|
|
Interview with Protodeacon PETER SCORER, of the parish of St Elias in Devon (Great Britain): ‘The closure of the diocese of Sourozh cannot be excluded’.
“Portal-Credo.Ru”: Father Peter, it is the 50th anniversary of the Dormition Cathedral in London.
Protodeacon Peter Scorer: Yes, you know, I can even remember how, when I was quite small, I was there at the consecration of the church…
Where did the Russian community go before that?
The church of St Philip, not far from Victoria station. Services were held there on alternate weeks with the Church in Exile. I remember the funeral of my grandfather, Simeon Ludvigovich Frank took place there. He is buried at Hendon Cemetery in the capital. Services there were taken alternately by the future bishop Anthony (Bloom), and the recently deceased bishop Vitalii (Ustinov). Father Vitalii would always reconsecrate the Holy Table, as he had said to Father Anthony, “You are the servant of the devil”, and that meant that he had to re-bless the church. In 1956 the Russian community leased the church which is today celebrating its 50th anniversary from the Anglican church. In the seventies the church was purchased, as the previous owners were thinking of letting the church become a Chinese restaurant. Bishop Anthony appealed to his flock, and they began to raise money. Even people from the USSR contributed, and the church became the property of the parish. So it remains to this day.
Celebrations took place in the cathedral to commemorate the jubilee, and were led by the Head of the DECR MP, Metropolitan Kirill (Gundyaev). Were any of the old parishioners present?
No, nobody. But the celebrations were full of pomp. New blue vestments came from Moscow, the singing was by the choir of the Danilov monastery, the Dean of the South-Western parishes and senior priest of the Sourozh diocese Benedict Ramsden, who serves in Cornwall, was made a mitred archpriest. Archbishop Grigorios of Thyateira (a great diplomat, who had incidentally accepted the letters of release given by Bishop Basil (Osborne) to all the clergy of the Sourozh diocese of the ROC MP) concelebrated with Metropolitan Kirill. Also concelebrating were Archbishop Innokenty, and most unpleasant of all, Bishop Hilarion, who had come from Vienna. He had caused so much pain during the last years of Metropolitan Anthony’s life. There were no bishops to represent the Anglican or Roman Catholic or Coptic churches, just priests. On 14 October there was a reception in the Dorchester Hotel (next to Claridges, one of the smartest hotels in London) for the bishops and important guests, and on the 15th at the Royal Thames Yacht Club for everybody.
One has the impression that things will go on as now. That the Dormition cathedral will remain with the ROC MP, and the Statutes of the Sourozh diocese will be annulled… and what about the financial situation in the diocese?
First of all, one must not forget the power of propaganda, and in this case, that coming from Moscow. In actual fact, things are not what they appear to be. Secondly, as far as the cathedral in concerned, of course the Moscow patriarchate has a lot of power, it has authority and money. But, there is also British law, which is not interested in any of this. The future of the cathedral will be decided by the Charity Commission. All the diocesan funds have been frozen, neither side has any access to them until the case is resolved. Regarding the statutes of the diocese, I sincerely believe that they will be annulled with the arrival of the new so-called diocesan administrator, Archimandrite Eliseus (Ganaba). Generally speaking, I do not understand this uncanonical concept of ‘diocesan administrator’. Why is a ruling bishop not appointed?
Well, why?
As has been said before, this is an ‘awkward diocese’. That is why, it seems to me, one cannot rule out the possibility of the diocese of Sourozh being closed. You see, I cannot remember a single instance of any diocese existing for four years without a ruling bishop.
It is possible that after all Father Eliseus will become the next bishop. It has been said that he is soon to be consecrated as a bishop. Incidentally, it is interesting that they are sending to London a man who has been in various hotspots: in Estonia – during the well known scandal with Constantinople, in Antioch and in Jerusalem, where he was until very recently the head of the Russian Ecclesiastical Mission, another troublesome post. He will be arriving in London together with father Michael Dudko, who has been to London before. On the other hand, one cannot rule out the possibility that in time bishop Mark (Arndt) (ROCOR) will be appointed ruling bishop of the Sourozh diocese.
And what will become of Bishop Basil, who is now being threatened with an episcopal court?
Let me say first of all that Bishop Basil, and he has said so himself, has never received an invitation to attend meetings of the Synod. So one must assume that he has to find out that he is awaited hundreds of miles away through something like the internet. But I do not think that Moscow will now enter into a serious conflict with Constantinople. Already now, during Metropolitan Kirill’s visit to London, it was noticeable that there were some attempts made in the direction of conciliation. Apart from that, the actual procedure for an episcopal court in the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow patriarchate has not been elaborated, although there have been efforts to do so and work is still in progress. I must also say, finally, that Moscow never wanted Bishop Basil to be a ruling bishop, and that is why Bishop Kirill always answered Bishop Basil’s request to send him clergy from Moscow, who were badly needed, by saying that he had no one to send. But he did have people, and now we can see them.
About half of the parishes have left with Bishop Basil. Why has the other half stayed with Moscow? It includes descendants of the old émigrés, and English people.
Many of them feel that they are remaining faithful to Metropolitan Anthony, as they came to the Russian church exclusively through him, and Bishop Anthony always strove, to the very end to remain with the Moscow patriarchate. These people don’t or don’t want to examine the causes of the present situation. There are those who came to the Russian church, to orthodoxy through reading Dostoevsky or Berdyaev, and there is there an element of romanticism, onion domes and so on. Finally, there are some who simply look at everything through rose-tinted spectacles. At the same time, I must say that we have a lot of support, including from clergy, from within Russia itself, although many there are afraid of speaking out.
Interview by Aleksei Theoktistov
For ‘Portal-Credo.ru’
19 October 2006
|
