"Why I Cannot Accept The Union And What I Have Done About It"
This June 2007 letter to Met. Laurus is worth reading.
To read it click here.
Sep 27, 2008
Sep 26, 2008
Dzershinsky, Stalin, and St. John Maximovitch?
1. Felix Dzerzhinsky's statue resurrected?
2. St. John Maximovitch patron of KGB?
3. Will Stalin be canonized?
To read more click here.
2. St. John Maximovitch patron of KGB?
3. Will Stalin be canonized?
To read more click here.
Sep 25, 2008
Sep 22, 2008
ROCOR-MP Synod Eats Mahopac Alive
----- Original Message -----
Forward From: (source prefers not to be named)
Subject: Too little, too late
Email received:
Dear brothers and sisters!
We are inviting everyone to Mahopac this Sunday, September 21st to our Parish Feast of Nativity of Mother of God.
The Divine Liturgy begins at 10 AM and will be headed by Bishop Gabriel.
With deep regret we would like to inform everyone that the building of our church was recently condemned by The Synod of Bishops. With profit being the motivating factor, the church building will soon be closing, and the property might be put up for sale. We believe that this decision is a tragedy, not only for the Parishioners, but for the whole Orthodox community.
The Parish, and the land on which it stands, are very special and dear to many people.
Furthermore, the unique history of the Parish exemplifies the importance for the preservation of the church. It is crucial to mention that our holy place is the first home for the The Icon of Mother of God of Kursk, thus closely tying the history of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia to our Parish. The coming of The Kursk Icon to America provoked a stir amongst many prominent Russian Orthodox immigrants in this country. In fact the land on which our church stands today was donated to the ROCOR by the famous prince Beloselsky- Belozersky upon learning about the arrival of Kursk Icon to the United States. Thus in 1950 the original monastery was founded on the donated land. In order to restore the buildings and the land for the future Parish, donations were collected by the late bishop Seraphim. Also, there is a Russian orthodox cemetery located on the property, which is the burial place for many renowned Russian immigrants of the last century. Relevantly to our case, in 2004 we received an official blessing from The Synod to start our Parish. This blessing, granted not long ago, is now being revoked.
We have to stop this atrocity from happening. We have to preserve such precious Russian orthodox places, for not only do they embody a unique history, but they are also home to many prayers. Holy places such as our Parish of Nativity of Mother of God shouldn't become places for profit. Instead they must remain standing, both for us and for our children.
Please come and pray with us!
sub-deacon Nikolai Shevelchinsky
Ekaterina Piskareva (painter-restorer-iconographer )
To read the Appeal from Mahopac Faithful to ROCOR-MP Bishops click here.
Forward From: (source prefers not to be named)
Subject: Too little, too late
Email received:
Dear brothers and sisters!
We are inviting everyone to Mahopac this Sunday, September 21st to our Parish Feast of Nativity of Mother of God.
The Divine Liturgy begins at 10 AM and will be headed by Bishop Gabriel.
With deep regret we would like to inform everyone that the building of our church was recently condemned by The Synod of Bishops. With profit being the motivating factor, the church building will soon be closing, and the property might be put up for sale. We believe that this decision is a tragedy, not only for the Parishioners, but for the whole Orthodox community.
The Parish, and the land on which it stands, are very special and dear to many people.
Furthermore, the unique history of the Parish exemplifies the importance for the preservation of the church. It is crucial to mention that our holy place is the first home for the The Icon of Mother of God of Kursk, thus closely tying the history of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia to our Parish. The coming of The Kursk Icon to America provoked a stir amongst many prominent Russian Orthodox immigrants in this country. In fact the land on which our church stands today was donated to the ROCOR by the famous prince Beloselsky- Belozersky upon learning about the arrival of Kursk Icon to the United States. Thus in 1950 the original monastery was founded on the donated land. In order to restore the buildings and the land for the future Parish, donations were collected by the late bishop Seraphim. Also, there is a Russian orthodox cemetery located on the property, which is the burial place for many renowned Russian immigrants of the last century. Relevantly to our case, in 2004 we received an official blessing from The Synod to start our Parish. This blessing, granted not long ago, is now being revoked.
