Category Archives: Convertitis

Rebaptism and Pathology

Fifty Years of Recent History

Nearly fifty years ago, in 1976, a scandal took place in the Orthodox Church in Guildford, England. A very young, poorly educated and inexperienced Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) priest, married off to the first woman come so he could be ordained at the uncanonical age of 22, rebaptised a group of recent converts. The converts had previously been received from the Church of England into the Moscow Patriarchate in the usual Orthodox way by chrismation. Here they had been receiving the sacraments for some time until they had been told by a rather fanatical priest that they needed to be rebaptised! The local Moscow Patriarchate bishop, supported by all other canonical Orthodox, complained.

His petition went to the then still Orthodox ROCOR Synod in New York. Its leader, Metropolitan Philaret, whom no-one would ever suspect of liberalism, commented that this rebaptism was a form of Neo-Donatism. The priest was rebuked – later he divorced the woman that he had been ordered to marry and left the priesthood and the Church. Sadly, the bishop who had had him ordained and had preached the ‘theology of rebaptism’ to him was not rebuked. However, some years later that bishop also ended up outside the Church and then died. An extreme right-winger, he had first created several more scandals, including consecrating as bishop a pedophile in Russia, outside his canonical territory.

Two years later, in 1978, there took place the rebaptism of the late French Catholic monk Fr Placide (Deseille) in the sea at the foot of the Athonite Monastery of Simonopetra. Fr Placide was very well-known in Roman Catholic France and had great respect as a scholar. Later I met him. However, he had already transferred to the so-called ‘Byzantine rite’, as the Roman Catholic rite had been deformed after the Second Vatican Council in the 1960s. Fr (now St) Sophrony the Athonite, whom I knew very well, was very upset. For him this rebaptism was not only quite unnecessary, but also a provocation. He expressed the Orthodox theology of the sacraments, as practised by our 1,000 bishops.

This is that there are no sacraments outside the (Orthodox) Church, but there are sacramental forms or rites. The grace that is missing from them is made up for, completed, by contact with the Church and Her life. Thus, a rite of baptism with water (triple immersion is not compulsory – for Orthodox emergency baptisms are conducted without this) in the Name of the Holy Trinity outside the Church is acceptable as a valid sacramental form. The grace that is clearly missing from it to make it into a sacrament is communicated by reception into the Church. To repeat the sacramental baptismal rite is a type of fundamentalism, formalist literalism, which is actually typical of Protestantism.

Pathology

Today we are seeing again this same Protestant ‘Will I be saved?’ neurosis among some converts from Protestantism to the Orthodox Church. In this there is always the sectarian desire to condemn others, which is why Protestantism consists of a myriad of warring sects. This ‘OneTrueChurchism’ is a typically Protestant reflex. It is pathological because, like all pathologies, it is based not on Christian love, but on hatred for others, not on theology, but on pathology.

There are those who want to prey on the insecurity of neophytes in order to make such new converts doubt in their own Orthodoxy, using jurisdictions just as Protestants use denominations. But why do they want to prey on their insecurity? Simply because they want neophytes to become dependent on them. Creation of dependency is again typical of sectarianism, which is always associated with cults, that is, on guruism, personality cults, lust for power.

There is also a need among these cult leaders or gurus to recruit others. With very small flocks and so lacking money – given their anti-pastoral fanaticism, that is understandable – they are desperate to fill their near-empty churches. Without ethnic groups to attend their ‘temples’ (as they call churches), their only audience is naïve, young people, including the lonely, incels, closet homosexuals and others with problems. They make easy prey for the spiritual vultures.

Thus, one young Englishman I know is on his third rebaptism now. He lasted three years in a parish of 200 in the canonical Church, then went off to a tiny ROCOR community (nowadays they are always tiny) for about one year. However, that group of ten individuals was not good enough for him, so he went off to another tiny old calendarist group, which rebaptised him. He stayed with them for only about one year but they were not exclusive enough for him!

Six months ago he was rebaptised in a group, numbering six worldwide! The latest news is that he is dissastisfied with them, for they too are not strict enough for him. Here is the map of his way out of the Church, because that is how it will end – and it always does end in that way, outside the Church. This ‘anabaptism’ (Greek for rebaptism) is typical of Protestantism, whose underlying mentality and reflex is clear from the outset. It is not Orthodox, for it is not Love.

 

Is this the End of ROCOR?

