On Canonicity - whatever that may be

I came to Orthodoxy through the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia in 2005. At the time, ROCOR was in communion with the Serbian Orthodox Church, the Orthodox Church of Jerusalem, and the Orthodox Church of Sinai. To the rest of the Eastern Orthodox churches, ROCOR was considered "uncanonical". At the time there were many articles published on ROCOR clergy blogs and elsewhere expressing the view that this was a bizarre use of the word canonical.

The thrust of their arguments was that referring to ROCOR as uncanonical seemed to have little to do with the degree to which ROCOR adhered to the canonical tradition of the Church and more to do with the fact that it wasn't in communion with the churches using the term in this partisan way.

In 2007 ROCOR entered into full communion with the Patricarchate of Moscow and was subsequently recognised as canonical by the other Eastern Orthodox churches. The language used by ROCOR shifted at this point, and we, too began to refer to certain other churches as uncanonical, despite us having been in communion with many of these very same churches only months earlier.  In fact, in some cases, it was members of our very own Holy Synod that had consecrated the bishops of these churches which were now suddenly deemed uncanonical. This was very difficult to understand for many of us who had been taught that canonicity is not about being in communion with one group or another, but rather about faithful adherence to the canonical tradition of the Church.

How could we look at these churches that adhered faithfully to the canons of the Church and tell them that they were uncanonical, meanwhile entering into communion with churches whose practice on a number of fronts seemed not to be in keeping with canonical tradition?

I am now a member of the Orthodox Church of the Gauls, which is not an Eastern Orthodox church and makes no claim to be such.  We are part of a different communion of Orthodox Churches.  Our faith, our teachings, as well as our spiritual and liturgical life, are Orthodox.  Our bishops have their apostolic heritage in the same succession and lineage as the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox churches, and we are in communion with other churches with similar roots.  Yet, many within the Eastern Orthodox church refer to us as "uncanonical".  Indeed, the OrthodoxWiki article refers to us as "independent".

This latter term is particularly interesting.  In a sense, I can understand one communion referring to another as uncanonical.  When there is any kind of disagreement, human weakness will nurture a desire to demarcate others as somehow "not like us" and perpetuate that demarcation, even if the differences are imagined rather than real.  Such a label is an effective way to do this.  However, it is more difficult to understand the reference to us being independent.

By what defintion is the Orthodox Church of the Gauls independent?  We do not stand alone: we are part of a wider communion of Orthodox churches, sharing the same Orthodox faith and practice.  If we are "indepedent", then so is the Greek Orthodox Church, the Armenian Apostolic Church, or any of the other member churches of the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox communions of churches, but this seems a very counter-intuitive use of the word independent, as it would be if a police constable operating under orders, as part of a police force, were said to be functioning as an independent agent.  The word simply cannot be legitimately applied to that situation according to any common understanding of the word in the English language.

Regarding canonicity, I suppose that this just isn't something that we feel we must demonstrate to others.  We merely seek as best we can to order our life on the Apostolic Orthodox-Catholic Faith.  Are there canons of the ancient councils that we do not apply rigorously?  Yes, there undoubtedly are.  Yet has the Phanar not hosted services in which the Pope of Rome has been commemorated in the litanies alongside the ruling bishop?  Does the Greek Orthodox church not permit subdeacons to marry?  Do the Antiochian and Russian Orthodox Churches not permit the offering of the Eucharist on the weekdays of Lent?  Was Metropolitan Nicolae (Corneanu)'s reception of communion in a Catholic church not greeted with nothing more than a "Please don't do that" from the Holy Synod of Romania?  All of these actions contravene at least one canon or another, and I'm sure that a little research could generate a plethora of further examples.  Yet nobody (perhaps apart from our Old Calendarist sisters and brothers) condemns these churches as being "uncanonical" on the basis of these examples of apparent disobedience of the Church's canons.  So I must wonder how my church is any less "canonical" than those listed above?

Some might say that we are uncanonical because our foundation as a distinct church did not arise from a decree of autocephaly from our mother church.  Yet, did what is now the Russian Orthodox Church have such a decree or did it claim autocephanlous status for itself?  Anybody with a passing knowledge of Orthodox history will confirm that the latter is true.  Yet nobody today challenges the canonicity of the ROC on this basis.  And despite the Orthodox Church in America having been founded by precisely such a decree, has its autocephalous status not gone largely unrecognised because the remaining Eastern Orthodox churches cannot seem to agree among themselves who has the canonical authority to issue such a decree?