We have to stop this atrocity from happening. We have to preserve such precious Russian orthodox places, for not only do they embody a unique history, but they are also home to many prayers. Holy places such as our Parish of Nativity of Mother of God shouldn't become places for profit. Instead they must remain standing, both for us and for our children.
Please come and pray with us!
sub-deacon Nikolai Shevelchinsky
Ekaterina Piskareva (painter-restorer-iconographer )
To read the Appeal from Mahopac Faithful to ROCOR-MP Bishops click here.
Sep 17, 2008
"Is the Grace of God Present in the Soviet Church?'
Book Review
"Is the Grace of God Present in the Soviet Church?"
by Professor I. M. Andreyev
St. John of Kronstadt Press says this book is " ... more pertinent today than when the work was written. Should be considered 'must reading' in assessing the future course of the Orthodox Church of Russia."
Monastery Press says this book is "A profoundly discerning and timely work that discusses the deeper spiritual reality..."
An excerpt from the Introduction to the English Edition of this book:
It should be noted that Andreyev does not conclude with a categorical conclusion that the "Soviet Church" is deprived of the Grace of God, only that there are grounds for uncertainty: "Therefore we do not have communion with the Soviet Church, because we have doubts as to whether the Grace of God is present."
To read the whole of the Introduction click here.
This book is offered by both the St. John of Kronstadt Press and the Monastery Press.
"Is the Grace of God Present in the Soviet Church?"
by Professor I. M. Andreyev
St. John of Kronstadt Press says this book is " ... more pertinent today than when the work was written. Should be considered 'must reading' in assessing the future course of the Orthodox Church of Russia."
Monastery Press says this book is "A profoundly discerning and timely work that discusses the deeper spiritual reality..."
An excerpt from the Introduction to the English Edition of this book:
It should be noted that Andreyev does not conclude with a categorical conclusion that the "Soviet Church" is deprived of the Grace of God, only that there are grounds for uncertainty: "Therefore we do not have communion with the Soviet Church, because we have doubts as to whether the Grace of God is present."
To read the whole of the Introduction click here.
This book is offered by both the St. John of Kronstadt Press and the Monastery Press.
Why Are New Calendarists So Sensitive?
An answer from St. Edward's, the Royal Path...
The Shepherd (Magazine) September 2008, page 8
QUESTION: “Can you tell me why the new calendar churches and those in communion with them are so sensitive about the calendar issue? Why are they so quick in condemning resisters?” J. C. by e-mail.
Of course the true answer to your question is that you should ask them! Because only the New Calendarists and those in communion with them can really answer for themselves, but I think I can hazard a couple of ideas which may not be far off the mark.
First of all, some of the Old Calendarists are so extreme, so intent on condemning others and on constant vigil to see their faults, that I think that many New Calendarists think that all traditionalists are tarred with the same brush. This is not a very intelligent conclusion, but it is an understandable one. We all tend to fall into similar errors, judging whole peoples en bloc, rather than looking and listening to see what their true position is.
Again, many New Calendarists and “those in communion with them” (you were wise to add that phrase!), especially out here in the West where they are in a majority, have been treated unkindly and rudely by Old Calendarists, who think that harshness and rudeness are manifestations of righteous zeal. They are not. However, once bitten, as the proverb says, twice shy, and thereafter they are wary that all Old Calendarists might be the same or assume that they might be.
Thirdly, I believe that many New Calendarists understand that their position is a wrong one, they understand that the involvement of their leaders and hierarchs in ecumenical activity is contrary to Orthodox tradition, but they go along with these things for a variety of reasons: convenience, family connections, failure to apply themselves to study those things which pertain to their salvation, false loyalty to clergymen, comfort, and so on. However, in doing this they also feel a little guilt, and one of the things that we tend to do when we feel our own position is unsound or when we feel guilt about something is to strike out at others, deflecting, we think, attention from ourselves.