Despite the very strong opposition of the CIA, in 2007 the New York-based émigré Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) at last entered into canonical communion with the Mother-Church, 99% of the Russian Orthodox Church (‘MP’), which is based in Moscow. At the end of the last century ROCOR had been strongly tempted by a politicised, ghetto-style, sectarian and isolationist position. It had been out of communion with the MP for over 80 years for political reasons, as Communist-enslaved Moscow had not been politically free until the 1990s. However, after this period the ROCOR position no longer made any sense.

Indeed, there were those of us who for years since the 1990s had battled for the establishment of this canonical communion in our struggle to reclaim ROCOR from sectarianism. Finally, we were present at our victory over the ROCOR temptation of sectarianism in Moscow in 2007, rewarded at last. Clearly, from 2007 on, ROCOR was called on to merge with other Orthodox in the Diaspora, contributing the liturgical and ascetic heritage of the old ROCOR to others, especially, but not only, to Non-Russian Orthodox who often lacked it. The later Metropolitan Kallistos (Ware), who like the rest of us loved the old ROCOR of St John of Shanghai, whom he had met, was just one of those to call on it to do so.

However, to our enormous sadness, ROCOR refused these invitations and overtures. Instead of contributing to a solid basis for the establishment of new Local Churches in Western Europe, Northern America and Oceania, the new ROCOR gradually allied itself with extreme right-wing, ex-Protestant neophytes. These were isolationist sectarians with very, very little idea of the real Russian Orthodox Tradition and the Russian language, history and culture, let alone the general Orthodox Tradition. Such individuals were called ‘crazy converts’ by ordinary parishioners, Russian and Non-Russian alike. Moreover, to our profound shock, racist hatred was openly expressed by this new ROCOR for Non-Russian Orthodox, and by at least one new American ROCOR bishop. He also publicly declared that’ the Patriarch of Constantinople is possessed’. We were all horrified.

With the increasingly serious dementia and physical ailments of the then ROCOR First Hierarch, Metropolitan Hilarion (Kapral), ROCOR gradually began to drift away from the Church, to whose communion it had returned in 2007. Certain extremist individuals, seeking revenge for our victory over sectarianism in 2007, and perhaps regretting the cutting off of generous CIA subsidies to ROCOR, usurped the Metropolitan’s position. They began using his electronic signature on very harsh documents which favoured their extremist positions.

Thus, a whole series of utterly anti-canonical actions took place, quite noticeably from 2016 on. These included the ousting of well-respected traditional ROCOR priests, even one of its old archbishops, all those linked with pre-Revolutionary Russia. Then there was also the Fr Alexander Belya affair. In this affair, a Ukrainian hieromonk, selected to be a bishop by ROCOR, was abruptly accused of extraordinary and still unproven crimes and then ousted and ‘defrocked’ by American ROCOR bishops, even though he, like many others, had already taken refuge in a canonical Orthodox jurisdiction.

What was the reason for this? We cannot be certain, but we can imagine the opposition to and jealousy of a seminary-trained, fluent Russian and Ukrainian-speaking episcopal candidate in ROCOR on the part of non-fluent speakers among certain members of the episcopate and candidates for the episcopate. As clergy of the old, traditional ROCOR were ejected, there had followed the consecration of extreme right-wing convert bishops and the ordination of extreme right-wing convert priests, all of Protestant backgrounds. They were now taking over, pushing those of the Tradition out according to plan.

The new ones wanted to replace grounded Orthodox like Fr Alexander Belya and senior clergy of the old ROCOR, who had nothing to do with sectarianism. The main interest of the new American ROCOR clergy appears to be in attracting extremist right-wing Protestants to their supposedly Russian Orthodox ROCOR jurisdiction. They certainly despised ordinary Russians, who were told (in front of me) to learn English! As supposed members of the Orthodox Church, these converts would quote out of context and misunderstood canons instead of quoting out of context and misunderstood chapter and verse. The dark and depressing spirit of the Puritan pharisees and of Calvinist New England witch-hunters remained the same.

As a result of such intrigues, in England there began the scandal of a very young and very inexperienced ROCOR convert bishop, received into the Church from Lutheranism by chrismation (!), who had only been in ROCOR for a few years (!). Under the influence of a newly-received old calendarist priest, he dictatorially (no discussion, let alone disagreement, would be allowed) even forbade his clergy to concelebrate with an ex-Catholic priest of the MP and his people to take communion in the MP Russian Orthodox jurisdiction of this priest. This priest had been received into the MP in the normal Russian Orthodox way by confession and concelebration. This young convert bishop created a schism, but, amazingly, he was actually backed up by other convert bishops!  Clearly, the disease was already ingrained.

