Author: orthodoxaustralia

  • 266. May 1/14, 1979 Prophet Jeremiah

    Dear Father Roman,

    CHRIST IS RISEN! Christ is in our midst!

    We send our heartfelt congratulations on the Feast of Christ’s Resurrection. May God grant you new strength for faithful labors in this holy season!

    In your latest church bulletin there is an announcement of a talk by Fr. Lev Puhalo on the Orthodox Christian teaching on life after death.” Fr. Lev’s recent statements on this subject have upset us and quite a few other people, and I would like to share our feelings with you.

    In recent issues of The Tlingit Herald Fr. Lev has put forth the rather startling doctrine that the soul sleeps, or at least is virtually unconscious, without any kind of knowledge or memory, after death, and several times he has indicated that the Orthodox teaching on the “toll-houses” encountered by the soul after death is not to be understood the way it is set forth by the Holy Fathers and in the Lives of Saints, but rather is to be thrown out entirely or re-interpreted as an “allegory.” The Tlingit Herald, vol. 6, no, 2, has some rather unkind remarks about those who accept these accounts the way the have been handed down, as if these people are “overturning the clear teachings of the Church,” and he even compares such people with Billy Graham and the Protestants. It is evident that in these words he is attacking (among other things) our own series of articles on “The Soul After Death.” In private letters from Fr. Lev to other persons, which we have seen, he openly attacks what he calls the “Platina doctrine of the soul,” as well as the “un-Orthodox” Jordanville teaching on life after death, and the “ghastly doctrine of Archbishop John Maximovitch” on this subject. In making these attacks he presents such a caricature of the Orthodox teaching on the “toll-houses” and other aspects of life after death (calling them “pagan”), and is so self-confident in dismissing all Patristic writings and Lives of Saints that disagree with his own opinions (calling the “spurious,” “suspicious and dubious,” or “apocryphal,” etc.) that we are very much afraid that he will lead people astray concerning the very important teaching of the Church ;; life after death. When we noticed that both Fr. Neketas’ bulletin from Seattle and your own bulletin announced Fr. Levs lectures on this subject, we were dismayed to find that he is receiving support from our parishes in spreading his teaching.

    The teaching which he is spreading is not only un-Orthodox itself, it is also filled with a spirit of disrespect for everyone who keeps to the “old teaching” on this subject (whom I suppose he would accuse of being under “Western influence,” not seeing how very Western and rationalistic his own teaching is), and what he is doing is to undermine respect for Lives of Saints and other basic Orthodox sources, at the same time setting himself up as the “interpreter” of these sources for all of us who are not as modern and “sophisticated” as he is. This, to my mind, is something just as bad as what Fr. Schmemann is doing in the OCA; but we never expected to see such modernism and rationalism in our Russian Church Outside of Russia!

    I wonder what we can do about this? Recently Fr. Michael Pomazansky wrote a good article on the “toll-houses” in Orthodox Russia (1979, no. 7) as a direct answer to Fr. Levs attacks, and our own recent article in The Orthodox Word on this subject covers about the same material as Fr. Michael’s article. We thought that after seeing such articles Fr. Lev would stop and at least acknowledge that he had not looked carefully enough at all the Orthodox sources on this subject; but alas, he continues to confuse people and insist that he knows how to “interpret” these sources, and that the rest of us are anti-Orthodox, Protestants, etc.

    We have no desire whatever to enter into a public debate with Fr. Lev on this subject, which we think would only confuse and upset people all the more; but what can be done to restrain his spreading of disrespect for Orthodox sources, as well as his setting himself up as an authority on questions which he obviously has not studied well? It is true enough that the question of life after death is one that is rather complex and involves images that sometimes are not to be taken “literally” (our own article on the “toll-houses” discusses this point—Orthodox Word #83, pp. 247-249); but Fr. Lev unfortunately uses this as an excuse to “throw the baby out with the bath-water,” and this can only have a bad effect on those who trust his words.

    These are the feelings of both Father Herman and myself on this subject, and I am writing this at least to make you aware of them. I don’t know if practically you will be able to do anything about this situation; Fr. Lev himself seems so emotional about his opinions that I wonder if he will be restrained even by his best friends. I would be glad to hear your comments on all this.

    Please pray for Fr. Herman. God willing, he is already on Mt. Athos, but we still worry that he will not be allowed to enter. Please give my greetings to Matuskha.

    With love in Christ,
    Unworthy Hieromonk Seraphim

    P.s. Please pray also for our missionary labors here. Just in the last year we have been able to begin missionary parishes in Redding and Etna, Calif., and Medford and Woodburn, Oregon (three of them English parishes, and the last one Russian). Just last weekend Fr. Alexey Young was ordained priest to take care of Etna and Medford. We all feel very strongly the difficulties of preaching true Orthodoxy in these terrible times, but we also see very clearly Gods help in our humble labors.