Then again, there is herd-mentality; one wishes to be “in” with the crowd, and so one adopts the views and opinions one hears from them. (This, of course, can also apply to Old Calendarists). Often the leaders, - and I do not necessarily mean their leaders in the hierarchy or clergy, but often just those who become vocal proponents of their position, - are not adverse to spreading false rumours about the stance of the traditionalists. I remember years ago, when we were in ROCA, which was then part of the traditionalist movement within Orthodoxy, a lady from the Moscow Patriarchate parish visited us. She was surprised that we would allow her to go inside the church, but said: “I would not be allowed to come to a service, though, would I?” Well, of course she would have been and would have been welcome to do so, but somewhere someone had told her that we would not accept her in Christian love.
All this may raise the question, why the New Calendarists, and those in communion with them, are so particularly vehement in their attacks on the moderate traditionalists, and I think the reason for this is that it is easy to dismiss the extremists as fanatical, and therefore they pose no threat. But those that are moderate, understanding of the difficulties, willing to show, as far as lies within them, Christian love, and yet are firm in their adherence to the Church’s traditions perhaps seem more of a threat to their chosen position because they cannot be easily dismissed as nut-cases.
I hope some of these thoughts help you. Please forgive any deficiencies in my reply.
source: http://www.saintedwardbrotherhood.org/0908/shepherd8.html
The Shepherd (Magazine) September 2008, page 8
QUESTION: “Can you tell me why the new calendar churches and those in communion with them are so sensitive about the calendar issue? Why are they so quick in condemning resisters?” J. C. by e-mail.
Of course the true answer to your question is that you should ask them! Because only the New Calendarists and those in communion with them can really answer for themselves, but I think I can hazard a couple of ideas which may not be far off the mark.
First of all, some of the Old Calendarists are so extreme, so intent on condemning others and on constant vigil to see their faults, that I think that many New Calendarists think that all traditionalists are tarred with the same brush. This is not a very intelligent conclusion, but it is an understandable one. We all tend to fall into similar errors, judging whole peoples en bloc, rather than looking and listening to see what their true position is.
Again, many New Calendarists and “those in communion with them” (you were wise to add that phrase!), especially out here in the West where they are in a majority, have been treated unkindly and rudely by Old Calendarists, who think that harshness and rudeness are manifestations of righteous zeal. They are not. However, once bitten, as the proverb says, twice shy, and thereafter they are wary that all Old Calendarists might be the same or assume that they might be.
Thirdly, I believe that many New Calendarists understand that their position is a wrong one, they understand that the involvement of their leaders and hierarchs in ecumenical activity is contrary to Orthodox tradition, but they go along with these things for a variety of reasons: convenience, family connections, failure to apply themselves to study those things which pertain to their salvation, false loyalty to clergymen, comfort, and so on. However, in doing this they also feel a little guilt, and one of the things that we tend to do when we feel our own position is unsound or when we feel guilt about something is to strike out at others, deflecting, we think, attention from ourselves.
Then again, there is herd-mentality; one wishes to be “in” with the crowd, and so one adopts the views and opinions one hears from them. (This, of course, can also apply to Old Calendarists). Often the leaders, - and I do not necessarily mean their leaders in the hierarchy or clergy, but often just those who become vocal proponents of their position, - are not adverse to spreading false rumours about the stance of the traditionalists. I remember years ago, when we were in ROCA, which was then part of the traditionalist movement within Orthodoxy, a lady from the Moscow Patriarchate parish visited us. She was surprised that we would allow her to go inside the church, but said: “I would not be allowed to come to a service, though, would I?” Well, of course she would have been and would have been welcome to do so, but somewhere someone had told her that we would not accept her in Christian love.
All this may raise the question, why the New Calendarists, and those in communion with them, are so particularly vehement in their attacks on the moderate traditionalists, and I think the reason for this is that it is easy to dismiss the extremists as fanatical, and therefore they pose no threat. But those that are moderate, understanding of the difficulties, willing to show, as far as lies within them, Christian love, and yet are firm in their adherence to the Church’s traditions perhaps seem more of a threat to their chosen position because they cannot be easily dismissed as nut-cases.
I hope some of these thoughts help you. Please forgive any deficiencies in my reply.
source: http://www.saintedwardbrotherhood.org/0908/shepherd8.html
Sep 7, 2008
Mr. Putin The Pagan
On September 8, 2000 - 9:00 p.m. CNN aired a program in which the president of Russia, in India, once again demonstrated that he is ***NOT*** an Orthodox Christian...
