Posted on 11/19/2005 12:37:40 AM PST by Queen Beruthiel
As I understand it, the sort of "main" Orthodox Churches in America are growing, the GOA, ROCOR, AOA and maybe OCA, but I'm not real sure about the last one. Of course "growing" is a relative thing...growing since when and from what. The growth, by the way, is mostly from converts and convert families.
Well each one you talk to will probably tell you it's the only caniocal one.
From what I've seen ROCOR is he most strict Orthodox (They don't even have seats in church, and mandate women covering their heads if they are married, and everyone has confession before the eucharist, etc).
The OCA is a lot more laid back, probably most similar to your experience in a Catholic church.
The Antiochian is probably the most liberal and evangelical.
The OCA is probably your best bet at finding a not ethnic-tied parish.
Also it depends where you live... you may not have an abundance of choices.
None have anything that could really be called heretical, most of the reason for a lack of union has to do with what country each came from, and heriarchial disputes following the 1917 revolution.
Looks like OCA is treading water (probably losing some to other Orthodox churches really)
http://www.oca.org/QA.asp?ID=44&SID=3
"I think there may be a place for a 'less specifically ethnic' parish but personally I prefer a strong Russian ethnic parish."
My experience is that in this day and age, a good mix, 50/50, 60/40 with a strong ethnic culture in the parish works best for the overwhelming number of people.
If it were all up to me and about me, I'd want 100% Greek and not hear a word of English from the time I walked into the church until I left, but, alas, it isn't all about me and in any case, it would prbably mean the end of most parishes within a generation or two. I can tell you, I remember the days, not so long ago, when we treated our endowment like a golden calf because we all "knew" that we were dying off and there would be no new wave a Greek immigrants to carry on paying the bills one day. It was a "would the last Greek to die please shut the lights off" kind of mentality. That has all turned around in the last 12 years or so. At lat count we had 12 different ethnicities in the parish and the Metropolitan says when he visits that he sees the face of the bright future of Orthodoxy in America in our parish.
But I know what you mean! :)
Well, to give an example of what I mean by "heretical": In one place where we used to live, there was an "Orthodox" church complete with robed and bearded priests, icons, Divine Liturgy, you name it. Yet upon further inquiry we discovered that it was, in fact, a "gay" church, with an all-homosexual priesthood, dedicated to advancing "inclusion" of homosexuality. This experience has made us very, very wary.
QB:
Check out the websites of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese, the Antiochian Archdiocese, the Orthodox Church in America and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. Each will give you a list of parishes in your state or area. Anyone of them ought to be fine...in other words, no homosexual cult organizations. Each parish will have different strengths and weaknesses, be more or less welcoming, more or less strict in praxis.
I mentioned only the larger jurisdictions because the smaller ones, the Serbian Church, the Bugarian Church, the Romanian Church all tend to be quite ethnic, but that too has its advantages. Stay away from HOCNA and any parish which you find has any type of close association with an Ephraimite monastery.
Thanks very much for your helpful response.
"As you can tell, I am a longtime FR lurker but a first time poster. My husband and I have been planning to convert to the Orthodox Christian Faith from Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism, respectively, but so far we have not contacted any particular church."
Welcome to posting!
As you might be able to tell from my post, I'm not Orthodox, I go to an eastern Catholic church. Something you might not be aware of is that the Catholic church actually consists of 23+/- churches, the largest being the western or Roman Catholic church. The much smaller eastern Catholic churches (the other 22) don't get much attention, but we're in communion with Rome. The big difference between the eastern churches and the western (Roman Catholic) church is that our liturgies and traditions are eastern, that is to say much more similar to those of the Orthodox churches than that of the Roman Catholic church.
Every now and then you'll see Catholic posters (myself included) talking about "heading east" or "going Canon 32-2." What we're talking about is switching from the western church to one of the eastern ones. A trend that seems to be getting more popular with time.
That's all a long of suggesting that you take a look at one of the eastern Catholic churches in your area. FReep mail me if you want more info, and I'll get you some links.
As for the "best" Orthodox church, I'm clearly not qualified to judge. But you're in good company, and we have some fine Orthodox posters on this thread who will be happy to help.
I will say that I absolutely love the eastern liturgies, and going east whether it be to an eastern Catholic church or becoming Orthodox is something well worth looking into. My only regret is that I didn't head east long ago.
Thanks for your kind offer of assistance. I actually have heard of the eastern rite Catholic Churches and I have great respect for them, as well as for the RC church. However, my husband and I have already made a firm decision in favor of the OC, though we have not yet converted. I do appreciate your generosity. One thing I have always liked about the religion threads on FR is that the Orthodox and Catholic posters (and many Protestants, to be fair) by and large treat each other with graciousness and fair-mindedness.
And not other Orthodox Church in the world recognizes it.
Where was this?
Serbian churches never have seats unless the churches are bought with pews installed, and then only in America! A couple of weeks ago I would have said that the Serbian Orthodox Curch (which is in communion with ROCOR) is just as traditional, but I would have to bite my tongue. After being away fro 2 years without any close encounters with the Serbian Church is America I was shocked to see some real perversions in one of its parishes in Florida.
For one, there is a large influx of Serbian redneck population that came with the tide of refugees from former Yugoslavia. Let me tell you: these people, the "children of communism," are not Orthodox. They insist on having a lamb for their Slava (Patron Saint) during the fasting period because, as one said "my grandfather did it that way!"
There is no reverence to the icons or even to the Precious Gifts. The priest who comes to serve on Saturdays vs Sundays never performs confessions. Yet parishioners take the Eucharist anyway! Some say they fasted for a week and that somehow makes up for the confession; to me it sounds like they are just making up their own rules, or actually what the post Vatican II Catholics do in America: eat meat on Fridays if you do charitable work instead of fasting but most just eat meat on Fridays.
