). The Western Diocese, from whence our Metr. comes, offers old and new calendars, English, Romanian, Bulgarian, Slavonic and other languages. This language issue is a straw man.

Is this document online somewhere?

Fabio, the original Ligonier Statement (1994) said all that you propose and more. It was the gold standard of American autocephaly.

Amen, Dean.

Well, it would be different in that it would be one institution instead of many and at least in the middle-to-long term would solve the current episcopal redudancy that exists in many areas.

There are only three models of unity:

1) To become one big diocese;

2) To become an autonomous church;

3) To become an autocephalous church;

I agree that (3) is the most desirable option. I suppose, though, that not few abroad have a very strong desire for (1). I’m just guessing that the middle-ground decision will be (2).

Concerning option (3) which I, too, favor. I think that not only financial, but also cultural and political reasons drive people to not want to see an autocephalous church in America. They probably fear that current support would finish and also that American culture could choke their respective cultures. Also many of the mother-churches are in less than desirable political conditions. It is not at all surprising that the only Patriarchate which is willing to accept autocephaly and in fact already did was the MP, the one with (today) less political problems at home. These political hardships play an important part, since the “American branch” is like having a straw above the water so you don’t drawn. When people suggest autocephaly, it sounds like taking that away for them, I suppose.

Maybe those who support the autocephaly should come up with a clear proposal guaranteeing that the current cultural, political and financial ties will not be severed, that English will be suggested but not imposed, that “motherland” traditions will be kept and respected. Of course a clause like “we will keep supporting the mother-churches as long as it does not harm interal finances” should be added, but the fact is that the concerns of this brethen has to be addressed and not shunned. After all, they *will* be part of the American flock.

If this is so Fabio (for the sake of argument), then what is the difference between what we have now? Either scenario would spell disaster for the American Church as it bespeaks a complete unseriousness.

First post. I am not a part of ROCOR by the way.

Fr. John,

You said it very well:

That is precisely the spirit of an Orthodox Church which is strong in its foundations, though it may be weak in its vessel.

I do not know if you are aware of the fact that Fr. George Calciu is now with the Lord and with his beloved ‘spiritual father’, the Holy Martyr Constantin Oprisan.

When I took care of Constantine Oprisan in the cell, I was very happy. I way very happy because I felt his spirituality penetrating my soul. I learned from him to be good, to forgive, not to curse your torturer, not to consider anything of this world to be a treasure for you. In fact, he was living on another level. Only his body was with us – and his love. Can you imagine? We were in a cell without windows, without air, humid, filthy – yet we had moments of happiness that we never reached in freedom. I cannot explain it.

The contemporary martyrs suffered at about the same time when America began to get caught up in the whole sex, drugs and rock’n’roll lifestyle.

The new generation receiving an education on how to treat animals properly, on how to avoid animal violence from happening, as well as humane treatment of farm animals might prove to be sensitive to the suffering of these martyrs.

Many of them were very young, university students, with a solid Christian education received in their families. They were protesting against the introduction of materialism into the schools and the forbidding of the students to go to Church. I believe that it was God’s plan to allow this to happen and to have more and more of their stories translated into English.

What we should learn when reading the lives of these new martyrs is that the political fight is just the surface, the real fight going on is “the fight between good and evil; between God and the devil”.

Much of this political fight is going on here in America. It is very important to be aware of the dimensions of this fight.

Only later did we understand that there were mystical implications. All these people were just instruments of the devil. After the actions had stopped, some of us understood. But, we were too involved with the political fight before we were in prison. Even if I and others protested against the introduction of materialism into the schools and the forbidding of the students to go to Church, I think the majority of our effort was being involved in the political fight. However, little by little, under the terror, the torture, and suffering, we understood that this political implication was just the surface. In fact, it was a fight between good and evil; between God and the devil. When we understood that, we started praying even more than before. God sent us illumination. We understood it and we were aware of the nature of this fight. We understood that it was not [a name] who was our enemy—it was the devil. He tried to destroy our soul.

The new martyrs experienced that the worst thing was to be tortured in order to blaspheme God.
http://www.sspeterpaul.org/downloads/2010-04.pdf

Father George: One cannot pray during those moments. But during the night, when everyone goes to bed, you gain your strength and find your repentance. You pray for this. It is not complicated. You say, “God forgive me!” It is enough for your soul to regain its strength and resist one more day… and one day more… and one day more. Not to die. Not to go crazy. Many of us went mad. But just to say, “Forgive me, God.” You knew very well that the next day you would again say something against God. But a few moments in the night, when you started to cry and to pray to God to forgive you and help you was very good. Many times we were quite angry with God—if you exist why did you allow this? But there was one moment when the mercy of God would come upon you and you could say, “God forgive me; God help me.” It was enough to help you. For another day, another day, another day.
We were freed and we were very happy to be free, but we had a kind of nostalgia about the prison. And we could not explain it to others. They said we were crazy. How could you miss prison? Because in prison, we had the most spiritual life. We reached levels that we are not about to reach in this world. Isolated, anchored in Jesus Christ, we had joys and illuminations that this world cannot offer us. There are not words to express exactly the feeling we had there. Many times we were not happy at all, but there were moments of happiness there.

Eliot, your point is very well-taken. As I’ve gotten older I have indeed softened my attitudes towards the ethnic churches and their American eparchies. At least I can see that however irregularly, however uncanonically, however haphazardly, they did succeed in implanting Orthodoxy in a new world in which there was no patronage or direction for doing so (at least from within their own communities –the Metropolia was already here, but that’s another story). They did it even though they were strangers in every way to this land. And desperately poor to boot. That’s not chump change, that’s more than I could have done given the circumstances.

So yes, their experience needs to be honored. My critique however was not with their efforts but with their foreign overlords who should –and do–know better. Who, let’s be honest, use their American eparchies as cash cows.