  • 265. Sunday April 30/May 13, 1979 Apostle James

    Dear Fr. Herman,

    Christ is Risen!

    We were glad to hear from you from Jordanville, and look forward to news from Mt. Athos. Friday night we sang the canon to St. Demetrius the Great Martyr, praying that he would be able to open the way to the Holy Mount for you, and every day we sing his magnification.

    Why do they want you to stay in Jordanville for two weeks? If it’s absolutely necessary or useful, then of course you should. But if it’s just so they can “test” you and see if you’re “worthy” to be having an independent existence outside of Jordanville, or to prepare you for bishop—then run from it as fast as possible. Vladika Nektary on his last visit mentioned again his desire to retire with us here, but said that now he would not, because now we will be taken away for bishops in 2 or 3 years, and then no one knows who will be “appointed to Platina,” and he wouldn’t like it. I suggested to him that we would take the path of Sergius of Radonezh instead of George Grabbe (who says that according to Metr. Anthony one can not refuse to be a bishop), and he was consoled a little.

    I deeply, deeply feel that we have God’s work to do here, and if we allow ourselves to be taken from it we will betray our calling, and probably be flops besides. Vladika Laurus apparently looks on us with the eyes of the organization, not giving much importance or value to what we do, and only looking for the right hole to plug us into for the “good of the whole.” Your two weeks in Jordanville (if it is not really very necessary or useful) would hurt not so much we as our common work—making it seem less urgent to the church world, and making you very “visible.”

    Forgive me if I’m not looking at this right. You will know best what to do when you return.

    We have been all right this week, working fairly well, and with only a few visitors. I find myself rather nervous being “in charge” and having to read the mail, but there’s no great suffering yet. Pray for Dima—his family is visiting next week and want to take him home for a “normal life,” and he is frightened that he will do whatever they say. But it’s probably best for him to be scared. If he goes, of course, it will be difficult for us. Guma and Sergei are behaving well. The kids are due today in Wildwood. The sisters are about as usual.

    I think most of all about our summer Pilgrimage, which could be a magnificent opportunity for “Orthodox enlightenment” such as is not being given very much nowadays. How are the sermons in Jordanville? I have the impression that a heavy “church” atmosphere is hanging over everything and stifling a much needed freshness, and we could be helping to give this freshness. Perhaps when we’re dead they’ll even recognize our labors—but at least we have to help those we can. Is this wrong?

    I watched Fr. Alexey serve twice, and he will do fine. I gave him some general advice on confession, and he basically understands it. I confessed Ian and Susan by telephone on Friday.

    Robert Murray (Iakov’s father) was in a terrible accident at the time of the ordinations, and miraculously escaped with only a sprained ankle and bruises. Fr. Alexey and I went to visit him and I liked him—I think he wants faith but just can’t break out of his rut. I gave him Fr. Dimitry Dudko’s book, and he promised to read it.

    Today was the wedding in Etna, and next Sunday the first service in Medford.

    A few days ago it was snowing in Wildwood, and today it’s 80 degrees—real summer weather.

    Pray for us. May God make your trip fruitful.

    With love in Christ,
    Your brother, hieromonk Seraphim

    P.S. Chuck and Roberta came yesterday with their baby Timothy, who is healthy. They have 30 people now, with 10 children in school.

    P.P.S. Someone sent us a Xerox from Jordanville of your Zutie Ctareza Theodosius—76 pp.—is this right?

    P.S. I had a long talk With Dima. He is preparing himself psychologically to leave, and I can’t “push” him not to—his mother wrote him that he is “brainwashed” and that we are “exploiting” him, and he probably begins to believe it a little. Obviously, he is being given a “test” of his freedom—he will have to respect his place here more if he will be able to stay.

    Don’t write him a letter “demanding” or “forcing” anything on him?—he already thinks you “force” him too much. May Gods will be done. This is evidently a “test” that he needs. I will grieve more for him than for us if he leaves, but of course it will be discouraging to have so few hands with so much to do. I grieve most of all the “church public opinion” (Jordanville, etc.) doesn’t seem to approve of our existence. But God is with us!

    Enclosed is a copy of a letter to Fr. Roman Lukianov.

  • 264. April 20/May 3, 1979 St. Theodore Trichinas

    Dear Barry,

    CHRIST IS RISEN! May the blessing of our Lord be with you!

    We were very happy to receive your letter and hear of your path to Orthodoxy. May God send you His grace abundantly and grant you eternal salvation in His True Church!

    The light you saw, and the presence you felt, I am sure, are from God. Such a thing is fairly frequently experienced by converts to Orthodoxy, and the remembrance of it is often of great help in the temptations that come upon one in leading a true Christian life. However, don’t think much about it, and especially don’t make any “theories” about it! Just know that God is close and sometimes lets us feel that closeness.

