Talk:Holy Orthodox Church in North America

Although I am not judging the merits of this article, and although for all I know its statements may be true, it is filled with the church's POV. If it were alone, I could remove a sentence such as "Since 1965, most of the Orthodox Churches have violated the canons which forbid common worship with the non-Orthodox and imparting the sacred Mysteries (sacraments) to them." However, rendering it NPOV will require a complete overhaul. This church's rejection of most Orthodox churches alone makes it worthy of an article; hopefully it can be made high-quality in time. Nyttend 03:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I would wish to comment on "Since 1965, most of the Orthodox Churches have violated the canons which forbid common worship with the non-Orthodox and the imparting of the sacred Mysteries to them (sacrements) to them." The canons of the Orthodox Church are a fact, and any local Church or Bishop is free to either remain faithful to the canons under discussion or not. It is a fact that the Orthodox Church's involvement in the Ecumenical Movement has been the source of great controversy that has not been resolved at the present time. One can find the permission for Orthodox priests to impart the Sacraments to non-Orthodox in various publications that are approved by their Patriarchs and bishops which is, again, without serious precident in the Orthodox Church. I can provide the names of those publications if needed. Finally, in the history of the Orthodox Church there are many examples of a small remnant refusing to accept violations to what the Orthodox Church has always believed and practiced. It is a venerable and well known occurance in the lives of the Saints for those who find the practice or beliefs of a Patriarch or bishop questionable to break communion with them until assurance is made that the issues have been resolved.Fr. Sergius Gordon 04:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Clarification about HOCNA not being in Communion with most Orthodox churches

I would wish to comment on "Since 1965, most of the Orthodox Churches have violated the canons which forbid common worship with the non-Orthodox and the imparting of the sacred Mysteries to them (sacraments) to them."

The canons of the Orthodox Church are a fact, and any local Church or Bishop is bound to remain faithful to the canons under discussion. At his consecration, an Orthodox bishop makes a public oath to abide by the Sacred Canons. It is a fact that the Orthodox Church's involvement in the Ecumenical Movement has been the source of great controversy that has not been resolved at the present time. One can find the permission for Orthodox priests to impart the Sacraments to non-Orthodox in various publications that are approved by their Patriarchs and bishops which is, again, without canonical precedent in the Orthodox Church. I can provide the names of those publications if needed.

In the history of the Orthodox Church there are many examples of a small remnant refusing to accept violations to what the Orthodox Church has always believed and practiced. It is a venerable and well known occurrence in the lives of the Saints for those who find the practice or beliefs of a Patriarch or bishop questionable to break communion with them until assurance is made that the issues have been resolved. Many of the greatest saints of the Orthodox Church were not in communion, or in intermittent communion, with their local bishops because of doctrinal disputes. There are no canons or declarations in councils accepted by the Orthodox Church that stipulate that one must be in communion with a particular See, Patriarchate, or bishop to be an Orthodox Christian. The Roman Catholic Church believes that communion with Rome is what makes one a member of the Church. The Orthodox Church has always taught that integrity in the historical belief and practice of the Orthodox Church is what makes one an Orthodox Christian.Fr. Sergius Gordon 17:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Recently someone deleted the entire article and replaced it with an article currently on the Orthodox Wikipedia site. The article there is currently under revision. We are happy to discuss facts and to make the article as neutral as possible. However, if one wants to claim we were members of the Greek Archdiocese or fled a canonical investigation or a canonical trial for charges of immorality they had better be prepared to present documented evidence in the form of affidavits and official statements from a properly constituted canonical or civil court.Fr. Sergius Gordon 00:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Concerning neutrality, I wish to challenge Fr Sergius to cite these violations of the canons by the various Orthodox Christian Churches. If such statements are going to be made, then the specific canons that have been violated should be cited, along with documentation of the violations. Otherwise Fr Sergius is using generalizing propaganda not appropriate for a neutral encyclopedic article.

Canons and Violations

If you read the appended articles one, two, and three, there is sufficient documentation. The second are the Sorrowful Epistles of Metropolitan Philaret of New York, the third are the documents that show why the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia received many clergy from various Orthodox Jurisdictions without a canonical release because those Jurisdictions were very involved with the Ecumenical Movement. The canons that have been consistently violated on the hierarchal level by those Orthodox Churches involved in the Ecumenical Movement are Apostolic Canons 10, 11 ,45 ,46 ,47 , and Canon 1 of the Local Council of Carthage. All of these Canons were accepted by the Ecumenical Council held in Trullo or also known as Quinisext. In Orthodox Christianity and the Spirit of Contemporary Ecumenism by Fr. Daniel Degyansky (ISBN 0-911165-20-7, Center for Traditional Orthodox Studies), who is a priest in the Orthodox Church of America, a jurisdiction that follows the Gregorian Calendar and is very active in the Ecumenical Movement, he mentions on pg.44 a directive that was put out by the Bishops of the Standing Conference of Orthodox Bishops in America (SCOBA)[[1]] that gives very specific outlines of how to interact with the heterodox. The Apostolic Canons 10, 11 , and 45 are referred to. Unfortunately this directive was later ignored, especially after the "Lifting of the Anathemas of 1054" in 1965. As we know, common prayers with the heterodox has become a common occurrence as anyone who wishes to read the various official publications of the various Orthodox Churches that participate in the WCC and other Ecumenical prayer services clearly demonstrate. In the Balaamand Agreed Statement that was issued in June 1993, the Orthodox delegates fully recognize the priesthood and sarcaments of the Roman Catholic Church, despite the fact the Roman Catholic Church has not renounced its beliefs that the Orthodox Church has considered heretical for hundreds or even a thousand years. The Thyatiera Confession issued in 1975 with complete endorsement by the Patriarch and Holy Synod of Constantinople recognizes the validity of heterodox priesthood and sacraments and allows inter- communion. It has never been retracted. The list could go on for pages. For further reading let me recommend Fr. Degyansky's book mentioned above, The Struggle Against Ecumenism (ISBN 0-943405-09-2, Holy Orthodox Church in North America, 1998), Against False Union(ISBN 0-913026-70-0, Alexander Kalomiros, 1978) and The Orthodox Church and the Ecumenical Movement During the Period 1920-1969(ISBN 0-913026-74-3, Fr. George Macris, 1987). Fr. Sergius Gordon 02:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Controversy

This is quite a slanted article. Forgive me if I have bothered anyone by appending to the end, but there is a reason why other people have been altering it. As stated above, the HOCNA is controversial among orthodox jurisdictions. It formed under allegdations of sexual immorality, and broke away from another metropolis when victims spoke out. It is largely regarded as a personality cult centered around its founder. I was not responsible for the vandalism, but I just recently added the controversy section at the end.

Facts and Convictions, not Allegations

The main issues that were the concern of the eight clergy and 27 monks of Holy Transfiguration Monastery and the 22 married clergy throughout North America that were to become HOCNA was the failure of the bishops of ROCOR to take the Anathema Against Ecumenism that they had all signed in 1983 seriously [[2]].Fr. Sergius Gordon 22:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

A comment

I've restored the "Controversy" material which was inappropriately blanked. To quote WP:VAND, "Removing the comments of other users from talk pages other than your own, aside from removing internal spam, vandalism, etc. is generally considered vandalism."