• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
1
Uncanonical Orthodoxy: The Russian Orthodox Autonomous Church
By Alexander Valerievich Slesarev
 –
Minsk Theological Seminary
With the publication of this article, we continue the presentation of the history of pseudo-secessionist entities that have arisen in the Orthodox Church during the twentieth century.Among the many schismatic groups that have came into existence in the 1990's, perhaps themost notorious is so-called Russia Orthodox Autonomous Church (ROAC).
ROCOR’s
Venture Into RussiaA precursor to the emergence of the Russia Orthodox Autonomous Church can be consideredthe adoption on the 2 / 15 May 1990, by the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox ChurchOutside of Russia (ROCOR) under its then First Hierarch, Metropolitan Vitaly, of the so-called"Regulations on the Free Parishes
”
. This document marked the official proclamation of a newforeign policy by ROCOR, aimed at establishing parallel church structures (dioceses, deaneriesand parishes) within the USSR. The move was made possible by the easing of pressure onreligious organizations that was occuring in the final years of glasnost and perestroika. Therationale for the creation of new church structures parallel to the canonical Russian OrthodoxChurch of the Moscow Patriarchate (ROC-MP), was, primarily a result of historical factors.ROCOR had existed for 70 years as the free part of the Russian Orthodox Church and was ableto witness openly and explicitly about the repression of the Church in the homeland by theSoviet regime. Its culture and history was greatly influenced by the post-revolutionary WhiteMovement and the MP was regarded with suspicion and even animosity by many members of ROCOR at that time. Now in a changing political climate it was possible to give this animosity apractical expression.In the spring of 1990, immediately after the publication of the Regulations, ArchimandriteValentine (Rusantsov) (pictured below) rector of the Tsar Constantine Cathedral of Suzdal,together with his parish, left the MP and came into the jurisdiction of ROCOR. The main reasonfor
the archimandrite’s defection
was the long running feud between Valentine and his rulingbishop, who was then the Archbishop of Vladimir and Suzdal, the now Metropolitan Valentine(Mishchuk) of Orenburg and Buzuluksky.
The Establishment of the “Free Russian Orthodox Church”
 The acceptance of Archimandrite Valentine into the jurisdiction of ROCOR received wide publicity and become an example for dozens of parish communities in various regions of the country (Moscow, St.Petersburg, Siberia, Kaliningrad, Bryansk, Penza region, Stavropol andPrimorsky Krai, etc.). The hierarchy of ROCOR proclaimed the newparishes in Russia to be called the
Free Russian Orthodox Church(FROC)
and Archimandrite Valentine was appointed
Exarch of theSynod of Bishops of ROCOR in Russia
. In February 1991 there was held
 
2an episcopal consecration of Archimandrite Valentine (Rusantsov) as
Bishop of Suzdal andVladimirskogo
(2). As part of this consecration he swore an oath of loyalty to the ROCOR Synodand came under its canonical authority. In the same year, the Suzdal Diocese of the ROCOR wasregistered in the Ministry of Justice of Russia as a diocese of the Free Russian Orthodox Church(3).Corresponding with the increase in activity of ROCOR in the expansionof the FROC, was the arrival in Moscow of the ROCOR Bishop of Cannes,
Bishop Varnava (Prokofiev) (pictured left)
. However, theactivities of Bishop Varnava were very controversial, and included hisactive support of pro-fascist National Patriotic Front of "Pamyat" and areadiness to recognize the canonicity of the schismatic UkrainianOrthodox Church of the Kiev Patriarchate as well as a desire tocompletely subordinate the FROC under his authority. The aboveactions, combined with his own leadership ambitions, led BishopValentine (Rusantsov) to enter into open conflict with Bishop Varnava.Bishop Varnava of Cannes and the formation of the FROC
 –
PSCA
Archbishop Lazar
In response to the sharp criticism against himself Bishop Varnavapersuaded the Synod of Bishops of ROCOR to withdraw BishopValentine's authority to manage the FROC. Seeing an opportunity toseize power, Bishop Valentine refused to recognize the victory of Bishop Varnava and at the Suzdal Diocesan Congress held in 1993,withdrew from the jurisdictional subordination of ROCOR, whileclaiming to maintain Eucharistic communion - a highly controversialand scandalous stance. A further step to distance the FROC fromROCOR was the decision of the IV Congress of Clergy and Laity of FROC, held in March 1994 that proclaimed the formation of theProvisional Supreme Church Authority of the Free Russia OrthodoxChurch (PSCA - FROC) (4). This PSCA regarded itself as being theHighest Church Authority and as being not only an alternative to theROCOR Synod of Bishops, but that the ROCOR Synod should be subordinate to itself! TheArchbishop of Tambov and Morshansk Lazar (Zhurbenko, was elected the President of theFROC
 –
PSCA. He had come from the Russian Catacomb Church (5), and in 1982 had entered the jurisdiction of ROCOR and been secretly ordained bishop by Bishop Varnava (Prokofiev) of Cannes who had come to the USSR on a tourist visa. (6)The Vice-President of FROC-PSCA became Bishop Valentine (Rusantsov), now elevated to therank of Archbishop. Perhaps the most controversial act of the PSCA was the ordination of newbishops, among which included the Bishop of Odessa Agafangel (Pashkovsky), Bishop TheodoreBorisov (Gineevsky), vicar of the Suzdal diocese, and Bishop Seraphim of Sukhumi (Zinchenko),vicar of the Suzdal diocese. In response to these acts, the Synod of Bishops of ROCORsuspended Archbishop Lazar and Bishop Valentine from serving, and refused to recognize the
 