After up to 50 years of faithfulness to the old ROCOR, over a dozen clergy and thousands of people left the new ROCOR because of this convert bishop’s schism. They wanted to be in communion with their families and friends. Thus, the convert bishop’s schism from the MP led to the loss of well over half his diocese, the vital and living part, which did not serve in tiny ghetto-groups of converts in small rented chapels, backrooms and garden sheds. Although warned well in advance of exactly how many clergy, real parishes and people he was going to lose, he, backed by the American Synod, still went ahead with this insanity, to the distress of the MP, which looked on in disbelief and whose Patriarch told him not to do it. Some in the MP called for a ‘psychiatric ambulance’. Instead of obeying his own Patriarch, the young convert bishop proceeded to ‘suspend’ and then defrock’ clergy of another jurisdiction!

Although the MP were sympathetic to the ex-ROCOR group, who were only supporting traditional Russian Orthodox theology and practice, the MP could not take in the group who had petitioned the MP to do this. This was because the MP was frightened of upsetting political relations with the increasingly deviant and aggressive ROCOR, which was blackmailing the MP: ‘If you do this, we shall not attend your Council of Bishops and we shall go into schism with you all’. This fear of blackmail will not last. For the moment distracted by the Ukraine, from which affair Moscow will clearly emerge triumphant, as has always been obvious, though Moscow’s attitude in the Ukraine have repeatedly been condemned by the anti-Russian American ROCOR (!), as also by the CIA (a coincidence?!), sooner or later the MP will call ROCOR’s bluff. Enough is enough!

Now the convert bishop has, contradicting himself, concelebrated with an Antiochian bishop, who has just defrocked one of his priests, who had objected to the standard Antiochian (and Orthodox) practice of receiving converts by chrismation, and not rebaptism. This priest, who openly calls his bishop and all Antiochian bishops ‘heretics’ (!), had also objected to the long-standing local Antiochian practice of giving communion to nominally Miaphysite Syrians, Copts, Ethiopians and Eritreans. The defrocked Antiochian priest has received the sympathy of many ROCOR converts in the USA. After all, as they logically point out, in the USA ROCOR there even has one bishop who openly, and he claims with an official blessing, rebaptises unrebaptised converts who have already been members of the Orthodox Church for many years! (He calls this by the unknown and heretical term ‘corrective baptism’).

The Antiochian bishop in question, Metr Silouan (Oner), has specifically declared that he will defrock any priests who carry out such ‘corrective baptisms’. He has also said that any jurisdiction that does this has ‘schismatic tendencies’ and these people are ‘extremists’. As well we know. But you have to suffer, be persecuted and slandered for proclaiming the Church Truth. Logically, ROCOR will have to fall out of communion with yet another Local Church, the Antiochian, painting themselves ever more into their sectarian corner. Or else it must renounce the practices of its own bishops in England and in the USA.

Clearly, once the distraction of the Ukraine is over, the MP will have to intervene and bring order. As just one example, Fr Alexander Belya and his large group of parishes, mainly ex-ROCOR, could be made bishop for the MP parishes in North America, if Moscow were to take him in from the Greek Church, where he and most of the others were forced to take refuge from ROCOR Protestant sectarianism and, presumably, from clerical jealousy. It looks as though we are seeing the death rattle of ROCOR, which has been riding roughshod over the canons and obedience to the Mother-Church.

ROCOR will have to make up its mind whether it accepts the Orthodox Tradition of the Mother-Church, or if it wants to be just another weird American old calendarist sect, a ROCOR, Russian Old Calendarists Outside Russia, made up of crazy converts from Protestantism and of children of immigrants who long ago lost their roots. Moscow will no longer tolerate the persecution of Orthodox inside ROCOR. A split inside ROCOR, between the increasingly fewer actual Russian Orthodox and the new sectarians now looks inevitable.

It is all so tiresome. Again and again the same indiscipline and ignorance on the part of ROCOR. Just when you think it is back in the saving fold of the Church, its American wing again rejects canonical Orthodoxy. This is all a repeat of baptism controversies like that of Palmer in the 19th century and more recently those in ROCOR in the 1970s and 1980s. We have seen it all before. Is ROCOR condemned to repeat the same extremist, old calendarist-type errors in every generation? If so, it is time that it was brought to heel by Moscow, which alone can instruct it to stop persecuting Orthodox. If it refuses, then Moscow will be forced to step in to protect the persecuted, saving them from the schisms, anti-canonical acts and anti-Christian persecutions of ROCOR.