Neither an Ecumenical Council, nor the Patriarchate of Constantinople or of Moscow, nor any other Mother Church can create a new local Church. The most that they can do is to recognise such a Church. But the act of creation must be carried out in situ, locally, by the living Eucharistic cells which are called to gradually make up the body of a new local Church. 

- Metropolitan Kallistos of Diokleia. 

My purpose here is not to disparage the good and holy people in any of these churches, but rather to highlight that the entire modern discussion of whether a particular church is canonical is filled with so much contradiction and misdirection as to be of very little value, if any at all, and seems to my inexperienced and uneducated mind to serve little purpose other than as a weapon to perpetuate segregation.

It is my opinion that, when assessing the Orthodoxy or otherwise of any ecclesiastical body, the questions asked should simply be these:

• Is this church's faith and practice an expression of Orthodox doctrinal, spiritual, and liturgical Tradtition?
• Is this church's episcopate part of the lineage of the apostles through sustained Orthodox succession?
• Does the ethos of this church reveal the salvific love of Christ towards his creation?

If the answer to these questions is yes, then perhaps we ought to consider whether we can embrace them as sisters and brothers in the life in Christ, and greet them with a kiss.

Render unto Caeser...

No, I don't particularly like the King James Bible either but it's the only translation that has the desired effect in a blog post title, so there it is.

My attention has recently been drawn to this article by a Konstantin Matsan.
 
My initial reaction was that de Nile is not just a river in Egypt, it seems. However, after further consideration, I think that Mr Matsan is right in that too often all manner of assertions are made about the supposedly deepening relationship between church and state in Russia without any effort being made to show the premise to be true, (I believe that "begging the question" is the expression that he is struggling to find), but he falls into the trap of another logical fallacy in that this itself does not render the premise untrue.

Are the Russian state and the Church in Russia getting closer? Finding an answer to this would require a detailed historical comparison, which I am not qualified to make, and indeed we are presented in the article with evidence that seems to suggest that there is no real deepening relationship here. Perhaps a more manageable question, then, would be whether they are already too close. This only requires an examination of present circumstances.

Read more...

On Liturgical Archaeology

There are many objections to the Orthodox Western Rite. Many are founded on ignorance and can simply be either disregarded or educated away according to mood or circumstance, (such as the lady who flat out refused to believe that anything but the Byzantine Rite was ever used in the Church and tried to convince me that the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom was commonly used in England prior to the Schism). Others do actually have some basis in reality and in genuine concern for the proper passing on and living of the Orthodox Faith and for the spiritual well-being of Orthodox people. These deserve more attention and ought to be taken on board to one degree or another. There are yet others which cannot be so easily categorised because their proponents see them as so self-evident that, in expressing them, they do not often go beyond a brief statement, expecting that this will be readily understood and agreed upon by all right-thinking people, (i.e. people like them). The truth is that this simply serves to further polarise already opposing viewpoints. Then listening stops as, due to human weakness, both sides become defensive and dig their heels in.

One example of this is the position that holds that the restoration of pre-schism western services for use in the Church is "liturgical archaeology". This sort of disparaging terminology may serve as a self-congratulatory mantra among those who already agree with each other but to those who remain to be convinced, it simply shows a lack of respect and a dismissive attitude. Reliance on such belittling expressions instead of actual reasoned and coherent thoughts also suggests a severe lack of confidence in a very weak argument. This may be an inaccurate assessment but it is precisely the picture painted by the way in which this is often presented.

So, let us examine the reasons why people perform this "liturgical archaeology".

Read more...

Western Rite Developments

Well, it all seems to be happening!

After decades of existing as a handful of scattered monastic communities and hermitages, it seems as though the Western Rite within the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad is well on its way to being much more firmly established.

First, we got the informal decision of the Synod of Bishops that all Western Rite communities in ROCOR would be given stavropegial status - itself a great blessing, for it freed bishops from having to look after communities whose rite and culture they did not understand and communities with unsympathetic bishops striving to survive against all odds, generally making things easier for everybody concerned and removing some of the barriers that the previous unhelpful situation placed before those who might otherwise explore Orthodoxy as a spiritual home. After all, who wants to join an isolated mission whose ecclesiastical status is volatile and whose stability is precarious at best?