On October 3, being in India, RF-president Putin and his wife took part in a pagan rite -- the placing of a wreath on the spot where the spiritual father of the Hindu nation, Mahatma Gandhi, was cremated. As the newspaper "Komsomol'skaya pravda" ["The Truth Of the Young-Communist League"] noted, "Before placing the wreath, the Putins, as custom demands, took off their shoes and put on white slippers. The entire Russian delegation followed their example." (!!) The president of Russia declared in an interview conducted by CNN Broadcasting that he believes not in God, but in Man, yet he conscientiously imitates "the Orthodox Faith" in the churches of the Moscow Patriarchate, and also actively participates in masonic and pagan mysteries (for example, he was initiated into "knighthood" by the Grand Master of a certain [masonic] Order in Germany; and, while, in North Korea, he ritually worshipped the deified leader Kim il Sen). In India, Putin once again confirmed the fact of his total lack of any religious sensibility, since rituals of this sort -- participation in which he could easily have declined -- are incompatible with Orthodoxy, as was convincingly proved by Aleksandr Nevskii and Mikhail of Chernigov, [two] previous rulers of Russia.
source: http://monasterypress.com/putpag.html
On October 3, being in India, RF-president Putin and his wife took part in a pagan rite -- the placing of a wreath on the spot where the spiritual father of the Hindu nation, Mahatma Gandhi, was cremated. As the newspaper "Komsomol'skaya pravda" ["The Truth Of the Young-Communist League"] noted, "Before placing the wreath, the Putins, as custom demands, took off their shoes and put on white slippers. The entire Russian delegation followed their example." (!!) The president of Russia declared in an interview conducted by CNN Broadcasting that he believes not in God, but in Man, yet he conscientiously imitates "the Orthodox Faith" in the churches of the Moscow Patriarchate, and also actively participates in masonic and pagan mysteries (for example, he was initiated into "knighthood" by the Grand Master of a certain [masonic] Order in Germany; and, while, in North Korea, he ritually worshipped the deified leader Kim il Sen). In India, Putin once again confirmed the fact of his total lack of any religious sensibility, since rituals of this sort -- participation in which he could easily have declined -- are incompatible with Orthodoxy, as was convincingly proved by Aleksandr Nevskii and Mikhail of Chernigov, [two] previous rulers of Russia.
source: http://monasterypress.com/putpag.html
Appeal From Kursk Clergy
In this letter the clergy of Kursk explain to Met. Vitaly that the MP has only pretended to repent of Sergianim, and their much-lacking "glorification" of the new martyrs was a political maneuver and a mockery. And much more...
To read the letter click here.
To read the letter click here.
We're Being Railroaded!
The Unrestrained Comments of Hieroschemamonk Elia prior to the union.
To read more click here.
To read more click here.
Outrage Committed Against Met. Vitaly†
An Eye-Witness Report
Dear Brothers and Sisters, if you will indulge me a few more words I would like to share with you the truth about the forced incarceration of our beloved Vladika Metropolitan Vitaly by the Canadian Police...
To read more click here.
Dear Brothers and Sisters, if you will indulge me a few more words I would like to share with you the truth about the forced incarceration of our beloved Vladika Metropolitan Vitaly by the Canadian Police...
To read more click here.
An Explanation For The Flip-Flops
"...Ask me how this is possible!, and, I will answer that this change of heart and spiritual mind is rooted in deep spiritual delusion and sickness of heart and mind that has come upon the elect themselves during these last days."
-Fr. Spyridon Schneider
In 1976, when I was a Deacon serving at Holy Epiphany Russian Orthodox Church under Fr. Roman Lukianov he told me something that I will never forget. He said:
“Fr. Spyridon, never before in the history of the Church has there been a persecution as cruel and diabolical as the persecution of the Orthodox Church in Russian by the Bolsheviks. In all previous persecutions the Church knew her persecutors, whether they were Mongols, Turks or others; they never pretended to be anyone other than themselves. However, in Russia the Bolsheviks sent their criminal agents to seminaries, dressed them in podriasniks and ryasas, ordained them readers, sub-deacons, deacons, priests and bishops and vested them in the robes of Christ so that these God-hating criminals could betray the faithful and destroy the Church from within.”
