-
Please remember: Pray for Ukraine in the Prayer forum; Share news in the Christian News section; Discuss religious implications in FFA: Religious Topics; Discuss political implications in Politics (and if you don't have access, PM me) Thank you! + Fr. George, Forum Administrator
Archbishop Lazar Puhalo... good to read?
- Thread starter ignatius
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2004
- Messages
- 3,826
- Reaction score
- 85
- Points
- 48
- Location
- Canada
- Faith
- Orthodox Catholic
- Jurisdiction
- OCA
ignatius said:
Please do a search of past threads on OC.net. There is at least one that discusses Archbishop Lazar in detail and others that have relevant information.
Thomas
Archon
I remember that discussion however when I tried to do a search ,so I could list one for Ignatius, without any luck. Could you find one and attach it so Ignatius can review the previous posts.
Thomas
Thomas
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2004
- Messages
- 3,826
- Reaction score
- 85
- Points
- 48
- Location
- Canada
- Faith
- Orthodox Catholic
- Jurisdiction
- OCA
Here is one thread.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=rcv5h524jlo3ot2c0edn1sf4p5&topic=11020.0
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=rcv5h524jlo3ot2c0edn1sf4p5&topic=11020.0
Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo) began his peregrinations in the world of Orthodox clergy in the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, where he was ordained a Deacon. When Blessed Father Seraphim (Rose) wrote a work on the tollhouses, entitled "The Soul After Death," Deacon Lev Puhalo (Archbishop Lazar's name before monastic tonsure) took great offense at Father Seraphim's work on the tollhouses, and attempted to begin a polemical exchange with Father Seraphim on this matter. This exchange did not get too far-Father Seraphim was not inclined to get involved in a polemical battle, and the Synod of Bishops ruled that the polemical exchanges should cease-and that Father Seraphim's work reflected the teachings of the Orthodox Church, while Deacon Lev's did not. (I have been told Deacon Lev's position was akin to "soul sleep" taught by the 7th Day Adventists)
Father Seraphim did indeed cease writing about the subject, while Deacon Lev did not. He was warned by the Synod of Bishops on more than one occasion to "cease and desist," but he would not do so. Subsequent to his refusal to obey the orders of the Synod of Bishops, he was defrocked. At this point he went to the Free Serbian Diocese. Despite the fact that he had been deposed by the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, Deacon Lev was tonsured a monk and ordained a priest by the Free Serbian Diocese. (At that time, I do not believe the Free Serbs ordinations were generally recognized within the Orthodox Church, as one of the "Autocephalous" Ukrainian Churches was involved in the consecration of the Free Serbian Bishop Iriney).
Apparently, it was Father Archimandrite Lazar's (his title in the Free Serbian Diocese) desire to become a Bishop that spurred his move to the Free Serbian Diocese. When he found this could not happen in the Free Serbian Diocese as they apparently had some sort of policy that precluded persons not of 100% Serbian ancestry from becoming a Bishop in their jurisdiction, Father Archimandrite Lazar left the Free Serbian Diocese. I became briefly acquainted with Father Archimandrite Lazar at that time by correspondence. In one letter, I asked him why he had left the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, and he replied that it was so he could "be with his fellow Serbs."
Father Archimandrite Lazar next turned up in the Orthodox Church of Portugal, which was an Old Calendarist group that supposedly had been given a blessing to begin as an "autonomous" Old Calendar Church by Archbishop Auxentios (Pastras), head of one of the Greek Old Calendar Synods. Archbishop Auxentios did not consult his Synod concerning this Orthodox Church of Portugal, however, which left its authenticity greatly in question. Also, of course, this Orthodox Church of Portugal was not recognized by any other Orthodox Churches-even the Old Calendarists also did not recognize it because the way Archbishop Auxentios allowed its beginning without any consultation of the Synod. Also, the Orthodox Church of Portugal's ruling hierarch, Bishop Gabriel, was so extreme that he had priests of ROCOR joining his Church rebaptized! The Orthodox Church of Portugal consecrated Father Archimandrite Lazar-or-the defrocked Deacon Lev Puhalo-he was referred to both ways at the time-to the "Episcopate." I do not recall hearing exactly what his title as a Bishop was.
Later on down the road, the now "Bishop" Lazar abandoned the Orthodox Church of Portugal, and joined the Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Kyiv Patriarchate. It seems that this Ukrainian group also "consecrated" "Bishop" Lazar a "Bishop." I never heard exactly why this happened-whether they did not recognize his previous consecration as Bishop, or, for some other reason. Perhaps two consecrations are better than one?
Without having heard too much about "Bishop" Lazar for a few years, he then turned as as a "retired Archbishop" of the OCA. This was extremely odd, as the OCA's Mother Church, the Moscow Patriarchate, certainly could not have appreciated that they received Lazar, as a Bishop, after an Episcopal Consecration from a Church which the MP considered to be in schism from it, and ruled by a Bishop ["Patriarch" Filaret (Denisenko)] whom the MP had defrocked for a number of reasons....