    As you prepare for Baptism, I would give you several words of advice:

    1. Don’t allow yourself to get stuck on the outward aspect of Orthodoxy—whether the splendid church services (the “high church” to which you were drawn as a child), the outward discipline (fasts, prostrations, etc.), being “correct” according to the canons, etc. All these things are good and helpful, but if one overemphasizes them one will enter into troubles and trials. You are coming to Orthodoxy to receive Christ, and this you should never forget.

    2. Don’t have a hypercritical attitude. By this I don’t mean to give up your intellect and discernment, but rather to place them in obedience to a believing heart (“heart” meaning not mere “feeling,” but something much deeper—the organ that knows God). Some converts, alas, think they are very “smart” and they use Orthodoxy as a means for feeling superior to the non-Orthodox and sometimes even to Orthodox of other jurisdictions. Orthodox theology, of course, is much deeper and makes much better sense than the erroneous theologies of the modern West—but our basic attitude towards it must be one of humility and not pride. Converts who pride themselves on “knowing better” than Catholics and Protestants often end by “knowing better” than their own parish priest, bishop, and finally the Fathers and the whole Church!

    3. Remember that your survival as an Orthodox Christian will depend very much on your contact with the living tradition of Orthodoxy. This is something you won’t get in books and it can’t be defined for you. If your attitude is humble and without hypercriticism, if you place Christ first in your heart, and try to lead a normal life according to Orthodox discipline and practice—you will obtain this contact. Alas, most Orthodox jurisdictions today (such as the OCA) are losing this contact out of simple worldliness. But there is also a temptation on the “right side” which proceeds from the same hypercriticism I just mentioned. The traditionalist (Old Calendar) Church in Greece today is in chaos because of this, one jurisdiction fighting and anathematizing another over “canonical correctness” and losing sight of the whole tradition over hyper-fine points. Our Russian Church Outside of Russia is in the best possible position in this regard, being rather in the middle of these two extremes and maintaining a balanced position (for example, grieving and occasionally remarking on the loss of Orthodoxy by the other jurisdictions, but not going to the extreme of declaring them to be “without grace”). We have recently written an article, in this connection, on Blessed Augustine, whom some converts (and Greeks) would like to regard as simply a “heretic,” without seeing that despite his errors he is actually more Orthodox than the modern, formally-correct “theologians” who criticize him

    You yourself have had enough experience in life to avoid these temptations, which are actually those of the young and inexperienced; but it is good to keep them in mind.

    You are already probably fairly well prepared for Baptism in outward knowledge (that is a lifelong task in any case, and one is never really “prepared”!). I would advise you to read some things that give more the “feel” of Orthodox Church life. The Confessions of Blessed Augustine is good reading for repentance and the warming up of the heart, and the ascetic and devotional literature of the Church is also very good—Lives of Saints, Desert Fathers, collections like the Lausiac History and the Dialogues of St. Gregory the Great (who is much loved in the East). I am sending you separately our newest publication—some Homilies of St Symeon the New Theologian, which serve as a kind of catechism of the meaning of our Christian life, and also (in case you haven’t seen it) our article on Blessed Augustine from last year’s Orthodox Word.

    As for serving God in the clerical state—that can be seen better after you become Orthodox. It is best not to think too eagerly of it in the beginning for fear of going “too fast” and not absorbing the lessons right in front of one. God will show. Just this Saturday (two days from now) we will have the ordination here of a young convert from Roman Catholicism. He joined the Church about 9 years ago and matured through various trials into someone who is just “ripe” for pastoral service. You must definitely meet him, and will gain much from talking with him. (He is Alexey Young, editor of the missionary periodical Nikodemos. He will take over our missionary labors in the southern Oregon area. By the way, the latest issue of Nikodemos is an excellent appeal to Roman Catholics to come to Orthodoxy—you should read it. We will have some extra copies soon in case you don’t subscribe.) There are many complications in pastoral labors today, and there is more hope for success in them if one “matures” into them rather than follow a standard path of “being assigned to a parish.”

    This summer we will have our St. Herman Pilgrimage again on August 8-9, and then a week of courses on various Orthodox subjects (this year it will probably be a rather intense course). It would be good if you could attend. Of course, you are welcome to come and visit us any time. Please feel free to write about any questions you may have, also.

    May God guide your steps into His Church and make you a fruitful laborer for Him!

    With love in Christ,
    H.S.

  • 263. March 7/20, 1979 St. Paul the Simple

    Dear Anna,

    May the blessing of the Lord be with you!

    Thank you for your letter. I think it reveals less confusion than you think—perhaps your ideas are still somewhat confused, but I think your basic attitude is correct, and if you persevere in spiritual struggle your ideas also will straighten themselves out.

    Your battle with “demoniac fornication” is not as unusual as you may think. This passion has become very strong in our evil times—the air is saturated with it; and the demons take advantage of this to attack you in a vulnerable spot. Every battle with passions also involves demons, who give almost unnoticeable “suggestions” to trigger the passions and otherwise cooperate in arousing them. But human imagination also enters in here, and it is unwise to distinguish exactly where our passions and imagination leave off and demonic activity begins—you should just continue fighting.

