Diocese of Sourozh

[Alex Haig]

Does anyone know what's going on in the Russian Diocese in the UK? I've heard something is happening but news on the issue is limited.

With love in the Risen Christ

Alex

[James Aubuchon]

I refer you to:

Bitter rift in UK Orthodox Church
By Becky Branford
BBC News

The Moscow Patriarchate is reluctant to relinquish its UK diocese

A bitter power struggle is taking place within the UK branch of the Russian
Orthodox Church, over a plan to break from Moscow.

Parish councillors say they have been expelled for opposing the plan, and
that the locks on the cathedral doors have been changed to keep them out.

Acting church head Bishop Basil of Sergievo says the values of the Moscow
church are at odds with the UK diocese.

The row is an expression of old splits over the character of the UK church.

It also reflects fast-moving changes of allegiance within the Orthodox
Church around the world since the collapse of the Soviet Union, say experts.


In this case, Bishop Basil wants to break away from Moscow and be accepted
under the jurisdiction of Constantinople - which according to religious
commentator Felix Corley, is a more "Western-oriented, liberal grouping".

At the source of many of the tensions, explains Mr Corley, is the changing
character of the Orthodox congregation, particularly in London, with the
influx of Russian emigres over recent years.

'Western' values

For decades until his death in 2003, the church was led by Anthony Bloom,
who was born in Switzerland and educated in Paris. Under his leadership, Mr
Corley explained, the church thrived, but developed an "independent,
Western" character.

Those who have embraced the vision of Metropolitan Anthony should be given
the opportunity to carry this vision forward

Bishop Basil

These values are resisted by many of the church's new, more conservative
Russian-speaking members, who now make up the bulk of the congregation. They
expect a traditional church, he says, similar to that they grew up with.

In a frank letter to clergy and congregation on 1 May, Bishop Basil - an
American - set out his reasons for wanting to leave the Moscow Patriarchate.


He explains that "for some years the Cathedral parish in London has been
troubled by conflict between two groups of parishioners with very different
interests and, indeed, styles of churchmanship".

He concedes that "a claim is being made that there is support within the
patriarchate for those who are waging the campaign against the leadership of
the diocese. This claim is not being denied. Recently a 'withdrawal of
labour' has been declared at the London cathedral, causing considerable
disruption during Holy Week."

Bishop Basil acknowledges that the two groups "have different interests and
needs".

"Those who have embraced the vision of Metropolitan Anthony [Bloom] should
be given the opportunity to carry this vision forward," he says, by leaving
Moscow and going into the jurisdiction of Constantinople.

Those who do not wish to follow him, he says, are free to leave.

Bishop Basil was not available for direct comment.

'We don't want to go'

His stance has infuriated Russian-speaking parishioners.


Bishop Basil changed the cathedral locks, say opponents

"We represent thousands of people who don't want to go to Constantinople. We
represent the majority of the congregation," said Liubov Alieva, one of six
members of the parish council who say they were expelled about six weeks ago
for their opposition.

She says two of the expelled members were also church wardens, but are no
longer able to access the cathedral because the locks have been changed.

"We now have in London 100,000 Russian emigres who need this place... Bishop
Basil is more than welcome to [move to Constantinople] himself, but he's
taking everything with him - all the property and everything."

The issue of the church property - worth millions of pounds - is fraught.

"I'm ashamed to say that there is going to be a legal battle," said Ivan
Leonidov, a human rights lawyer from Russia. "It's the right of our people,
our cultural right, to keep this property."

On 5 May Moscow Patriarch Alexy II said in a letter to Bishop Basil: "What
you propose is not only a step backward.

"Going down the path of a multiplication of divisions we risk losing...
peace and stability in Universal Orthodoxy, and the eventual price will be
new suffering for the flock."

'Mirror on world'

"What's happening now in the British diocese is really a mirror of what's
happening more widely," says religious expert Mr Corley.