When I was last in California, in 2006, as a speaker at the Fourth ROCOR Council, I expressed surprise at the bizarre things I saw in San Francisco. A priest from the East Coast explained to me with a smile: ‘When God made America, he tilted it slightly, so that all the oddballs ran down to California’. In England, Russians, Romanians, Greeks, French, Germans and those of other nations behave themselves and are polite. They are welcome here. It is only certain Americans who come here, swaggering around like Mormons, Scientologists and members of other US sects and cults, trying to change the way you speak!, as though they owned the place, and are spectacularly rude and insult the local people. They do not behave as gentlemen. You are not welcome here and you should go home. American ROCOR: You have become a laughing-stock throughout Europe. Your time is up, the farce is over, take the psychiatric ambulance and go. It is time for mismanaged ROCOR to hand over to the MP, who are competent. It is what we have been saying for years.

 

The Difference Between Orthodox Christians and Converts

The Orthodox Christian Man

He may be called Nick, George, Sergei or Jim (= Dimitrios, Dmitry, Dumitrou, Dima) and he works as a builder, carpenter, plumber, electrician or car mechanic (if Serb). He did not go to church very often, apart from to stand outside to smoke cigarettes and talk with his friends, who have the same name as him, until he turned 50, then he started seriously. He once spoke to a convert. The latter told him that his parents were not Orthodox so ‘they will not be saved and will go to hell’. Nick/George/Sergei/Jim said afterwards: ‘He talk crap’ (this sounds more effective when said with a rolled ‘r’ in an Eastern European accent). He added that ‘he look like he need good meal. That make man of him’. He tells everyone that he is the boss (his wife told him so), but he actually knows that his wife is the boss and, secretly, he prefers it that way, but would never admit to it in public.

The Orthodox Christian Woman

Her name ends in ‘a’ (for example Maria), or in ‘na’ (for example, Alina, Arina, Carolina, Ekaterina, Galina, Inna, Irina, Karina, Nina, Marina, Nina, Paulina, Valentina, Christina, Ioanna, Oana, Oksana, Svetlana, Tatiana, Elena) or else in oula (for example, Coula, Foula, Poula, Roula, Soula, Toula). She did not go to church very often until she turned 40, then suddenly she started and now she never misses a service. She is an excellent cook and like her husband is slightly overweight. Her husband says that ‘she comfortable’, which is his word for ‘plump’. She has to be slightly plump for the sake of her many grandchildren, who like sitting on her lap.  She never argues with her husband because she arranges it so he always agrees with her. Her sons, who are builders, fear her and she made sure they all got married before the age of 30. Her daughters, who are beauticians, hairdressers, nurses or teachers, spend as much time as possible with her. She encourages them to have as many babies as possible.

The Male Convert

Although his real name is Bob, Tom or Tony, he calls himself Seraphim, Moses, Vladimir or Silouan. He is single and tends to be frightened of or even despise women (which is why he is single). He has very long hair, tied into a bun at the back, and a very long beard (the parish priest has short hair and a short beard and no-one else in the parish has long hair or a beard). His favourite colour is black and he is very thin. He has a huge number of icons, many ‘Orthodox’ books, several tiny wrist-size rosaries (which for some reason he calls ‘ropes’) and watches podcasts given by gurus who look like him. His favourite word is ‘holy’, and adds it to everything: ‘holy liturgy’, ‘holy canons’, ‘holy icons’, ‘holy tradition’, ‘holy fast’, ‘holy fathers’ etc. He has very right-wing views. He litters his speech with words like ‘prelest’, ‘schema’, ‘stichar’ or ‘omofor’, which he mispronounces and which no-one else in the parish or anywhere else knows anyway. He is not at all practical and gives the impression of being rather autistic. He works part-time and has problems holding down a job. Thank goodness nobody would ever think of making him a bishop. If they did, the power would go to his head and make him crazy.

The Female Convert

Although her real name is Sue or Pam, she calls herself Seraphima or Anastasia. She is single. Although she comes from a well-off family, she usually dresses in long and old skirts. She does not look after her long hair, would never dye it, and never wears any make-up. Her favourite colour is black and she appears to wear tablecloths over her hair, though she calls them headscarves. She is to be found in food shops examining the ingredients of various foods to make sure that they contain no non-fasting foods, the slightest amount of which could cause her to sin mortally. She is vegan and very thin and pale. She does not feel confident with children and may never have any.