At this point Fr. Roman broke down in tears and sobbed from the depths of his heart and bowels of his feelings. Inexplicably, this same Fr. Roman has for the past twelve years or so been one of the chief architect-proponents of reunion with Moscow. Ask me how this is possible!, and, I will answer that this change of heart and spiritual mind is rooted in deep spiritual delusion and sickness of heart and mind that has come upon the elect themselves during these last days.
source: http://monasterypress.com/eyewitness.html
-Fr. Spyridon Schneider
In 1976, when I was a Deacon serving at Holy Epiphany Russian Orthodox Church under Fr. Roman Lukianov he told me something that I will never forget. He said:
“Fr. Spyridon, never before in the history of the Church has there been a persecution as cruel and diabolical as the persecution of the Orthodox Church in Russian by the Bolsheviks. In all previous persecutions the Church knew her persecutors, whether they were Mongols, Turks or others; they never pretended to be anyone other than themselves. However, in Russia the Bolsheviks sent their criminal agents to seminaries, dressed them in podriasniks and ryasas, ordained them readers, sub-deacons, deacons, priests and bishops and vested them in the robes of Christ so that these God-hating criminals could betray the faithful and destroy the Church from within.”
At this point Fr. Roman broke down in tears and sobbed from the depths of his heart and bowels of his feelings. Inexplicably, this same Fr. Roman has for the past twelve years or so been one of the chief architect-proponents of reunion with Moscow. Ask me how this is possible!, and, I will answer that this change of heart and spiritual mind is rooted in deep spiritual delusion and sickness of heart and mind that has come upon the elect themselves during these last days.
source: http://monasterypress.com/eyewitness.html
Sep 6, 2008
Consoling Words From Abbess Juliana
Abbess Juliana consoles those who are confused and hurt:
11/22/2001
I am asked by several friends, who are totally confused and troubled by the situation. This is my answer. Hope many can read it. Please to forward it. As for the behaviour of b. Mihail- Father Benjamin says one word: "NEDOPUSTIMO". ("incompatible"-jh)
In humble reply to those who are troubled and confused regarding the hurricane of evil now threatening the Holy Russian Orthodox Church in Exile, let us realize it is this very reaction which the enemy tries so savagely to create in us, aware that it is confusion and ignorance which distorts the our understanding of what is happening.
I say "enemy" rather than "enemies" because all these apostates, whatever their rank, title or name, are acting in the service of the " father of lies", satan, who is temporarily unrestrained and permitted violence in his attack on the Truth and all who refuse to speak or accept lies.
Why does Almighty God permit this? It is not the first time the Holy Orthodox Church has been on the thin edge of catastrophe...there was a time when only ONE faithful hierarch stood bravely at the gates until the storm blew over. Because our Creator has given us the heavenly gift of free will, He allows each of us to make our own decision, the one which will determine our eternity. This is one of those testing times, perhaps the final, and we cannot expect Him to interfere. Already the goats are separating themselves from the sheep!
The shocking behaviour, the shameless lying, the hatred and violence of persons once consectrated to the Lord Jesus Christ Christ.....all this is incredible until we realize that these people have become spiritually insane; they are being moved about like mindless puppets to complete the plan of their master to whom they have surrendered their immortal souls. Understanding this, it becomes obvious that nothing we can say to them or about them can make the slightest difference. The most important thing for US to concentrate on, is the urgent need for us to make our own final decision for Jesus Christ, the WAY, the TRUTH, and the LIFE, and in order to keep and strengthen our resolution we might give thought to these suggestions:
First, as long as we still have the opportunity, let us fervently prepare for and receive Holy Confession and the Precious Body of our Saviour as frequently as possible! In doing this we must take care that we harbour no hatred or contempt for ANYONE, remembering how our suffering Redeemer prayed, "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do!" Also we must try to withdraw our attention from the increasingly bizarre words and actions of the deluded and hostile, praying for them but avoiding all contact with them ! This is essential because their spiritual madness is extremely contagious and eternally fatal.