The Moscow Patriarchate, he says, is "expending vast effort" to bring
Orthodox churches overseas back into the fold and to expand into new areas.

Meanwhile, there is an opposite process of "fragmentation" under way in the
former Soviet republics.

"The end of the communist period meant within the Orthodox heartland -
Russia, Bulgaria, Ukraine especially, and Estonia - Orthodox people were no
longer dragooned by their government into being part of a particular
patriarchate. It was then possible to set up alternative Orthodox
structures.

"So the Moscow Patriarchate is not only trying to shore up its own authority
at home, but simultaneously it's working hard abroad to expand."

But, he says, "these jurisdictional disputes are very, very messy. And the
question is, who does the property belong to?"

[Alex Haig]

Yes, thankyou for the article. There is also much information at www.dioceseinfo.org (http://www.dioceseinfo.org).

However, this information is all very impersonal, I'd like to find out what actually is happening at the personal level in the diocese, if at all possible.

With love in the Risen Christ

Alex

[Andrew Morris]

I have only talked to a very few people in the Diocese, and I can only possibly speak for myself. i still feel in a state of shock at what has happened. At the same time, I realise how incredibly naive I have been and how this move - of the Sourozh Diocese to the Ecumenical Patriarchate - should have been made some twenty years ago, i.e. before the fall of communism. I am appalled by the heavy handedness of the Moscow Patriarchate's treatment of Bishop Basil; I am deeply saddened by the inevitable fragmentation of the Diocese - because it is clear to me already that not all the Sourozh priests are behind Bishop Basil; I am very concerned that all the very positive initiatives- conferences, journal, youth camps, publishing house, liturgical translation work - made by the Diocese of Sourozh over the last fifty years are now in the hands of someone of whom I know nothing.
It is clear there is no 'happy ending' to this - the lawyers will make a fortune out of the disputes about property; the clergy are divided; and unless the Ecumenical Patriarchate upholds Bishops Basil's appeal quickly, I fear that Bishop Basil will be driven into a sort of exile.

[Matthew Panchisin]

In the letter of His Holiness Patriarch Alexis II of Moscow he doesn't seem to be heavy handed, but rather concerned for everyone.

[Matthew Panchisin]

To all whom it may concern;

I should have refrained from commenting and offering an opinion based on a few letters. Being removed from the situation I can't accurately offer any commentary.

Nevertheless I sure hope things work out.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[Fr. Alexander Tefft]

Bishop Basil is still a bishop of the Moscow Patriarchate, fully entitled to serve the holy mysteries. He is simply "relieved of administrative duties" and retired. His status is equal to that of any retired bishop.

The situation in Sourozh is extremely painful for all of us, especially the clergy. Archbishop Innokenty, the temporary administrator, has stated publicly that he wishes life in the diocese to continue as usual, as we work for internal unity in the spirit of peace.

Once I have received approval from appropriate authorities, I shall post a reply to the BBC that I have written. In it, I outline what I believe to be the basic ecclesiological issues under question.

[Fr. Alexander Tefft]

I should add that I am a deacon of the OCA, on loan to the diocese of Sourozh, and therefore occupy neutral ground.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear friends,

Without wishing this to be taken in any way as a comment on any of the posts made thus far, I am going to close the present thread on the current state of life in the diocese of Sourozh, UK, for the time being.

The situation in the diocese of Sourozh is still very much in examination, with a commission established by the Patriarchate of Moscow to explore it, and an appeal having been lodged with the Ecumenical Patriarchate. While the situation is under consideration by these bodies, it seems prudent to forestall discussion here in the Community.

Again, this is not a comment on any of the above posts; simply a note that it seems best not to carry on an open internet dialogue about matters still being considered by these ecclesiastical bodies.

If you have any questions about this decision on my part, please do feel free to send me a Private Message.