3validity of the new episcopal consecrations. In the developing conflict, the ROCOR Synoddecided to ordain a new bishop for the management of Russia's parishes. The choice fell on theArchimandrite Evtikhii (Kurochkin), who was consecrated as Bishop of Ishim and Sibirskogo (7).The Lesna Council & the Short PeaceAfter the withdrawal of Bishop Varnava (Prokofiev) from Russia, which occurred in late 1994,there was a thawing of relations between the FROC and ROCOR. The Council of Bishops of ROCOR, held in December 1994 in the Lesna Convent (France), saw the signing of an Act of reconciliation between the Synod of Bishops of ROCOR and the FROC - PSEA. Under the termsof reconciliation the FROC - PSCA was abolished, and many of the earlier decisions lost theirforce. In particular, Valentine (Rusantsov) lost the title of "Archbishop" and again was named a
“B
ishop
”
. In relation to the
“bishops”
arbitrarily ordained by the FROC - PSCA, it was decided toaccept their episcopal dignity provided they swore an episcopal oath to the ROCOR Synod. Avery important decision of the Lesna Council was the reorganization of the spiritual governanceof the FROC in Russia, with the establishment of the Diocese of Moscow, St. Petersburg andNorth Russian, Suzdal, Siberian, and South Russian Odessa, Black Sea and Kuban. Forconsistency in the management of Russia's dioceses, instead of the abolished FROC-PSCA, therewas established a Bishops' Conference, in its activities completely subordinate to the Synod of Bishops of ROCOR (8).Bishop Evtikhii and the Suspension of Bishops Lazar & Valentine
Bishop Evtikhii (Kurochkin)
 
of Ishim
 
Despite the resolution of the existing problems and a sense of orderbeing restored in the administration of the Russian parishes, inJanuary 1995 the Bishops' Conference was shaken by anotherscandal. Once again it was the barely restrained, lust for power of Bishop Valentine that was the source of trouble. Bishop Evtikhii putforward against Bishop Valentine, a number of charges relating tohis less-than-episcopal lifestyle and manner of church governance.Moreover, Bishop Evtikhii conveyed his displeasure in a writtenreport addressed to the First Hierarch of ROCOR, MetropolitanVitaly (Ustinov), accusing Archbishop Lazarus, Bishop Valentine, andthe other bishops ordained by those two, of disloyalty to theROCOR Synod of Bishops.The outcome of the stand-off, was the suspension from all priestly duties of ArchbishopLazarus (Zhurbenko) and Bishop Valentine (Rusantsov). The leadership of Russia's flock of theROCOR was entrusted to
Bishop Evtikhii (Kurochkin)
. In addition, the Russian hierarchsordained by the FROC - PSCA, were asked to prove their loyalty by recognizing thecondemnation of Archbishop Lazar and Bishop Valentine, as well as over a trial period, to reside
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...