Other suggestions for coping with depression include re-reading the prophesies in Holy Scripture and the Holy Fathers, showing how all these matters are well understood by the Holy Church and remain under the control of our wise and loving Father in Heaven. Also we must pray for (and earnestly seek!) spiritual guidance from faithful bishops and clergy, who will be fewer in numbers but whose stability is shown by their own purely Orthodox words AND behaviour. We must prepare ourselves mentally and spiritually for the eventual loss accesss to our Temples which will have been dangerously contaminated by apostasy. It is urgent to withdraw from wordly, unnecessary contacts and activities in order to approach more closely to the Heavenly Church, so intimately united with us in humble and trustful prayer.
As matters continue to worsen, we will understand that we are in the midst of a war in which few of us can take an active part but whose outcome is already known in which TRUTH is victorious and all past evil will be forgotten in the joy of Christ's Eternal Kingdom! The very outbreak of this war should give us hope and even the beginning joy for it brings closer the triumphant return of our Lord Jesus Christ when all will be judged by their deeds. Oh, may we then be found innocent and faithful and "He will wipe away all tears!" AMEN.
Rev. 7:12
source: l http://www.monasterypress.com/abbessjuliana22.html
11/22/2001
I am asked by several friends, who are totally confused and troubled by the situation. This is my answer. Hope many can read it. Please to forward it. As for the behaviour of b. Mihail- Father Benjamin says one word: "NEDOPUSTIMO". ("incompatible"-jh)
In humble reply to those who are troubled and confused regarding the hurricane of evil now threatening the Holy Russian Orthodox Church in Exile, let us realize it is this very reaction which the enemy tries so savagely to create in us, aware that it is confusion and ignorance which distorts the our understanding of what is happening.
I say "enemy" rather than "enemies" because all these apostates, whatever their rank, title or name, are acting in the service of the " father of lies", satan, who is temporarily unrestrained and permitted violence in his attack on the Truth and all who refuse to speak or accept lies.
Why does Almighty God permit this? It is not the first time the Holy Orthodox Church has been on the thin edge of catastrophe...there was a time when only ONE faithful hierarch stood bravely at the gates until the storm blew over. Because our Creator has given us the heavenly gift of free will, He allows each of us to make our own decision, the one which will determine our eternity. This is one of those testing times, perhaps the final, and we cannot expect Him to interfere. Already the goats are separating themselves from the sheep!
The shocking behaviour, the shameless lying, the hatred and violence of persons once consectrated to the Lord Jesus Christ Christ.....all this is incredible until we realize that these people have become spiritually insane; they are being moved about like mindless puppets to complete the plan of their master to whom they have surrendered their immortal souls. Understanding this, it becomes obvious that nothing we can say to them or about them can make the slightest difference. The most important thing for US to concentrate on, is the urgent need for us to make our own final decision for Jesus Christ, the WAY, the TRUTH, and the LIFE, and in order to keep and strengthen our resolution we might give thought to these suggestions:
First, as long as we still have the opportunity, let us fervently prepare for and receive Holy Confession and the Precious Body of our Saviour as frequently as possible! In doing this we must take care that we harbour no hatred or contempt for ANYONE, remembering how our suffering Redeemer prayed, "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do!" Also we must try to withdraw our attention from the increasingly bizarre words and actions of the deluded and hostile, praying for them but avoiding all contact with them ! This is essential because their spiritual madness is extremely contagious and eternally fatal.
Other suggestions for coping with depression include re-reading the prophesies in Holy Scripture and the Holy Fathers, showing how all these matters are well understood by the Holy Church and remain under the control of our wise and loving Father in Heaven. Also we must pray for (and earnestly seek!) spiritual guidance from faithful bishops and clergy, who will be fewer in numbers but whose stability is shown by their own purely Orthodox words AND behaviour. We must prepare ourselves mentally and spiritually for the eventual loss accesss to our Temples which will have been dangerously contaminated by apostasy. It is urgent to withdraw from wordly, unnecessary contacts and activities in order to approach more closely to the Heavenly Church, so intimately united with us in humble and trustful prayer.