    That the demons attack you in dreams is a sign of progress—it means they are retreating, seeing that you are resisting conscious sin. God allows this so that you will continue fighting. Often this demon goes away altogether for a while, and one can have a false sense of security that one is “above” this passion; but all the Holy Fathers warn that one cannot consider this passion conquered before the grave. Continue your struggle and take refuge in humility, seeing what base sins you are capable of and how you are lost without the constant help of God Who calls you to a life above these sins.

    About our Russian Church Abroad—I think it is not a bad description to say that it is in a way the “conscience” of Orthodoxy today. One Greek priest once told us a very similar thing. Of course, we in this Church are all very human and weak ourselves, but we do try to keep the standard visible, from which almost all the Orthodox churches are falling away at a rapid pace.

    I think the Protestants are not too far off about the “one world church,” the harlot of the Apocalypse—but, like all their apocalyptic ideas, they add many distortions to their ideas. From the experience of the Council of Florence in the 15th century (when the Greek Churches did for a time join the Pope of Rome), and from the recent pronouncements of Patriarch Demetrios of Constantinople and Pope John Paul II—I don’t see how anyone can deny that the “Union” of most Orthodox Churches with Rome (and through Rome to at least some of the Protestant bodies) is rather close. As for the Catacomb Church in Russia, it certainly exists, and quite a bit of material has been published on it (from eyewitnesses) in the Russian language/press in recent years. Its chief bishop, as far as we know, is still Metropolitan Theodosius (who is of course a different person from the OCA Metropolitan), who issued a declaration that was circulated in Moscow and Leningrad when the present Patriarch Pimen was elected in 1970.

    About your joining the Synod: let this decision come naturally and peacefully. We are not out to make “fanatics,” but to speak the truth of age-old Orthodoxy which most Orthodox Christians today are abandoning (in fact, many Orthodox people aren’t even aware of them, so great is the level of ignorance today). If you are to marry Timothy, this is something you will decide together. Since our parishes in Sacramento and Calistoga have no English services or English-speaking priest, you would probably do best to continue attending OCA services there while you think and pray about this question. We certainly recognize the sacraments of other Orthodox jurisdictions, and there is no doubt that you have been baptized Orthodox. Your decision (if you make it) to join the Russian Church Abroad will mean that you want to join the small band of strugglers who recognize the process of apostasy in the Orthodox Churches and consciously want to separate yourself from it. We tell our own spiritual children that, wherever there is no Synod church, they can attend other Orthodox churches, but that they should not receive Holy Communion there (except in case of mortal necessity)—this is basically the position of Metropolitan Cyril of Kazan, one of the Catacomb bishops of the 1930’s.

    I will be serving Liturgy in our Redding mission church this Sunday (March 25) and conducting a “Bible Study” afterwards. You are very welcome to attend if you can. Liturgy will be early (around 8 a.m.), followed by lunch and Bible study around noon. The address is 1972 Jewell Lane (in the southern part of town, just off Business Route 99). If you were to come by bus, someone could pick you up at the station; you could call 241-1732 (the telephone number of Mrs. Valentina Harvey, in whose garage our service are held). I would be glad to talk with you then.

    With love in Christ,
    Unworthy Hieromonk Seraphim

  • 262. Feb. 14/27, 1979 St. Cyril, Equal to the Apostles

    Dear Father Basil [Rhodes],

    Thank you for your letter, and please forgive this delayed response, which is partly caused by our recent snowstorms and other winter difficulties.

    I was glad to see the kind tone of your letter, and I hope that we will continue to be on friendly terms. There are at times some unkind words exchanged by various people in both our “jurisdictions,” but the unfortunate phrases that sometimes come out in the heat of argument are best forgiven and forgotten. May God forgive us all for our careless acts of uncharity!

    You know Anna much better than I know Timothy, and I am really not prepared to counsel him on his “maturity” or “immaturity” for marriage until I know him better; if he is to be baptized here by us, this counselling will come as he prepares for baptism and afterwards. The basic decision, of course, is up to them, and if they do choose to marry, they will probably come to a harmonious resolution of the “jurisdiction” question also.

    The disharmony between our Church Abroad and your OCA is perhaps not as drastic as you may think. It is true that we (for the reasons I will mention below) would not consent to concelebrate, as things now are, with priests of your jurisdiction; but we do not deny the grace of your Sacraments any more than you deny ours, and we regard the giving of Holy Communion to lay members of the OCA as a pastoral rather than a “canonical” question. The issues that separate us are so complex (at least in our days when the general church consciousness is so low) that most laymen simply cant be expected to grasp them. Our own spiritual children, I will tell you frankly, we do discourage from receiving communion in OCA churches, trying to arouse in them a more conscious attitude to the Orthodox Church situation today.