Then a number of parishes and missions started to apear: some of them newly founded, some of them developed from study societies, and some of them received from independent jurisdictions. The most signficant of these were perhaps the reception of the former HOCACA at the end of last year, and the encouraging news of the discussions with the Orthodox Church of France. This is all very encouraging, although it does raise some questions about the haste of things and the stability and formation both in the Faith and the priestly life of those being received.

Now, within the past fortnight, we have received news that the Council of Bishops has established a Western Rite Vicariate, giving much greater structure and stability to the Western Rite effort, and quite possibly addressing the matter raised in the previous paragraph, as now people are actually being received into something that is integrated and should now begin to operate as a unit. The recent meetings and proposed conferences, I am sure, will add to the stability, structure, and growth into a functional family.

Now, to top it all off, if anything makes a bold statement that the Western Rites of the Orthodox Church are as full and legitimate an expression of the Holy Orthodox Faith as any other, it is not that their forms of services are blessed for use, or that they come directly under the jurisdiction of the First-Hierarch himself, or even that those who belong to those rites are increasing in number, but rather the remarkable fact that ordinations are now being done at a western Pontifical High Mass, by an Orthodox bishop in western vestments, and using the Roman ordinal. I am almost sure that this combination is a first in modern Orthodox history and it speaks volumes, opening the way for people to trust the Church in its western expression with the salvation of their souls. May we soon begin to see Orthodox Saints whose lives have been formed in the Western Rite - the true test of its Orthodoxy.

I am truly delighted by this as an Orthodox Christian with western roots, who loves the western hymns, liturgies, and Saints, and I hope that this will also prove to have great missionary potential across the world but particularly in these isles where many of those Saints once sang those hymns and prayed those liturgies.

I thoroughly look forward to further developments and the video footage that we have been promised of this weekend's ordination. Please pray for Dom Joseph of Christ the Saviour Monastery as he is to be ordained to the diaconate.

I leave you with a photo-video collage from 2007, which brings back memories.

Milan Synod - yet again

Is it true?

I have heard on the grapevine that the Holy Synod of Milan, as of yesterday, is part of the Moldovan Orthodox Church under the omophor of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia, its bishops have been received as bishops, and it is now in full communion with the rest of the Orthodox Church.

However, I have so far been unable to find anything in any of the usual places online to confirm this. Does anybody have further news?

Many thanks.

The Episcopal Liturgy

Too often, the word catholic is made to carry meanings that are not its own, usually by people who are driving a particular cause, but it does not mean "universal" in the sense of being all-encompassing, accepting everything. Rather it means something more akin to "of the whole", internally complete, lacking nothing. The Catholic Church is not anything like "the worldwide church", and is indeed not limited to this world, but rather it is the Church in its wholeness, in the fullness of its sacramental life, with the people of God, adopted children of the Father, baptised into Christ's name, and sealed with the Holy Spirit, believing and living the faith that has come to us from the Apostles, in union with and under the care of their high priest.

The basic unit of Christian life is not the individual. It is not the family or even the parish. No. The most fundamental unit of Christian life is the diocese - the local and full expression of the Catholic Church. Too often we forget this. People become isolated in their parishes, or worse yet, simply "go to church", and then go home again, not even being aware of their fellow parishioners. Yet growing into the likeness of God, which is the entire purpose of our Christian life, involves growing into loving communion with our brothers and sisters, reflecting in some way the communion of the Holy and Undivided Trinity.

Then God said, 'Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness...' So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

- from Genesis 1

We forget that the eucharistic celebration with a priest is a mere shadow of the Church's sacramental ideal, and that our repeated commemoration of the bishop in our services is no mere pandering to worldly authority but an attempt to express at least in words what is lacking in physical presence, which is the gathering of the diocese around its bishop to make eucharist to God. In some mystical way, each of the parishes, monasteries, and missions in a diocese, offering the services to God, does so as a single offering with each other under the common bishop who is commemorated.

