?Donatism - Sergianist - Self-Anathemas?
The issue of "donatism" has oft been brought up by the voices of "world Orthodoxy" to try and maintain that the stand of resistance authored by Blessed Metropolitan Philaret is not only illegitimate, but heretical. It is to be clarified that donatism involves the condemnation of another party because of "their personal sins", not the errancy or schism of their doctrine, which as those links provided show, has sound Patristic foundation. Furthermore, the mention of "Catacomb successions", those which have the blessing of the "historically canonical authorities in Russia" comes up, because it validates resistance to the sergianist MP and questions the ROCOR moral collapse of the MP as the "legitimate interlocutor" in what can be termed a "new normal". Blessed Metropolitan Philaret maintained that no valid dialogue could be undertaken unless these bodies were present and took active part in the deliberations; instead, ROCOR, has uncanonically separated from constituent Bishops and dioceses and now presumes to engage in an all out campaign of slander of its own members who disagree with the way that dialogue is taken place, maintaining that their voices of dissent are illegitimate because they are "schismatic", "illegitimate", "pretender", "crackpot", etc., etc, etc.--textbook donatism and an utter breach of sobornost'. I am thankful you gave me this opportunity to explain my post and hope that you consider well the lack of credibility of maintaining a position with a polity which by its actions falls under its own historic anathemas and invites resistance in its "schism" from itself. The synodeia of ROCOR is becoming nothing more than a robber synod by word, deed, and thought--that is a sin I would just not want to see you bear.
Pray for me, a sinner,
Faithful follower...
Dear Faithful Follower of God
I am confused as to the connection between donatism and what you write below. Who stated that the catacomb consecrations are invalid? Certainly not me. I don't understand your point, nor see how it relates to donatism.
Glory to our Lord, Jesus Christ!
This has been rebutted by a previous post, but other people "choose"
not to deal with Orthodoxy on "canonical terms". Maintaining
that "catacomb consecrations are invalid" is as tenable as stating
that those who followed the will of St. Tikhon, St. Joseph of
Petrograd, St. Peter of Krutitsky, St. Cyril of Kazan and
pursued "resistance" (which has its "patristic" foundation detailed
in the following links) being "obedient" to the legitimate
authorities and resisting Soviet infiltration and dissolution of the
Russian Orthodox church. I think [some of the] comments are quite
unsalutary and an affront to the witness of the New Martyrs and
Confessors, but this seems to be the new direction of ROCOR, a body
which has lost "all credibility" for falling under its own
anathemas. Can a body which falls under its own anathemas not be
schismatic? Why is it the self-anathemizers think so? How is it
they think people opposing them are in "schism" when they have
placed themselves in a state of ecclesiological contradiction and
dissolution?
Pray for me, a sinner,
Faithful follower...
PS Here are the links "again". It is hoped that people taking the
time to put forward opinions "educate" themselves first and stop
spreading misinformation, but then again, what can be expected of a
body and its followers which defend self-anathemization as a
necessary sacrifice at the altar of nationalistic-political
expediency?
See:
The Doctrine of the Orthodox Church: The Structure of the Church
Announcement of the Extraordinary Joint Conference of the Sacred Community of the Holy Mount Athos