    What is this church situation that separates us? It has two aspects:

    (1) Recognition or non-recognition of the Moscow Patriarchate as the normal and legitimate Orthodox Church of Russia. The Metropolias reception of “autocephaly” and “canonicity” from Moscow in 1970 (which is now the chief “official” reason for the strained relation between us) seems to us an example of crude “legalism”: the reduction of Orthodoxy to a purely outward question of church forms, no matter what alien spirit might be using those forms. (This is the sin of “Sergianism.”) The episcopate of the Moscow Patriarchate is the puppet of an atheist organization (the Communist Party of the Soviet Union) whose aim is the destruction of the Church; granting full and normal recognition to it (whatever ones aims in doing this) means giving aid to this alien organization and its purpose, and crushing the spirit of those in Russia itself who are trying to preserve the genuine Orthodox view of church life and organization (the “True Orthodox” or “Catacomb Church” of whose present existence we have many proofs). The over-abundant journeys of OCA clergy to the USSR are propaganda fodder for the enemies of Orthodoxy (religious enemies first, not political). Perhaps you may think this difficult to understand, or far-fetched; I am sending you some back copies of our Orthodox Word which explain various aspects of the issue, from the words of hierarchs and laymen in Russia.

    (2) The second question is the path of ecumenism-modernism which the leaders of “world Orthodoxy” (led by the Patriarch of Constantinople) are pursuing, and from which the OCA has shown no indication of separating itself. This is another complex question, going back (like the Moscow question) to the 1920 s, but becoming clearer than ever in recent years. This path is a tragic betrayal of Orthodoxy, which differs from the betrayal of Florence in the 15th century only in that it is not yet complete; but it [letter ends]

  • 261. Feb. 9/22.1979 b St. Innocent of Irkutsk

    Dear Timothy [Shell],

    May the blessing of our Lord be with you!

    We were glad to hear from you; thank you for the information on Russian periodicals.

    About your personal problems: Fr. Basil Rhodes has also written us a letter, saying about the same things he wrote to you, but apologizing for calling our Church “schismatic” and a “fringe” group. He says he has no objection whatever to your being baptized here—he just doesn’t want you marrying Anna if you are in the Russian Church Abroad!

    I think he is being overly-dramatic about the whole matter. The question of “jurisdictions” (in one case of the OCA and our Church Abroad) is not such a crucial one that it would prevent marriage, even if the partners were to belong to different jurisdictions; to be sure, oneness of mind on this question is preferable, but in practice this is worked out by the couple themselves.

    Neither the OCA nor the Russian Church Abroad deny the grace of the sacraments of the other. It is true that on the clergy level there is no communion between us; this is a matter of principle on the part of the Church Abroad, which will not compromise on the question of accepting the Soviet-dominated Patriarchate of Moscow (from which the OCA receives its “canonicity”) as a normal Orthodox Church. Now, also, there is the question of the increasingly evident modernism and ecumenism of OCA pronouncement^ and practice, both official and unofficial. The recent publicity given to OCA bishops’ travels to Moscow and Rome, with photographs taken of them with Patriarch Pimen and the Pope—underscore the path which the OCA is taking, following the path of the Greek Archdiocese and other modernist jurisdictions. Our Church stands deliberately apart from this path, and that is the reason for the tensions between us.

    Father Basil wants you to have a “true vision of Orthodox Christianity in America”—I heartedly agree. Our Church Abroad stands for preserving the Faith handed down from Christ and the Apostles; the OCA goes along with the times—even though they are slower in this than the Greeks, and they camouflage it with high-sounding but very abstract words about Orthodox “mission.” We are in contact with priests and laymen in the OCA (and some who have left it) who only confirm this diagnosis. Recently we ourselves were given a vivid illustration of this: the people in Medford for whom we served Divine Liturgy several times told me on my last visit that they were asking the OCA to come and serve them, because we are “too strict.” Actually, we were very mild with them, and our “strictness” consisted of speaking about spiritual life during talks and sermons, and once refusing to bless a table of meat and cheese during a fast period (without, however, making a “scene” of it or expressing anger). Their understanding is that the OCA is not “too strict” in this way; and that indeed seems to be the case.

    All this is something you will have to see for yourself, and probably already see. Laymen are generally less responsible for seeing the issues involved than are clergy, and in actual practice there is some “intercommunion” between the OCA and the Church Abroad on the lay level. We ourselves do not refuse communion to OCA members if we see that they simply can’t understand the issues (which do, indeed, seem a little complicated to those who are not too close to church life). But Fr. Basil is right that he could not concelebrate with us, because that would imply that we approve of his Church’s positions.