INXC, Matthew

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear all,

Now that the appeal lodged with the ecumenical patriarchate has been heard and deliberated upon, with a response issued (as of only a few moments ago), it may be appropriate to re-open this thread for posting -- so long as we can keep discussion on this matter focused within the scope of this Discussion Community; namely, the discussion of all matters, including this one, from the framework of the Church's patristic, monastic and liturgical heritage (and not simply an opinion debate on the matter to hand).

The response issued by the ecumenical patriarchate only a few hours ago reads as follows:



From the Ecumenical Patriarchate, Holy and Sacred Synod, 8 June 2006

The Holy and Sacred Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate during its meeting on June 8 2006 under the presidency of His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, examined the appeal of His Grace Basil, Bishop of Sergievo, to the Ecumenical Patriarch and, taking under consideration canons 9, 17 and 28 of the 4th Ecumenical Council unanimously decided to accept under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate the above named Bishop, placing him in the Patriarchal Exarchate for Orthodox Parishes of Russian Tradition in Western Europe.

Thereafter the Holy and Sacred Synod proceeded, at the request of Archbishop Gabriel of Komana, head of the above mentioned Exarchate, to elect Bishop Basil with the title of Bishop of Amphipolis, as his auxiliary Bishop, to serve the pastoral needs of Orthodox living in Great Britain who desire to place themselves under the jurisdiction of the Exarchate.

At the Patriarchate, June 8, 2006

From the Chief Secretariat


INXC, Matthew

[Fr Aaron Warwick]

For those interested, the canons cited by the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate are referenced below.

Canon 9 of the Fourth Council:
IF any Clergyman have a matter against another clergyman, he shall not forsake his bishop and run to secular courts; but let him first lay open the matter before his own Bishop, or let the matter be submitted to any person whom each of the parties may, with the Bishop's consent, select. And if any one shall contravene these decrees, let him be subjected to canonical penalties. And if a clergyman have a complaint against his own or any other bishop, let it be decided by the synod of the province. And if a bishop or clergyman should have a difference with the metropolitan of the province, let him have recourse to the Exarch of the Diocese, or to the throne of the Imperial City of Constantinople, and there let it be tried.

Canon 17 of the Fourth Council:
Outlying or rural parishes shall in every province remain subject to the bishops who now have jurisdiction over them, particularly if the bishops have peaceably and continuously governed them for the space of thirty years. But if within thirty years there has been, or is, any dispute concerning them, it is lawful for those who hold themselves aggrieved to bring their cause before the synod of the province. And if any one be wronged by his metropolitan, let the matter be decided by the exarch of the diocese or by the throne of Constantinople, as aforesaid. And if any city has been, or shall hereafter be newly erected by imperial authority, let the order of the ecclesiastical parishes follow the political and municipal example.

Canon 28 of the Fourth Council:
Following in all things the decisions of the holy Fathers, and acknowledging the canon, which has been just read, of the One Hundred and Fifty Bishops beloved-of-God (who assembled in the imperial city of Constantinople, which is New Rome, in the time of the Emperor Theodosius of happy memory), we also do enact and decree the same things concerning the privileges of the most holy Church of Constantinople, which is New Rome. For the Fathers rightly granted privileges to the throne of old Rome, because it was the royal city. And the One Hundred and Fifty most religious Bishops, actuated by the same consideration, gave equal privileges (isa presbeia) to the most holy throne of New Rome, justly judging that the city which is honoured with the Sovereignty and the Senate, and enjoys equal privileges with the old imperial Rome, should in ecclesiastical matters also be magnified as she is, and rank next after her; so that, in the Pontic, the Asian, and the Thracian dioceses, the metropolitans only and such bishops also of the Dioceses aforesaid as are among the barbarians, should be ordained by the aforesaid most holy throne of the most holy Church of Constantinople; every metropolitan of the aforesaid dioceses, together with the bishops of his province, ordaining his own provincial bishops, as has been declared by the divine canons; but that, as has been above said, the metropolitans of the aforesaid Dioceses should be ordained by the archbishop of Constantinople, after the proper elections have been held according to custom and have been reported to him.

