Another Kryill Flip-Flop Example

This is a segment of a Euphrosynos Cafe forum discussion 0ctober 2003

The Saint Euphrosynos Cafe Discussion Forum
A discussion forum for Traditional Orthodox Christians and Inquirers

Change in ROCOR?

Bishop Kyrill of San Francisco's flip-flopping Ecclesiology
by Lounger » Wed 22 October 2003 8:06 pm
Some time ago Deacon Basil from Australia posted an interview of Bishop Kyrill in 1999, where Bishop espressed a proper attitude towards Mpscow Patriarchate. Then suddanly Father Alexander Lebedev sent out the following:

His Grace, Bishop Kyrill of San Francisco and Western America has directed me to address the lists where Protodeacon Basil Yakimov had posted an essay that Bishop Kyrill had written four years ago, concerning the Moscow Patriarchate.

Bishop Kyrill wishes to let it be known that this essay does not at all reflect his current thinking, and that he has formally rescinded that previous statement. He also has expressed his will, as he had already done in the past, that his previous essay be withdrawn and not be republished in any forum.

Bishop Kyrill is especially concerned that the post of the essay to the internet forums by Protodeacon Basil Yakimov, at its end, stated that it was "reprinted by permission from the author," which is an absolute falsehood.

Bishop Kyrill will address the issue of Protodeacon Basil Yakimov's action with Fr. Basil's Ruling Bishop, His Grace, Archbishop Hilarion.

Bishop Kyrill has also directed that his interview of September 27, 2003, where he expresses his views clearly and unequivocally, be reposted to the lists where Protodeacon Basil Yakimov's posts appeared.

With love in Christ,

Prot. Alexander Lebedeff
Dean of the Southern Deanery of the Western American Diocese

Posts: 377
Joined: Sun 3 November 2002 1:55 am
Location: ROCE

by Lounger » Thu 23 October 2003 3:25 am
Fr. Alexander Lebedeff wrote: "Bishop Kyrill wishes to let it be
known that this essay does not at all reflect his current thinking,
and that he has formally rescinded that previous statement."

Just one more piece of evidence---and there are dozens, hundreds---
that the "current thinking" of ROCOR is not the traditional Orthodox
thinking of ROCOR under Saint Philaret.

Fr. Alexander Lebedeff wrote: "He also has expressed his will ...
that his previous essay be withdrawn and not be republished in any

Similarly, the new ROCOR does not want to see "republished" the
decree on the baptism of all converts, or the condemnation of the
OCA (forbidding prayer with its clergy), or the recognition of
Auxentius as the canonical "Archbishop of Athens," or the
anathematization of all "those who" teach the branch theory heresy
or the heterodox-Mysteries heresy (for example, the Serbian
Patriarch who heretically proclaims Rome a "sister Church"). Father
Alexander himself has inched closer to these heresies in the past by
quoting eighteenth-century, westernized Russian bishops and sources
(not universally-recognized Saints) who refer to a "church lung"
or "Mysteries" among the heterodox. He seems to prefer these
westernized sources (pseudomorphosis) to ROCOR's open, public,
official (True Orthodox) teaching under Saint Philaret. That's why
Father Alexander and Father John Shaw, for years on the Internet,
have consistently disparaged Saint Philaret and his legacy.

Whereas ROCOR has obviously changed, the Russian government and
patriarchate have not changed nearly enough. Putin still defends the
genocidal KGB---says they have nothing to apologize for [what about
the 20-60 million?], and when asked if he believes in God, tells
reporters "I believe in man." Does an "Orthodox Christian" (Father
Alexander's phrase for Putin) utter such blasphemies? No. Putin is
not a Christian, and Father Alexander is misinforming his

Putin, bizarrely, will not condemn Soviet genocide against the
Church, but he does say that Russia needs to join the West in order
to join civilization---as if civilization emanates from the post-
modern West, rather than from Christ and Orthodoxy. This leader and
this government is not Orthodox and Father Alexander is misleading
people by saying so.

Agent DROZDOV---in the very same interview in which he
allegedly "repents"---says clearly that he does not renounce the
history of Sergianism. Once again, Father Alexander has distorted
this interview and reality.

Fr. Alexander Lebedeff wrote: "Bishop Kyrill will address the issue
of Protodeacon Basil Yakimov's action with Fr. Basil's Ruling

Yes. Punish those who expose the perversion (and the cover-up) of
traditional, public, Orthodox ROCOR teaching by the new, false,
ecumenist, and Sergianist ROCOR teaching and false teachers.

The above was a quote from the lsit of one Thomas Deretich


The Spiritual Dead-End Path of the Moscow Patriarchate

by Bishop Kyrill of Seattle

Russian Orthodox Church Abroad

At the present time---a time of religious decline and of spiritual and moral
decadence throughout the whole world (which is attempting to envelop Russia
as well)---, one cannot remain unconcerned by the spiritual condition of the
Russian people. After the supposed fall of the communist regime, our vision
was focused on Russia, with hopes for her rebirth. But later we discerned
the fraud underlying this "fall," in which a significant role was played by
the perennial enemy of Russia: the West.

Rejoicing with all of our hearts at the restoration of destroyed Churches
and the construction of new ones, and at the conversion of many people to
the Faith, we still see with sorrow that the path taken by the Moscow
Patriarchate has not changed at all, and is, as before, leading the Russian
people to nowhere: into a spiritual dead-end of religious modernism,
compromise, and acquiescence.