However, the Episcopal Divine Liturgy is the eucharistic celebration par excellence, for there is the fullest expression of the Catholic Church. There is the bishop, who rightly divides the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15), with his priests as extensions of his sacramental care for his people, and his deacons entrusted with assisting him in serving God in the liturgies, as he leads the gathered people of God in making supplication to their Lord, offering thanks and praise, and being imbued in return with the grace of God which is from on high.

Where the bishop is present, there let the congregation gather, just as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.

- St Ignatius the God-bearer

It is our duty as Christians to fervently pray for our bishop, and to take the opportunity to pray with him as he offers prayer and worship to God with us and on our behalf. We should take part in diocesan events, for these are events in the life of our family in God. We should know and love each other, and pray and serve with each other under our bishop, according to our particular order within the Body of Christ. Then we shall see the services of the Church as they are intended to be, without the curtailments and concessions that have to be made in the absence of a bishop but to which we have become accustomed in the parishes and perhaps come to accept as normal. This is itself fascinating and enlightening.



It is not every time that we shall be able to pray with the bishop - distances are long, fares and fuel are expensive, episcopal visitations are perhaps fewer than we would prefer - yet we must make the effort in humility and joyful expectation, for when we do so, properly disposed, we become more fully what we are to be as members of the Church, and we open ourselves just that little bit more to participation in the life-creating energies of God.

Be eager to do everything in God's harmony, with the Bishop presiding in the place of God, and the Presbytery in the place of the council of the Apostles, and the Deacons, most sweet to me, entrusted with the service of Jesus Christ.

Each of you must be part of this chorus so that, being harmonious in unity, receiving God's pitch in unison, you may sing with one voice through Jesus Christ to the Father.

-St Ignatius the God-Bearer

Kamilavka-tip to my friend, Reader Gregory Soloviev, for the video clip.

Milan Synod - Part the Second

Last year, I posted this, wondering what had become of the excitement surrounding the supposedly imminent restoration of communion between the Holy Synod of Milan and the Russian Orthodox Church (Milan was once in communion with ROCOR, whence it acquired its hierarchy). I had welcomed the rumours, which I had heard from two independent and reliable sources, so could only conclude that whatever discussions had taken place had come to nothing. There was no public news about this, to my knowledge. I did, however, wonder at how this could ever have gone ahead with such public and vociferous opposition to the Russian Church from certain quarters within the Milan Synod. Other individuals aside, it is no secret that Archbishop John of New York is no fan of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Over the past few days, things have taken an interesting turn. Archbishop John has been elevated to the rank of Metropolitan and appointed leader of a new metropolis of North and South America, and the British Isles, formerly the American dioceses of the Milan Synod, along with its deanery of two priests in the British Isles. Remaining in communion with Milan, this new metropolis has been granted autonomous status.

At the same time, the Milan Synod issued a statement, reproduced on the news blog of Bishop Abbondio of Como, to the effect that it is not engaged in fraternal relations with any Russian breakaway group but only the Moscow Patriarchate. To my knowledge, this is the first public acknowledgement of any movement of Milan in the direction of Moscow, and I wonder whether it may be a sign of things to come.

Could it be that the release of Archbishop, now Metropolitan, John into his own autonomous synod was simply Milan's way of "trimming the fat", unburdening itself and thus allowing itself to move more freely to pursue what it had seemingly tried to pursue a little over a year ago? It seems curious that, a mere few days after all of this transpired, this document of the new metropolis was posted for public consumption.

Let's see where this goes. I, for one, shall continue to pray for communion with Milan under its head, Metropolitan Evloghios. I have long sympathised with this particular Old Calendar synod, if not for its stability then certainly for its resistance to some of the ecclesiological heresies that seem to be plaguing much of the Church today, and hoped for its restoration to the Orthodox Church. I do believe that it will be a healthful presence within the Moscow Patriarchate should this result in communion. It only seems unfortunate that any such good news will not apply to the former Milan clergy here in Britain, at least for now.

May God bless their efforts.

What The Filioque?

Seriously, what is going on in Russia? Why are Orthodox Christians, fresh out of the Russian Federation, reluctant to ask for blessings for travel, memorial services for their departed loved ones, or any of a number of other prayers offered by the Church, simply because they do not have money? What sort of situation have they become accustomed to that leads them to think that they will be refused if they cannot afford it, or that they would be expected to pay a fee for such things in the first place, or that would cause them to greet with such surprise the glad tidings that there is no charge? I can understand some people making some sort of donation to the church as a token of gratitude but that should come from their heart, no? This seems a different matter.

