After the merger

The unification of the Patriarchal and “foreign” Orthodox churches is being completed. True, it is by no means in an idyllic setting. The All-Diaspora Council shifted responsibility for making decisions to the Bishops' Council, and that, in turn, to the Foreign Synod, which includes only five people, four of them are supporters of unification. After this, opponents of the “Anschluss” will most likely leave the ranks of the ROCOR and join Greek or other Russian Orthodox jurisdictions.

But this is not the main thing. It is more interesting what will happen next, after representatives of the churches settle the disputes related to the canonical status of clergy who once went to foreigners, and are now seriously concerned about the need to “return home” and hope for the forgiveness of their sins. Let’s assume that all such problems will be resolved, but a new topic will be on the agenda in the near future - who will manage foreign dioceses and their considerable property in the USA, Germany, Australia, Latin America... After all, in recent decades the number of ROCOR clergy has decreased significantly - to the Russian church with long services in Church Slavonic, the young dynamic descendants of lieutenants Golitsyn and cornets Obolensky do not always go far. In the third generation, the force of inertia still somehow operates, and in the fourth, people, as a rule, already forget their Russian roots, becoming ordinary Western “yuppies”, poorly compatible with the archaic church. There are, of course, exceptions, but they only confirm the rule.

So the hour is not far off when the Moscow Patriarchate will come to the aid of foreigners, sharing its hierarchical cadres with its brethren. And it doesn’t matter whether such a possibility will be formally recorded on paper at the time of unification or a little later. When the unification officially takes place, the only people left in the church will be those who, without any problems, are ready to submit to almost any bishop, if he serves in the same language as in the Middle Ages, and at the same time denies the “papist” Gregorian calendar. Therefore, any guarantees of “self-governing” status are only reassuring for those priests and parishioners who are still subject to “unification” phobia.

In addition, within the ROCOR itself there are influential characters who are most interested in speedy integration with the Patriarchal Church, which is patronized by the Russian authorities. These are business people of the modern formation. Those who really influence the situation in ROCOR, for the most part, do not care who will lead its dioceses. For example, for Boris Jordan, a modest parishioner of the Church Abroad, who read an hour-long report on the need for reunification at the cathedral, the prospects of working in the Russian market, where the requirements for the political loyalty of investors are constantly growing (remember the recent “Browder case”, when, it would seem, absolutely the “pro-Russian” investor was suddenly deprived of the right to enter the country). Or for the synodal treasurer, Archpriest Pyotr Kholodny, who successfully collaborated with Norilsk Nickel as a nickel and platinum trader on world markets: Pyotr Kholodny has an MBA degree (Master of Business Administration) and has been in business for a couple of decades. To what extent these business people are seriously concerned about issues related to discussions relevant to the 20s and 30s (such as the attitude towards the Declaration of Metropolitan Sergius, which is odious for traditional foreigners, which will turn 80 years old next year), is a more or less rhetorical question.

The fact that the Russian Orthodox Church is inclined to impose its will on its foreign branches is clearly illustrated by the example of the current situation in the Sourozh diocese. Until recently, it seemed that this diocese in Great Britain - the unique creation of the famous Metropolitan Anthony (Bloom) - would exist for many years in the same form as during the life of the shepherd. That is, as an association of clergy and parishioners who put in the first place not the typicon of the publication of the Holy Synod of the Victorious times, but love and mercy, Christian enlightenment, which knows no national boundaries (hence the divine services in different languages, which distinguished this diocese from others). But when some of the diocesan neophytes who arrived from Russia demanded that the churches serve strictly according to the domestic charter, they immediately received the support of Moscow, which led to dramatic consequences. Bishop Anthony’s successor, Bishop Basil (Osborne), whose candidacy was nominated by the Diocesan Assembly, submitted an application to transfer to the jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, and was immediately removed from management by Patriarch Alexy II and “sent to retirement.” And instead of him, the diocese is governed by a bishop appointed by Moscow.

ROCOR, as mentioned above, on the contrary, is committed to theological traditionalism. In terms of their rejection of all kinds of church innovations (even the most moderate ones, which have nothing in common with the notorious “renovationism” of the 20s), the “zaruezhniki” take a no less tough position than the patriarchal orthodoxies. It is no coincidence that on the issue of the Sourozh diocese, the positions of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad coincided, and the main initiator of the unification process, Archbishop Mark of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, was included in the commission that will now deal with its fate. A situation unprecedented for churches that are still not in canonical or eucharistic communion with each other.

However, there is nothing surprising in this - the paths of “Westernized” Orthodoxy (similar to the one that existed in the Sourozh diocese) and the Russian Orthodox Church are increasingly diverging. Tolerance is not a word in the vocabulary of modern Russian church leaders. And foreign dioceses represent an excellent opportunity for the international expansion of the Patriarchal Church, which it will not fail to take advantage of.