As matters continue to worsen, we will understand that we are in the midst of a war in which few of us can take an active part but whose outcome is already known in which TRUTH is victorious and all past evil will be forgotten in the joy of Christ's Eternal Kingdom! The very outbreak of this war should give us hope and even the beginning joy for it brings closer the triumphant return of our Lord Jesus Christ when all will be judged by their deeds. Oh, may we then be found innocent and faithful and "He will wipe away all tears!" AMEN.
Rev. 7:12
source: l http://www.monasterypress.com/abbessjuliana22.html
High Treason
The Luring of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad to the Moscow Patriarchate
by Olga Dolskaya - October 2001
This essay tells the other side of the Vitaly group story. It exposes many surprising things that they (Laurus synod) did not want known. They persuaded the flock to pay no attention to these "fanatics", "schismatics", "disobedient trouble-makers". Read this and see for yourself.
To read more click here.
by Olga Dolskaya - October 2001
This essay tells the other side of the Vitaly group story. It exposes many surprising things that they (Laurus synod) did not want known. They persuaded the flock to pay no attention to these "fanatics", "schismatics", "disobedient trouble-makers". Read this and see for yourself.
To read more click here.
Sep 5, 2008
Is MP Sick Or Graceless?
St. John Maximovitch says MP is "spiritually sick". He does not say "graceless".
To read the words of this saint click here. http://cyprianites.blogspot.com/2008/12/is-mp-sick-or-graceless.html
To read the words of this saint click here. http://cyprianites.blogspot.com/2008/12/is-mp-sick-or-graceless.html
Sep 4, 2008
Another Kryill Flip-Flop Example
This is a segment of a Euphrosynos Cafe forum discussion 0ctober 2003
http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1132&start=28
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
Lounger
Member
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun 3 November 2002 1:55 am
Location: ROCE
Top
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
forum."
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
readership.
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
Bishop."
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
religions.
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
ideas.
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.
Lounger
Member
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun 3 November 2002 1:55 am
Location: ROCE
Top
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
尼古拉前执事
Archon
Posts: 5547
Joined: Thu 24 October 2002 11:01 pm
Location: Pueblo, Colorado, United States of America
Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Non-Phylitist
•
Top
by OrthodoxyOrDeath » Sat 25 October 2003 7:03 pm
Interesting indeed.
OrthodoxyOrDeath
Top
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
mwoerl
Top
by Lounger » Fri 5 December 2003 11:21 pm
*bump*
Lounger
Member
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun 3 November 2002 1:55 am
Location: ROCE
http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1132&start=28
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
Lounger
Member
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun 3 November 2002 1:55 am
Location: ROCE
Top
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
forum."
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
readership.
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
Bishop."
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
religions.
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
ideas.
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.
Lounger
Member
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun 3 November 2002 1:55 am
Location: ROCE
Top
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
尼古拉前执事
Archon
Posts: 5547
Joined: Thu 24 October 2002 11:01 pm
Location: Pueblo, Colorado, United States of America
Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Non-Phylitist
•
Top
by OrthodoxyOrDeath » Sat 25 October 2003 7:03 pm
Interesting indeed.
OrthodoxyOrDeath
Top
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
mwoerl
Top
by Lounger » Fri 5 December 2003 11:21 pm
*bump*
Lounger
Member
Posts: 377
Joined: Sun 3 November 2002 1:55 am
Location: ROCE
Bishop Kyrill Flip-Flop
The (1998 -jh) Opinion of Bishop Kyrill of Seattle in Connection with the "Statement" of Archbishop Mark of Berlin (ROCOR) and Archbishop Theophan (MP) Regarding Ecclesiastical Unity.
(originally posted on the official Synodal web site)
Please view (2001 -jh) addition at bottom of page.
It was with great sadness that I read the "statement" of the participants in the ninth meeting between clergy of the ROCOR and the MP on the territory of Germany. This statement, I am deeply convinced, is an irresponsible collection of demagogic phrases, containing not even one healthy thought that could lead to the resolution of the myriad ecclesiastical problems of the Russian Orthodox Church at the end of the 20th century.