Has anybody else encountered this? Does it make anybody else feel as unwell as it does me? Have I painted a bullseye on myself by daring to mention it? Something smells foul to me.

New Bishop for Old Rite

Well, why should I be the only one who doesn't get to use tabloid-style headlines from time to time?

It seem that His Grace Bishop John of Caracas has been charged with the care of Old Ritualist communities in the Russian Church Abroad, which were placed under his extra-diocesan jurisdiction by a decision of the Synod of Bishops on the 13th (26th) of October. Bishop John was elevated to the holy episcopate at the parish of the Nativity, where he was consecrated according to the rites and ceremonies of the Old Rite. He, of course, replaces Bishop Daniel of Erie, who reposed in the Lord earlier this year. This would seem to indicate an ongoing support for the Old Rite and outreach to those who belong to it but who remain separated from the bosom of the Church. Long may it continue.



I am no expert on the Old Rite but only pick up snippets through reading due to my personal interest. However, I have noticed Bishop John's occasionally unusual attire and have always assumed that this was due to his Old Rite consecration. He does not always wear the klobuk, which is a modern combination of the kamilavka and monastic veil, but often the separate veil apparently worn over some form of headwear with a rounded top. Perhaps somebody with more knowledge can add more on this. Notice, as well, the distinctively less ornate Panagia (pectoral icon) and the Russian lestovka instead of the Greek prayer knots that can be seen in the above photograph, taken after Bishop John's consecration. Here are some videos from that occasion:



The Synod seems to be taking a few decisions lately without actually formalising them with a decree. I'm not sure what this means in terms of fluidity and future plans but I find it curious.

Liturgical Oddities

I stumbled upon this website yesterday and was delighted to find an Orthodox parish broadcasting its services. I began watching the most recent broadcast yesterday, as I very much enjoy looking at these things. Only, I could only watch so far before I just had to shut the computer down. I watched the rest today. Imagine my surprise at some of the things that I saw:

A subdeacon giving a litany, a deacon reading half of the Anaphora instead of the priest, a lay server placing items on the Holy Table, the priest not dividing the Lamb with the spear as usual but grabbing it and carelessly ripping It apart with his bare hands with seemingly little care for prevention of dropping crumbs. The Royal Doors were wide open throughout the Liturgy, even at the point where they would be closed if a bishop were to serve. Very peculiar was the complete omission of the Litany of Fervent Supplication, the Litany for the Catechumens, both Litanies of the Faithful, and the Litany before the Lord's Prayer, not to mention other minor things, which, while not major causes of alarm, were unusual, such as kneeling for part of the Anaphora (on a Sunday), the deacons splitting the litanies between them, and so forth. I found watching it more of a distraction than a spiritually beneficial experience.

Is this sort of thing common in North American parishes under Antioch?

Read more...

Prostrations on Sunday

When I was newly baptised or perhaps still a catechumen, I picked up a great deal of what I know about Orthodoxy from discussions on the internet. Of course, one can question the wisdom of this as it has many pitfalls as well as advantages. Among these snippets of information was the rule that prostrations are forbidden on Sundays, in honour of the Resurrection. I had no reason to doubt this so I simply accepted it, and it was further reinforced by the fact that we did not make prostrations on Sundays at my parish, or at my local Greek or Antiochian parishes which I visit from time to time.

So, one Sunday a couple of years ago, when I paid a visit to my local Russian parish and saw some of the faithful prostrate themselves at the epiklesis, my first thought was that perhaps they simply did not know any better. My second thought, having seldom been to a weekday Liturgy, was just how much these people held their Lord in awe and reverence. Really, from that point, I have restrained myself from making prostrations on Sundays, contrary to what my heart calls me to do, and only out of obedience to this "no Sunday prostrations" rule.

Then, just over a fortnight ago, I was at the conference of the Diocese of Sourozh. On the Sunday morning, Archbishop Elisey served the Episcopal Divine Liturgy with his clergy, and I was confused to find that, with the exception of one priest who had trouble with his back, I was the only person in the altar who did not prostrate at the epiklesis.

Not being one to leave any liturgical question unanswered, I did some digging and found statements

Read more...