    My advice to you now would be to concentrate on the most important personal questions before you: Baptism and marriage. If you understand the meaning of the position of the Russian Church Abroad, I think you should prepare for Baptism here this summer. If you are sure Anna is the woman you want to marry, then that question will be next after Baptism. I think your confusion will disappear more or less by itself as you solve for yourself these two questions. Fr. Basil’s seemingly irreconcilable attitude will probably change also.

    Fr. Basil makes a point of the “immaturity” of both of you. Well, of course, you have both proved by your past actions that there is some truth to this; but maturity begins by realistically facing present problems and praying for God’s help to grow into true and fruitful Orthodox Christians. May God help you in this task.

    Please write if you have any more specific questions. We plan to have services (and Bible study) on the fourth Sunday of March (the 25th, I think) in Redding, and would be glad to see you then. (Right now we are deep in snow up here, with 3 feet falling this past week.)

    With love in Christ,
    Unworthy Hieromonk Seraphim

  • 260. Feb. 9/22, 1979

    Dear Rev. [Roy] Goodridge [Wales, UK],

    Thank you for your letter, expressing your anguish over the present state of the Anglican Church. Fr. Herman has directed me to reply to [you.]

    There is really only one answer to your situation: to be joined to the Orthodox Church. This, of course, will not solve all your problems, but at least it will put you in a place where you can face them with your feet on solid ground.

    Our Orthodox Church too, alas, is suffering from the disorder of the times, and now most of the Orthodox jurisdictions are expressing their willingness to go along with the “spirit of the times.” (although, compared with the Western confessions, they are still quite “backward,” thanks to God). Our Russian Church Outside of Russia, however, has clearly taken its stand against compromises with the times, for which reason it is considered rather “backward” by the other Orthodox jurisdictions. It would be good for you to get in contact with one of our priests in London (a convert to Orthodoxy), who could discuss the whole Orthodox Church situation with you:

    Fr. Yves Dubois
    25 Emily Road
    London W12 9TF

    As long as you are in the Anglican Church there is not much we can do to guide you. I would only advise you to pray fervently to God to show you the way to be fruitful in His True Church. The prayers of a recent saint of our Church, Archbishop John Maximovitch, are also very helpful. I am sending you one of our recent publications about him. Please feel free to write any questions.

  • 259. Jan. 28/Feb. 10, 1979 Sts. Ephraim and Isaac of Syria

    Dear Fr. Donald,

    Please forgive my long delay in answering your letters. I wanted to hear first from Bishop Laurus, and I wrote to him only after Christmas in order not to burden him at a busy time. I received his reply on the same day as your new letter this week, but now it has been nearly a week more before I am writing this, what with our printing, missionary trips, etc.

    What Vladika Laurus writes will be difficult for you to accept, and I only ask you to receive it with prayer for God’s guidance. Here I will simply quote his words, translated from Russian (parentheses added by me for clarity). I had mentioned to him your Bishops Christopher and Trevor, but had not mentioned you by name.

    “Inasmuch as the one who called himself Bishop Christopher did not have a correct ordination, all (of this jurisdiction) are unordained. Consequently, their uniting people to their jurisdiction, whether through baptism or however they receive them, is also without effect, for what they celebrate are not sacraments. Therefore, there can be no question of the reception (into our jurisdiction) of such (clergy) in their existing rank. (In the past) it has been allowed among us to receive Catholics and Uniates in their existing rank, on the ground that they have apostolic succession in their ordination. But in this (jurisdiction) there is no succession. If their “bishops” had been in schism (after being properly ordained and in communion with the Orthodox), this would have been a different question.

    “With the person you mention there is another difficulty in that he is married to a widow. This is an impediment to ordination.

    “I understand your feelings and, of course, it is sad that there are good people who are beginning to understand Orthodoxy correctly but by their previous actions have closed the way to priesthood. Of course, if he will sincerely approach and understand Orthodoxy, he should leave his priesthood’ and become a good Orthodox layman, perhaps, with God’s help, to raise up children who might themselves serve the Holy Church in priestly rank.”

    I have also spoken to Bishop Nektary of Seattle about you, and while he knew nothing of your jurisdiction, he did say that the canon forbidding marriage to a widow is one that is strictly kept and cannot be put aside.

    What to say? These words are from bishops who are loving and understanding as well as strict, and I accept them as from God Himself. I believe Archbishop John would not have given a different opinion. It is not for me to advise you to abandon what you have thought was the priesthood; I will only tell you my thoughts on your alternative.

    To join yourself to our church as a layman would be an act of courage and suffering, but would open up to you the possibility of spiritual fruitfulness in genuine Orthodoxy, which comes only with suffering. (To remain in our Church alone will require suffering.) To deny the grace of Christs Church on your previous ministry would be difficult, but would not mean denying God’s guidance of you during this time. The character of your present mission, of course, would be different: there is no reason why you could not continue the mission of the printed word (avoiding the pitfall of trusting oneself too much, and listening to the advice of others), but it would be a “priestless” community, with daily common prayers and hopefully occasional visits for Liturgy by a priest like Fr. Theodore in Cleveland.