It certainly did not seem that any good could come to the OCA for accepting Lazar-ROCOR could have problems with it, the MP could have problems with it, indeed, it could affect which jurisdictions would or would not serve with the OCA in some circumstances. I could never find out why he was accepted by the OCA, other than he was a "friend" of Archbishop Dimitry (Royster) of the OCA. I wondered, is that all it takes...?
At any rate-should you read the works of "Archbishop" Lazar? Obedience to the Church is touted as one of the supreme virtues. It is true that heretics, schismatics, even pagans, could write things that are acceptable to an Orthodox Christian. But, if one who is Orthodox wanted to read a book about Orthodoxy, or an Orthodox topic, why read a book by a Roman Catholic, a "Bishop Gregory of Colorado," a Hindu, or, one whose obedience to the Holy Church is questionable?
Father Seraphim did indeed cease writing about the subject, while Deacon Lev did not. He was warned by the Synod of Bishops on more than one occasion to "cease and desist," but he would not do so. Subsequent to his refusal to obey the orders of the Synod of Bishops, he was defrocked. At this point he went to the Free Serbian Diocese. Despite the fact that he had been deposed by the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, Deacon Lev was tonsured a monk and ordained a priest by the Free Serbian Diocese. (At that time, I do not believe the Free Serbs ordinations were generally recognized within the Orthodox Church, as one of the "Autocephalous" Ukrainian Churches was involved in the consecration of the Free Serbian Bishop Iriney).
Apparently, it was Father Archimandrite Lazar's (his title in the Free Serbian Diocese) desire to become a Bishop that spurred his move to the Free Serbian Diocese. When he found this could not happen in the Free Serbian Diocese as they apparently had some sort of policy that precluded persons not of 100% Serbian ancestry from becoming a Bishop in their jurisdiction, Father Archimandrite Lazar left the Free Serbian Diocese. I became briefly acquainted with Father Archimandrite Lazar at that time by correspondence. In one letter, I asked him why he had left the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, and he replied that it was so he could "be with his fellow Serbs."
Father Archimandrite Lazar next turned up in the Orthodox Church of Portugal, which was an Old Calendarist group that supposedly had been given a blessing to begin as an "autonomous" Old Calendar Church by Archbishop Auxentios (Pastras), head of one of the Greek Old Calendar Synods. Archbishop Auxentios did not consult his Synod concerning this Orthodox Church of Portugal, however, which left its authenticity greatly in question. Also, of course, this Orthodox Church of Portugal was not recognized by any other Orthodox Churches-even the Old Calendarists also did not recognize it because the way Archbishop Auxentios allowed its beginning without any consultation of the Synod. Also, the Orthodox Church of Portugal's ruling hierarch, Bishop Gabriel, was so extreme that he had priests of ROCOR joining his Church rebaptized! The Orthodox Church of Portugal consecrated Father Archimandrite Lazar-or-the defrocked Deacon Lev Puhalo-he was referred to both ways at the time-to the "Episcopate." I do not recall hearing exactly what his title as a Bishop was.
Later on down the road, the now "Bishop" Lazar abandoned the Orthodox Church of Portugal, and joined the Ukrainian Orthodox Church-Kyiv Patriarchate. It seems that this Ukrainian group also "consecrated" "Bishop" Lazar a "Bishop." I never heard exactly why this happened-whether they did not recognize his previous consecration as Bishop, or, for some other reason. Perhaps two consecrations are better than one?
Without having heard too much about "Bishop" Lazar for a few years, he then turned as as a "retired Archbishop" of the OCA. This was extremely odd, as the OCA's Mother Church, the Moscow Patriarchate, certainly could not have appreciated that they received Lazar, as a Bishop, after an Episcopal Consecration from a Church which the MP considered to be in schism from it, and ruled by a Bishop ["Patriarch" Filaret (Denisenko)] whom the MP had defrocked for a number of reasons....
It certainly did not seem that any good could come to the OCA for accepting Lazar-ROCOR could have problems with it, the MP could have problems with it, indeed, it could affect which jurisdictions would or would not serve with the OCA in some circumstances. I could never find out why he was accepted by the OCA, other than he was a "friend" of Archbishop Dimitry (Royster) of the OCA. I wondered, is that all it takes...?
At any rate-should you read the works of "Archbishop" Lazar? Obedience to the Church is touted as one of the supreme virtues. It is true that heretics, schismatics, even pagans, could write things that are acceptable to an Orthodox Christian. But, if one who is Orthodox wanted to read a book about Orthodoxy, or an Orthodox topic, why read a book by a Roman Catholic, a "Bishop Gregory of Colorado," a Hindu, or, one whose obedience to the Holy Church is questionable?