Instead of addressing and resolving all of the canonical and dogmatic
questions that led to the division of the Russian Church, and instead of
leading their people to victory over the powers of evil by pure Orthodoxy
and by the truth handed to us by the Fathers, the Hierarchs of the Moscow
Patriarchate are moving farther and farther away from the Truth, in the
direction of the pan-heresy of ecumenism.

From the earliest of times, the Church of Christ has withstood the trials
of various heresies. In the past, the devil attempted to fight against the
truth of Christ with a series of heresies; now he has gathered together all
of the falsehoods of the world in ecumenism. Here we find ancient Arians,
Monophysites, Monothelites, Iconoclasts, and all sorts of distortions of
the Faith by contemporary sects, by non-Christian, and even by pagan

Ecumenism calls for the removal of barriers not only between the various
Christian confessions, but also between religions, in order to create a
"Great Church," which would be the synthesis of all existing churches and
religions. At this time, already, there are joint services being performed
with the participation of representatives of various world religions and
confessions. Here are just a few examples of the liturgical innovations of
the ecumenists with which the Moscow Patriarchate has joined: ritual dances
by natives around the Altar Table; the liturgical use of contemporary rock
music; theatrical shows; joint prayer; and even the common celebration of
the "eucharist."

All of this has shown that the teaching of the Holy Fathers regarding an
ancient axiom, that "the Communion of the heretics is the food of the
demons," has been forgotten. These types of ecumenical joint activities
attempt to destroy the boundaries of the Church of Christ and lead to the
furtherance of religious relativism and the dissemination of neo-pagan

The ecumenical movement has grown to enormous proportions and has engulfed
almost all of the Orthodox Churches. The Russian Orthodox Church Abroad
remains one of the few Churches in the whole world that has not joined the
World Council of Churches.

Understanding the nature of the abyss toward which the Moscow Patriarchate
is pulling the faithful people of Russia, we acknowledge our responsibility
before them.

Undoubtedly, there are still clergy and laity in Russia who are not in
agreement with the ecumenical orientation and compromising ideology of the
Moscow Patriarchate. And it is for that reason that we would like to say to
them: "Truth does not permit disagreement in questions of Faith. Now is the
time to turn away from the evil fruit and to return to the Truth, which was
given to us as an inheritance by the Holy Fathers and Teachers of the
Church, which has withstood the fires of tribulation, and to which the
blood and sufferings of the New Martyrs of Russia have shown witness."

* From Orthodox Tradition, Vol. XVI, No. 2 (1999), pp. 45-46.

Posts: 377
Joined: Sun 3 November 2002 1:55 am
Location: ROCE

by 尼古拉前执事 » Sat 25 October 2003 5:47 pm
Wow. Interesting!
在基督 My Original Blog
尼古拉 My Facebook Profile
前执事 My Twitter Page


Posts: 5547
Joined: Thu 24 October 2002 11:01 pm
Location: Pueblo, Colorado, United States of America
Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Non-Phylitist


by OrthodoxyOrDeath » Sat 25 October 2003 7:03 pm
Interesting indeed.


by mwoerl » Sat 1 November 2003 5:58 am
yeh, it is interesting. also interesting is that deacon basil, who fr alexander mentioned bishop kyrill was -uh- "sorta miffed at" for posting his "rescinded thoughts," has been forbidden from "posting anti-mp posts" to any of the various and sundry orthodox internet lists....ah, yes-and they say nothing has changed-now apparently the mp is above all criticism!
michael woerl


by Lounger » Fri 5 December 2003 11:21 pm

Posts: 377
Joined: Sun 3 November 2002 1:55 am
Location: ROCE


Unprofitable Servant said...

If MP_ROCOR Archbishop Kyril (Dmitrieff)had a true change of heart about the Moscow Patriarchate after 1999--as opposed to being coerced or blackmailed by the KGB-- one wonders why he was so adamant about having his previous written statements expunged from the public record (with the always diligent assistance of Father Alexander Lebedev!)

Normally, if a religious or political leader reverses his opinion so diametrically on some important issue, he will explain WHY his previous views changed, with reference to his previous published writings.

Instead, Abp Kyril sought to erase his previous writings about the uncanonical status of the MP from the public record. Very strange, indeed! He later (in 2006) wrote that he now believed the MP was legitimate because one could do a Google search in Russia and find references on St. Ignatius Brianchaninov-- as if that had anything to do with the canonical status of the Sergianist church hierarchy!

I was truly puzzled when I first read his rambling commentary in 2006 on the subject of the Act of Canonical Union with Moscow. It made no sense at all, like some sort of mock confession at a Soviet trial in the Beria era.

Joanna Higginbotham said...

Interesting observation about Abp. Kyrill covering up his former view rather than just explaining his change in thinking. It pretty much eliminates the possibility that there was any genuine change of heart.

That leaves 2 possibilities:
1. coercion
2. he was an agent all along.

Case #1 - the coercion would have to be pretty strong - like witchcraft. 0therwise he and the rest of the Judas' would be either repenting or commiting suicide [a Judas thing to do] or leaking out the truth by now.

Case #2 - he simply got new work orders. The old work order was to get the faithful to trust him as one of their leaders [hence, the 1999 interview]. The new work order was to lead them into the union. This makes the 1999 interview unexplainable, and erasing records is old hat for KGB.

It is so true about his rambling nonsense. I was present for a speech/sermon of his that same time about the union. He tried to reassure us that the Russians were not going to come and steal our real estate. [He was right, they did not have to steal it, we handed it over.] He said the union would only mean one thing - that we would now be in communion with MP and nothing more.

0h the awful memory of those terribledays! How joyful it is to have true shepherds once again!