[Mariamni]

Dear Friends,

Matthew wrote:

The situation in the diocese of Sourozh is still very much in examination, with a commission established by the Patriarchate of Moscow to explore it, and an appeal having been lodged with the Ecumenical Patriarchate. While the situation is under consideration by these bodies, it seems prudent to forestall discussion here in the Community.

The first of these bodies has not yet made any conclusion, and perhaps discussion remains premature.

In XC,

Mariamni

[M.C. Steenberg]

The situation in the diocese of Sourozh is still very much in examination, with a commission established by the Patriarchate of Moscow to explore it, and an appeal having been lodged with the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

The first of these bodies has not yet made any conclusion, and perhaps discussion remains premature.

This is a valid point. Though, so far as I understand the situation, it strikes me that at this stage, the commission established by the Patriarchate of Moscow, and the role of Bishop Basil (formerly of Sergievo, now of Amphipolis) with regard to the parishes of the exarchate in Britain for which he has been made responsible, are two separate matters. The commission -- again, only insofar as I understand this -- is constituted to examine the situation of the diocese of Sourozh, of which Bishop Basil is no longer a member.

But if people would prefer this thread closed, that can be done; or to separate it into two threads for the two groups - that is also a possibility.

INXC, Matthew

[Tim Grass]

So..... does the Diocese of Sourozh exist anymore?

[Tim Grass]

....and if so.... are there any people/priests left in it?

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

So..... does the Diocese of Sourozh exist anymore?
....and if so.... are there any people/priests left in it?

Yes the Diocese of Sourozh under the Moscow Patriarchate still exists with a bishop, clergy and laity. What has happened is that Bishop Basil the former administrator of the Diocese along with some of the clergy and laity have gone under the omophor of the Ecumenical Patriarchate (Constantinople).

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Tim Grass]

Thanks for the clarification Father. I suppose what I'm really curious about is whether there is a practical afterlife of Sourozh.... are there enough clergy and people left who aren't going to follow Bishop Basil into the EP, that the Diocese of Sourozh will actually be more than just the odd parish here or there in the U.K.?

--tim

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Thanks for the clarification Father. I suppose what I'm really curious about is whether there is a practical afterlife of Sourozh.... are there enough clergy and people left who aren't going to follow Bishop Basil into the EP, that the Diocese of Sourozh will actually be more than just the odd parish here or there in the U.K.?

--tim

I am too far away from the situation to know this but perhaps others would know better.

In Christ -Fr Raphael

[Paul Fowler]

Thanks for the clarification Father. I suppose what I'm really curious about is whether there is a practical afterlife of Sourozh.... are there enough clergy and people left who aren't going to follow Bishop Basil into the EP, that the Diocese of Sourozh will actually be more than just the odd parish here or there in the U.K.?

--tim

Happily life goes on in Sourozh. HH Patriarch Alexei has appointed Archbishop Innokenty of Korsun (who is Bishop of the Patriarchal Diocese based in Paris) as Temporary Administrator. Bishopo Elisey of Bogorodsk has been apppointed as his Vicar Bishop, we are very positive about the future and thank God for all the care He has shown us through His Bishops and Patriarch.


Paul

[Paul Fowler]

Not sure if this is the right place for this, but on 30th March the Moscow Patriarchate sent Bishop Basil's file to Constantinople. As I see it (and I'm open to correction) thist means that Bishop Basil (formerly Bishop of Sergievo and Temporary Administrator of the Diocese of Sourozh) is no longer in a kind of ecclesiological no-mans-land, where he was a Bishop retired by Patriarch Alexei, whilst wanting to be transferred to the jurisdiction of Patriarch Batholomew and is now unequivocally under Constantinople. With this my hope and prayer is that all of us involved in this whole sorry mess can now move on


Paul