    To remain as you are, on the other hand, would mean to remain outside of communion and deeper contact with us in the Church Outside of Russia, and probably stuck in the rut of “non-canonical” Orthodoxy. In the latter case there will not be much we can do to help you, though of course we would remain in contact with you.

    May God guide you in His path, by the prayers of Archbishop John. Please pray for us also.

    With love in Christ,
    Unworthy Hieromonk Seraphim

    P.s. We will continue to send you our publications as they come out—if we overlook you, please remind us. Please send us your publications also.

    As for the title Living Orthodoxy, the idea is good, but Fr. Herman fears the word “living” is already “polluted” for us because of the “Living Church” in Russia and now has an overtone of “renovated.”

  • 258. Jan. 20/Feb. 2, 1979 St. Euthymius the Great

    Dear Fr. Ioannikios,

    Christ is in our midst!

    Thank you for your letters. Regarding Fr. Lev: your letter is a study in restraint in the face of attacks which, from what we have seen of them, are simply outrageous. Until about a month ago, Fr. Lev had sent nothing whatever to us of all his letters on the subject of life after death, despite the fact that one of the letters (which we received from elsewhere) specifically said a copy was sent to us. The few letters of his we have seen strike us as simply immature struttings based on an obvious failure to have studied the question well or read many of the basic texts he wants to attack. Then a month ago or so he sent us his one and only communication with us on the subject: a copy of a letter addressed to an unnamed priest (perhaps this was the letter you were answering?) wherein he has various unkind words about the “Platina doctrine of the soul,” the un-Orthodoxy of Jordanville publications, and the “ghastly” teaching of Archbishop John Maximovitch on life after death. Such things are inexcusable; they reveal not a love of truth or theology, but intellectual adventurism in search of new “victories” over anyone who disagrees with his whims. The recent Tlingit Heralds also, with their new “victories” over the Shroud of Turin, “after-death” experiences, etc., are just cheap and totally unobjective and unfair. How did he get the reputation of a “theologian”?!

    Incidentally, if Fr. Lev has made any specific references to Egyptian sources concerning life after death, I’d be interested in seeing them, as a student of the question. The after-life “gates” and “mansions” of the Egyptian Book of the Dead certainly have nothing remotely to do with the Orthodox teaching, and if he is looking for “influence” on the toll-houses from there, he is a million miles off. It seems natural to suppose that the image of the toll-houses comes from nothing more complex than Roman civil law; but no one except Fr. Lev seems to mistake the image for the reality. The qualification that the toll-houses are not “dogma” is, it seems to me, unnecessary and rather dangerous; we believe and accept and hand down ourselves, as a full part of our Holy Orthodoxy, much that is not “dogma”: the sign of the Cross, the way of performing the Mysteries, holy water, prosphora, the services of the Trebnik, our love for the Saints, etc. etc.—but if someone begins to take them away from us, or undermine the foundations for our acceptance of them, he is helping to destroy our faith as surely as one who challenges basic dogmas. This dissatisfaction with the way Orthodoxy has been handed down to us, this “reformism on the right,” so to speak—seems very unhealthy to us.

    Well, enough thoughts on an unpleasant subject. We ourselves don’t plan to answer any attacks Fr. Lev may throw in the air around us; but of course if he would deign to write us personally and tell us of his disagreements we would try to write a polite reply. Our last attempts to communicate with him resulted in emotional replies which (in one case) even Fr. Neketas thought was too much.

    A more pleasant subject: we are pleased with your tape-project on Vladika Averky’s Gospels and will stop ours where we are (something like 60 or 70 pages). Actually, we had specifically in mind having something in English by the time our Br. Thomas is ready for that class, and your tapes will do that nicely. I have started the Apostol and will continue that. Fr. Michael’s Dogmatic Theology, God willing, is to be out by this summer, if I can get all the transcripts corrected by then (the task I find hardest and slowest). Pray for this—the book is needed and overdue.

    Thomas Delp has had rather a miraculous recovery, after receiving Unction on his deathbed; but spiritually, alas, he seems as bad as ever. He is in full possession of his faculties, but is an utter slave to his own passionate inclinations and self-justification. He is in a rest home in Redding now and we see him occasionally, but he is very displeased with our attempts to shake him out of his sleep of sin. He is an alcoholic, and quotes St. Paul on “wine for the stomachs sake” to justify it; and for the sake of a worse passion he even disagrees with the Orthodox teaching on sexual morality. We did get to meet his mother for the first time\because of all this; she is a pious Roman Catholic, and attended an Orthodox Liturgy for the first time when Fr. Herman served in Medford (where Thomas was in the hospital). She has given up on him and doesn’t want him back in Florida. His future is grim if there is no change in his will; this whole trial was obviously sent him to wake him up, but up to now he resists God’s call.