All Saints Who Have Shone Forth in the British Isles

The Sunday after Pentecost is the feast of All Saints, when we commemorate those holy ones of God, both known and unknown, who have shone forth as beacons of the grace of God in their earthly lives. Over time, the custom developed of observing the following Sunday as All Saints of the local church, so for us last Sunday was All Saints Who Have Shone Forth in the Russian Land.

I mentioned this to a friend recently and he was surprised that the observance would be for the Saints of the particular jurisdiction rather than the local Saints. Of course, if our Orthodox situation in the west were canonically ordered, the two would be the same, and it is on this assumption that the arrangement came to be. However, this is not the case in Britain,

Read more...

Sourozh Diocesan Conference

I had the great pleasure over the weekend of taking part in the 35th annual conference of the Diocese of Sourozh, being the local diocese of the patriarchal Russian Orthodox Church in Great Britain & Ireland. The fellowship was worth it alone but the content of the conference was of great spiritual and practical benefit. My thoughts about the weekend are in need of some more refinement before I say very much here but, for now, I would like to say just how exceptionally well organised it was and how happy my brothers and sisters and I from three different parishes of the Church Abroad felt at being as warmly welcomed as we were - we were truly one family.

Perhaps I shall say a little more later. In the meanwhile, some photographs of the weekend may be seen here.

Milan Synod

Last year there was talk of reconciliation discussions between the Church of Russia and the Holy Synod of Milan. I heard about this from two sources, independently of each other. At one time I was told it looked likely that this would all be resolved by the end of last year and that Milan would be similar to ROCOR - an autonomous/semi-autonomous part of the Russian Orthodox Church.

I was very much looking forward to that. I have considerable respect for the Milan Synod and am acquainted with their "local" priest (these terms are relative, after all), with whom I was quietly hoping my parish could establish good relations.

So what happened?

Bishop Daniel of Erie Reposes - UPDATED

His Grace Bishop Daniel of Erie reposed in the Lord yesterday, the 13th (26th) of April, 2010, being the feast of the Holy Hieromartyr Artemon of Syria.

Bishop Daniel had been in poor health for some time and our prayers had been particularly asked for him in recent days. A short biography and photo gallery may be found on the website of the Eastern American Diocese. According to the ROCOR Synod website, the funeral is to take place on mid-Pentecost, which is Wednesday of this week. Although details have not yet been finalised, I would be very surprised if the funeral were held anywhere other than the Church of the Nativity, which to all intents and purposes served as Bishop Daniel's cathedral.

Bishop Daniel was ROCOR's extra-territorial bishop for those who belong to the Old Rite, which has been discussed in some small detail on this blog in the past. This was part of the efforts on the part of the Church Abroad to reach out to those who had been so badly treated in the past in order to bring them back into the Church's fold. However, wounds run deep and many of these communities have developed in interesting ways during these centuries of separation, making reconciliation difficult in many cases. As such, only one parish has so far returned within the Church Abroad, (although I gather that others have returned in the Russian Patriarchal Church). ROCOR reaffirmed its support of the Old Rite in the consecration of Bishop John of Caracas in 2008, which was performed according to the Old Rite. However, whether a new bishop will be consecrated to care for our brothers and sisters of the Old Rite remains to be seen.

Bishop Daniel was also sympathetic to the Western Rite, seeing it as simply another equivalent to the Old Rite.

Whatever happens, I am sure that the people of the Church of the Nativity have lost a loving pastor, and I pray that they find some consolation.

In a blessed falling asleep, grant rest, O Lord, to the soul of thy servant the Bishop Daniel, and make his memory to be eternal.

Update: 30/04/2010
Photographs of Bishop Daniel's funeral.
And a video:

A Diaconal Missionary Proposal

Again we pray Thee, look down with mercy upon our Church, do Thou strengthen, establish and increase her, and evermore defend her against the wiles of her enemies. Do Thou cast down all dissension, schism, heresy, apostasy, and unbelief, and spread abroad in our land, and in every place, piety, devotion and zeal for Orthodoxy; illumine those in ignorance and error, and those enslaved unto sin, and soften the hardness of their hearts, that they may come to know Thee; help them and us to live holy and blameless lives, and root the saving Faith firmly and make it to bear fruit in our hearts; we fervently entreat Thee, hearken and have mercy.

