Letter of Protopresbyter George Grabbe to Archbishop Nathaniel Lvov (1976)

28. To Archbishop Nathaniel (Lvov)

March 2/15, 1976

Dear Most Reverend Vladyka,

Thank you for replying to me so quickly. I will send your report on Innsbruck to print.

I hope that Vladyka Vitaly in Montreal will organize something. In any case, he will distribute his publications. The issue of organizing worship services there does not arise, since there is a permanent cathedral, and everything is well arranged. The Metropolia is relatively sidelined there; it is hardly visible or heard, and the church cannot be compared to our very large and magnificent cathedral inside (though not outside). I hope that the NTS will assist in the distribution of literature. They will probably be working there.

<...>

I have carefully read the memorandum on church groupings. I recognize that the question of grace is very complex, and I do not like to determine where it has disappeared and where it still remains. However, there are canonical offenses for which retribution follows without a judicial decision in the so-called declarative order. Such, for example, is the crime against the Paschalion, apostasy, etc. The expression "incorrect position" is very general in nature and sometimes may be too mild. Can such a definition suffice in relation to Nikodim [of Leningrad]? I would agree that regarding jurisdictional deviations, one should not rush to final decisions, limiting oneself only to an actual break in communion. But is that sufficient when ecumenism reaches the point of communing heretics? It seems to me that no new fundamental definition is required, but rather, it is necessary only to uphold the previously established abstention from concelebration, especially the liturgy. We should be alarmed not only by the danger of making a mistake and condemning as invalid that which has not yet deserved such a determination concerning the sacraments of those who have separated, but also by the danger of displaying indifference to truth and falsehood and some kind of participation in it through liturgical communion with those who have fallen into it. In general, the very fact that we are discussing this issue indicates uncertainty about the grace of those who have fallen away, and where there is uncertainty, there can be no concelebration. However, such uncertainty is not yet a final decision on the gracelessness of all those who have split away. I believe that if ecumenism continues to develop further, the time may come for a more definite delineation. For now, this heresy nests at the top but has not spread among the people. But what will happen when the principles of the Thyateira Confession enter life and practice, and Patriarch Demetrios serves the liturgy with Pope Paul [VI]? If the First-Second Council indicates that in the case of a violation of Orthodoxy one must break with one’s hierarch, then a Council of a Diocese may act similarly concerning the Heads of other Churches. Moreover, the rule not only permits this but directly instructs it. As for specific rules regarding the order of reception from their flock, it seems that this is required only when, from personal error and personal preaching, the matter extends to the persuasion of the entire Church, that is, both clergy and flock. Separation from the Church is not a matter of a single moment but is usually the consequence of a known process.

I do not agree with your report on the attitude toward Patriarch Tikhon. The question of declaring Patriarch Tikhon fallen was never discussed either in the Synod or in the Council. He died in 1925, and by the 1930s, it was too late to discuss the matter of his sacraments. I have never heard from anyone about the possibility of recognizing them as non-sacraments. Even in relation to Metropolitan Sergius in the 1930s, the question was not framed in such a way. Perhaps the Evlogians attributed this to us.

<...>

I deeply sympathize with your illness. May God grant you recovery. But the clergy are falling ill and dying not only in Europe. In Australia, the situation is even worse. Somehow, we have not managed to prepare a replacement. There are no candidates for the episcopate at all. And our older generation has reached the age of death. I do not always feel like an old man yet, but essentially, of course, I am one. This year marks 50 years since my first theological article was published in Church Gazette. Seventy-four years is already the Psalmist’s age, and one must always expect the arrival of "toil and sorrow."

<...>

 

Russian source: https://vishegorod.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=740&Itemid=151