    Please pray for us. We’re struggling to print a few more things while we still have freedom, which seems short the way things are going. May God grant even us fat geese to exercise a little even if, alas, we just can’t fly any more!

    With love in Christ,
    Unworthy Hieromonk Seraphim

  • 257. Jan. 14/27, 1979 St. Nina of Georgia

    Your Grace, dear Vladika Laurus,

    Blagoslovite!

    I hope you and the brethren spent the feast days peacefully and joyfully. For us these days went very well, both in the monastery and in our missions in Redding and Etna. Despite the troubles of the times and our sorrows over many “converts,” there are still some people left, both Russians and converts, who are willing to give their hearts and sacrifice themselves for the Orthodox Faith, for which we thank God.

    I am writing this letter in hope of receiving from you some advice (your personal opinion, and not any decision of the Synod) regarding one particular problem which has been presented to us: the reception of converts from the “non-canonical” Orthodox jurisdictions.

    Last November we were visited by a priest from one of these jurisdictions. He is in his early 30 s, is married and has several children, and lives on a farm in Tennessee, where he has a very small flock. He is very poor and has deliberately chosen a path of “struggle.”

    After studying at an Anglican seminary, he became Orthodox in a “non-canonical” jurisdiction about 10 years ago and was ordained priest about five years ago, I believe, by a “Bishop Christopher” in Pennsylvania (who has since died). He is now under a “Bishop Trevor” in Pennsylvania, who is head of a very small jurisdiction of probably no more than six priests; this jurisdiction is one of many that trace their ancestry back to the Metropolia’s “autocephaly” of 1927 (Bishop Eftimios).

    The priest who visited us left on the whole a good impression on us (unlike some other “non- canonical” priests we have encountered); he seems not very different from many of the serious convert-priests in our own Synod. He realizes that he has much to learn about Orthodoxy, and that he really started learning only after becoming Orthodox and becoming a priest. He came to visit us because he is very much attracted to the kind of Orthodoxy he finds presented in The Orthodox Word (as opposed to the “Boston” emphasis on “zealotry” and “strictness” and “correctness,” which he does not like). While he was with us (for nearly a week) he asked us if we could find out how he might be received into the Synod, and we told him we would inquire. We asked our Archbishop Anthony, but he seemed to indicate this was not his sphere, and so we are writing to you.

    With all this in mind, could you give us your opinion on the following questions?

    1. What is his present status in Orthodoxy, in the eyes of our Russian Church Abroad, and how might he be received into our Church? Is he simply without grace and should be baptized and start over again as Orthodox? I know our “Bostonites” would say this, and according to “strictness” perhaps they are correct. But is a more “pastoral” approach not possible? I ask this for two reasons:

    a. He himself sees his coming to the Synod as the culmination of a process of growth in Orthodoxy, and he would have a very difficult time totally denying his past Orthodox experience, as he would seem to be doing if he were to be baptized now. (And then would he not have to “rebaptize” those he has already baptized as a priest?) We tried to give him as his example the Orthodox Church of Eastern Africa, which began in a “non-canonical” jurisdiction but persevered until finding true Orthodoxy; but even there, I wonder how those first priests were received by the Patriarch of Alexandria—were they baptized and ordained, or received br cynzemr caht?

    b. Our experience with converts of the “strict” school (the “Bostonites”) has made us a little afraid of total “strictness,” which sometimes seems to produce something like a “sectarian” mentality.

    Therefore, our question is: if he could be a priest in our Synod, could he be accepted ________, in the manner that Roman Catholic priests are sometimes accepted? (As a matter of fact, he knows one Old-Catholic priest who was accepted by Vladika Nikon in this way—Fr. Augustine in Florida).

    2. He is married to a widow, who has children from her first husband. I already told him that this would probably be the biggest obstacle to his being a priest in our Church. I realize .that he probably could not be ordained in our Church with such a canonical impediment; but is it at all possible for him to be received

    3. Under what diocese does Tennessee come?—Chicago is by far the nearest diocesan see.

    We ourselves would very much like to see him received into our Church, first because he seems to be a “normal American” (unlike some of our converts) who would be able to give Orthodoxy to some ordinary people who would never think of going to a “Russian” Church, and second because he is hungry for a deeper kind of Orthodoxy than the “OCA” and other jurisdictions are giving today. It grieves us to see so much of the American “missionary territory” occupied by the “OCA,” which is becoming more and more spiritually empty (as we hear from people who are there), when there is the possibility for at least a few “strugglers” to give something deeper.

    If it would be possible for him to be received into our Church, I am sure he would be willing to go to Jordanville for some time in order to increase his knowledge of Divine services, customs of our Church, general Orthodoxy, etc. He clearly indicated to us his desires to learn and be corrected.

    I hope this letter has not burdened you too much, and it will not be too difficult for you to give at least a brief reply. Please pray for us.

    With love and respect in Christ,
    Unworthy Hieromonk Seraphim