The above is one of the supplementary petitions customarily included in the Litany of Fervent Supplication at the Divine Liturgy. It is called the Litany of Fervent Supplication because, having just been nourished by the readings of the Holy Scriptures and having them expounded, we are called to implore God for his mercy in even greater earnest, with our whole being. The deacon exhorts us with the words, 'Let us all say with our whole soul and our whole mind; let us say:', and the next two petitions are, 'O Lord Almighty, God of our Fathers, we pray Thee, hearken and have mercy', 'Have mercy upon us, O God, according to thy great mercy; we pray Thee, hearken and have mercy'. The people respond with a threefold, 'Lord, have mercy'.

Yet it is also called the Augmented Litany, and the reason for this is that the service books provide a number of additional petitions to be added to the litany at the discretion of the deacon for the various needs of the people. In his excellent piece on the diaconate, Archdeacon Photios Touloumes writes:

The deacons also led the people in prayer, standing in their midst, asking for the peace of the world, for the union of all and for whatever other petitions or needs the faithful requested.

Read more...

Cathedral of St Nicholas, Nice

Some weeks ago, I became aware of the dispute over ownership of this cathedral. It had been leased by Tsar St Nicholas II to the Archbishop of St Petersburg for 99 years. In that time, it came to be used by the Rue Daru jurisdiction under the Patriarchate of Constantinople, (of which the Basilite group became part after leaving the Diocese of Sourozh). The lease expired in 2007 yet its current occupants are now claiming rightful ownership.

What had managed to bypass me until today was the news from three weeks ago that a French court ruled that the Russian state, as the successor to the Tsar as the governing entity of Russia, is the rightful owner of the cathedral and all properties attached to it. An appeal was launched immediately.

It may be remembered that the Dormition Cathedral in Ennismore Gardens, London, was at the heart of a not dissimilar legal battle only recently, again due to members of this same jurisdiction which, as Fr Andrew shares, has long been problematic.

Jurisdictional claims over Estonia, receiving Bishop Basil and his clergy without canonical release in the United Kingdom, poaching suspended Antiochian clergy in North America*, and now attempting to misappropriate property in France - when will the power-grabbing of the Constantinople Patriarchate cease? It does nobody any good. It does our Orthodox witness no good, and it wounds the bonds of filial love that should exist among brothers and sisters in Christ. Please, let it end.

I think that our First Hierarchs need to approach this matter with humility and try to reach some resolution. Anybody who saw the excerpt from 60 Minutes would not fail to be moved with sympathy for Patriarch Bartholomew and gain some understanding of the situation in which the Constantinople Patriarchate struggles to exist, but grabbing power, territory, and property elsewhere cannot be the solution, surely.

That He may deliver His people from enemies both visible and invisible, and confirm in us oneness of mind, brotherly love, and piety, let us pray to the Lord: Lord, have mercy!

*This came in the wake of the Patriarchate of Antioch declaring its support for the Constantinople Patriarchate in its uncanonical acceptance of clergy from the Russian Church, only for Constantinople to then do the same thing to Antioch. I confess that I felt a sense of sinful satisfaction when this happened, of which I am not proud.

The Order of Deaconess: Liturgical Thoughts

St Phoebe of Cenchreae, by the hand of Suzanne Schleck

O Lord and Master, Who didst not reject women who were willing to offer themselves, insofar as is meet, to minister in thy holy houses, but didst receive them into an order of ministries; do Thou also bestow the grace of thy Holy Spirit upon this thy handmaid who desireth to offer herself unto Thee, and fill her with the grace of the diaconate, as Thou didst bestow thy diaconate upon Phoebe, whom Thou didst call to the work of ministry. O God, grant that she may blamelessly remain in thy holy houses, diligent in appropriate and prudent conduct. And prove thy handmaid perfect so that she, standing at the judgement-seat of Christ, may receive the worthy reward of her good conduct. Through the mercy and love for mankind of thine only-begotten Son, with Whom Thou art blessed, together with thine all-holy, good, and life-creating Spirit, always, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

- From the rite for the ordination of a deaconess

There are differing thoughts within the Orthodox Church on the subject on the order of deaconess and its revival. I have sympathy with a number of them but discussion of those matters isn't really the purpose of this post. Rather, I just find a little liturgical exploration interesting to bring some clarity to exactly what it is that we are talking about when we refer to deaconesses.