Women are never covered, even when they receive the Eucharist, and that includes even the priest's wife! The incensing of the Precious Gifts is done incorrectly -- the incenser has his back turned to the Precious Gifts, and is leading the procession! This happened while a bishop was visiting! I also noticed that there is no reverence paid to the icons when people walk into the church. People talk during the Divine Liturgy and the priest's son (looks like 4 or 5 years old), is constantly walking in and out and slamming doors during the Divine Liturgy. I am getting ready to write to the Patriarchate in Belgrade and ask that something be done about this!
So, to make a blanket statement that this archdiocese or that archdiocese is good across all parishes is simply misleading and wrong. I have seen some really weird stuff in a Greek church in St. Augustine, Florida, and in Fort Myers, Florida. Yet I have seen incredible Orthodoxy in Japan and in one OCA parish in Florida, the only one I ever visited.
So, rather than make blanket statements, let's just say that no two parishes are alike. Just as neighborhoods all look nice from an airplane, some are better than others when you are on the ground.
Most of all, remember that the Church is for the sinners. Thus, no parish is free from error and corruption. But, overall, Orthodoxy remains pure and unaltered, although there may be flakes and all sides. Also remember that a good Church is not necessarily the biggest. Our Lord said that the true Church will become invisible. That certainly seems to be the trend, and it's not such a bad thing. :-)
It may take some time before you find a true Orthodox parish and you will know one when you see one. Trust me.
Recognizes what?
The claimed autocephally of the OCA.
In Honolulu: http://www.inclusiveorthodox.org/index.htm (We have moved since then.)
I suppose the "inclusive" should have tipped us off, but we knew practically nothing about Orthodoxy at the time. We thought that "inclusive" merely meant "not ultra-Russian, ultra-Greek, etc." Don't get me wrong, we are more than willing to respect and accomodate ourselves to the ethnic background of the church we will attend (the one in our town is Greek). However, ashamed though I am to admit it, we found the prospect of attending a church where nearly 100% of the parishioners are, say, of Russian descent, rather daunting. When we were still members of a particular Anglican church, there was *one* black family in the entire congregation. Now we know how they felt.
Normally we go to an OCA parish (though we're looking t moving to a ROCOR on.
Nearly 100% are Russian or Ukranian decendants but not nearly that many keep such traditions, most cannot even speak Russian (some in the choir can sing slavonic songs they've heard for years but have not idea outside those songs how to speak Russian)
http://www.orthodoxwiki.org/ROCOR_and_OCA
To this day, only the Churches of Russia, Bulgaria, Poland, Georgia, and the Czech Lands and Slovakia recognize the autocephaly of the OCA.
http://orthodoxytoday.org/articles5/EardwineUnity.php
Considering the crisis the East Europe churches experienced in 1917 I'd say it's their call on the autocephally OCA.
The only ones with a legitimate qualm is ROCOR which itself is returning to communion with the MP, and them only because of the properties lost when the OCA was granted autocephally.
The rest are mostly playing a game of holier than thou.
"Considering the crisis the East Europe churches experienced in 1917 I'd say it's their call on the autocephally OCA."
That's not the way it works. But then again, autocephally is rarely granted; its usually taken and then the other Churches come around eventually.
"The only ones with a legitimate qualm is ROCOR which itself is returning to communion with the MP, and them only because of the properties lost when the OCA was granted autocephally."
I understood that it was the parishes of the "Metropolia" which became OCA. ROCOR, as I understood it, had absolutely nothing to do with it, being in schism with Moscow at the time of the autocephally grant.
"The rest are mostly playing a game of holier than thou."
More like old cold war politics. It makes little difference day to day anyway.
Read the orthodoxwiki article. Both claimed to be the official church both claimed Russia had given them permission, and that they were officially the real church. There was legal dispute over properties, which was a problem ROCOR had everywhere especially after 1991 when the status of teh MP church was globally recognized again and countries started giving ROCOR proprties back to Moscow (a big reason for their warming up of relations with Moscow being they stood to lose access to what had been ROCOR churches and historic places for almost a hundered years.
ROCOR and the OCA both claimed to be separate from Moscow in 1917, and both were part of the Moscow church prior to that, one being the church which came to America through the purchase of Alaska, and the other being the missionary church.
Here's the OCA official version:
http://www.oca.org/MVhistoryintroOCA.asp?SID=1
Here's the ROCOR official version:
http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/english/pages/history/briefhistory.html
The orthodox wiki article seems the least biased.
Until 1991 there was at least a good reason to be wary of the MP and thus the 1970 communion with the OCA; the large presence of the KGB hand in the Moscow church (most of whom haven't exactly left btw).
At this point however the Russian FSB (The KGB no longer exists) has shown less enthusiasm with church operations it had, though I wouldn't say the Moscow church operates completely outside of politics either.
That said the OCA churches are nothing like Russian churches. I've been to church in Russia and ROCOR churches are darned near identical (though smaller in design at least the ones I've seen). It makes sense for the ROCOR to be in communion with the MP.
Also
http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/01newstucture/pagesen/news05/fifthcomm.html
http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/01newstucture/pagesen/news05/mpbeslan.html
Most of the posts I've seen online regarding the OCA and ROCOR try to make them seem 'unofficial' churches, always with the goal of proping up something they are doing.
Considering that the schism in 1054 was mostly do to the bishop of Rome trying to institute a policy that the Roman Bishop and Rome itself were more official than other churches it seems ridiculous to me that any churches would attack another on that basis.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.