Byzantine practice has always drawn a distinction between the forms of ordination to minor orders (chanters, readers, and subdeacons), and those to major orders (bishops, priests, and deacons). Here are some of the differences.

Read more...

Calendar and Conscience

I do not intend for this to be a polemical post. My views on the use of the Meletian calendar by Orthodox Christians have been made known many times and in a number of places. Let it be sufficient for me to say here that, as things stand, I do not believe that it is in keeping with the life of the Orthodox Church.

I have been struggling with this matter for some months, especially since having been ordained as a reader. On the one hand, I wish to remain faithful to the canonical discipline of the Church while at the same time I do not wish to cause offence to my brothers and sisters - some of whom are good friends - who ask me to participate in services on the Meletian calendar.

I politely declined a kind invitation over the summer and simply attended, only vesting for Communion. Then, more recently, I was invited to be the reader at another Liturgy and initially declined politely. Then, realising that the Saturday reading would be the same regardless of the calendar used, I decided to be accommodating and read. On the kliros, however, it soon became apparent that the Saints being commemorated were not those of the day, and that I was expected to sing what were essentially the wrong troparia and kontakia.

In the end, and after some discussion with my parish priest, I have concluded that it is perhaps best for me not to participate in services on the Meletian calendar beyond my presence in the congregation. All of the other reasons aside, as its core, I feel that the unilateral adoption of this calendar by a substantial minority of Orthodox Christians has been the source of immeasurable and completely unnecessary division and pain within the Body of Christ, and I'm afraid that I could not maintain a clear conscience were I to take part in its use. This is no judgement on those who have been able to harmonise these concerns or who, out of necessity, are faced with a choice between the Meletian calendar or nothing.

Therefore, in keeping with the received custom of the Orthodox Church, and in obedience to my bishop, who has publicly expressed his thoughts about the Meletian calendar, I will only serve on the Orthodox Church calendar.

N.B. - This blog originally existed on a different Google/Blogger account. It was transferred to the account in which it currently resides using the "export blog" feature provided by Google. It seems that, in the transfer, the order of some of the comments on this post (and possibly others) has become confused. For the sake of clarity, please read the third comment before the second, which was the original order of their appearance.

Patronal Festival

In that meekness, humility, and love, which made their abode in thy soul, thou didst diligently minister to the suffering, O holy Passion-bearer Princess Elisabeth, and with faith didst endure suffering and death for Christ with the Martyr Barbara. With her do thou pray for all that honour thee with love! - Troparion, tone 2

The 18th (5th) of July is the feast of St Elisabeth the New Martyr, whose relics are currently in the UK. It will indeed be a blessing to have her relics here for her feast.

It is also the patronal festival of my parish, and the day when we plan to move into our new church. To mark the occasion, we are planning a full day of events to which all are welcome.

The plan is to begin at 10 o' clock in the morning with the Lesser Blessing of the Waters, followed by the Hours and Divine Liturgy. If the weather permits, we shall have a Cross Procession, which is a traditional act of worship for patronal festivals, which involves processing around the outside of the church three times, making four stations, forming the points of the Precious and Life-Giving Cross around the building. All the while, hymns will be sung and prayers offered for the church, the parish, the town, and the departed, while the people are blessed with holy water and the icon of St Elisabeth.

We shall then take a break for lunch (bring and share), then watch some videos of the life of St Elisabeth and the work of the nuns of St Elisabeth's Convent in Minsk. Some of you will probably know the nuns as some of them travel around Europe in a van, selling their wares - icons, vestments, other liturgical accoutrements - and they come to Britain usually twice each year.

We then plan to close the day's events with Vespers at half past three in the afternoon.

There is a flyer here.

I do hope some of you are able to come.

O Thou Who didst proclaim that even if thy disciples were silent, the very stones would cry out, so also grant that this holy house may proclaim Thee and draw all who dwell in this town and county to worship Thee in spirit and in truth. Inflame our hearts with love for Thee that we may offer to Thee ourselves and all Thou hast given us to the glory of thy holy Name. We fervently entreat Thee, O merciful One, hearken and have mercy!

- petition for the founding of a new church, from Augmented Litany at the Divine Liturgy