Recently, more than ever before, the question of the unification of the MP and the ROCOR is being trumpeted. Very sadly, these statements most often issue from the mouths of people for whom yearning for ecclesiastical truth is foreign, and who sow discord into the minds of their spiritual children. In order that my position might be understood correctly I would like the following points to be taken into consideration:
1. The tragic disunity of the Russian Church occurred in 1927 because of the signing of the sadly notorious Declaration of Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky). It is well known that up to this day neither that act itself, nor any of its ardent supporters have been officially condemned within Russia by the administration of the MP - while, realistically, that would be the first step that could lead to the healing of the ecclesiastical situation in Russia.
2. The division between the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia has been deepened by the failure of the MP to recognize many of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia. These have, in fact, been sacreligiously rejected by the MP, which has demanded that they first be politically rehabilitated by civil authorities, something that has never occurred in the history of the Orthodox Church. But having been freed from the control of the government, the MP could a long time ago have unequivocally glorified all the New Martyrs. In reality, the Patriarchate is looking and waiting to see in which direction the political winds will blow. And how shameful and hurtful it is to read in the Joint Declaration of Archbishop Mark of Berlin and Archbishop Theophan (MP), that the main issue that is dividing us, specifically the blood of millions of New Martyrs, they call "misunderstandings" and the result of some kind of "lack of knowledge," which is incomprehensible to me (see p. 1 of the "Declaration").
3. The current administration of the MP is constantly trampling on the Canons and the dogmas of the Holy Church by actively participating in the pan-heresy of the 20th century - ecumenism - and in the World Council of Churches. In recent times the process of secularization of the Church within Russia has increased and the conversion of its administration from a totalitarian structure into a commercial one has become the norm of life. (We know of many examples of dioceses opening commercial ventures, including selling tobacco and alcohol, involvement with money laundering and collaboration with the Mafia). Not stopping at this, the MP continues, just as it was in previous decades, to be the handmaiden of a government which is foreign to the national interests of Russia. It is also becoming an increasingly active force on the political arena.
4. The fact of the existence of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia as the free part of the Russian Church is a great help to the Orthodox people of Russia, who are trying to defend the glory of Orthodoxy from attacks by all detractors. Our voice is the only one which for almost eighty years has been carrying the truth of God into Russia. We also hear the cries and sighs of the stalwart defenders of the purity of the faith in the motherland. These cries are especially loud at the present time. And if "unification" with the MP, which Archbishop Mark is trying to accomplish, has become so timely, then why are there so many pastors within Russia who are struggling to find a way out of the spiritual dead-end that the post-Soviet church administration is ardently trying to lead them into? (We know well that the price of searching for the truth is very high - sometimes it even costs lives - for example, take the threats that were received by the recently murdered Archpriest Alexander Zharkoff in St. Petersburg just before his transfer under the omophorion of the Russian Church Abroad). From the very beginning of its canonical existence the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia has considered itself to be the temporarily self-administering free part of the Russian Church, whose calling is to serve God's truth and love. At the present time, however, we are faced with ever more frequent attempts by anti-church forces to accuse the ROCOR of lacking love in the matter of the unification of the two parts of the Russian Church.
Based on all the above I consider that the time for unification has not yet come. The MP and the ROCOR have never been so far apart from one another as at the present time.
We have always sympathized with the Church in Russia when it languished under the yoke of the atheist powers. Now that it has become "freed" from them, the MP has openly turned against us and against its Orthodox populace within Russia, (take, for example, the statements of Patriarch Alexis about the ROCOR, the Hebron affair, and the attempts to take away our churches in Europe and America).
But in this difficult time every hierarch must be responsible as never before for his episcopacy and for every one of his words, spoken or written. We must clearly realize that true unity of the two parts of the Russian Church is found not in the unification of the administration of the Church, but in unification in faith, in standing firmly in it, and in love.
The question of such unity can be resolved only at a forthcoming free All-Russian Sobor of the Russian Orthodox Church similar to the free Great All-Russian Sobor of 1917-1918, if all of the conditions required for the convocation of such a council will be met. God willing, at this future Sobor, it will be possible in open and honest discussions to resolve all of the problems of our ecclesiastical being that have developed during the 20th century. Meanwhile, those who, on their own, circulate various Epistles in the spirit of "unity" and "love" in actuality confuse our flock all the more, and sow even more discord in the minds and souls of the faithful, denying them true love, because, according to the words of the Apostle, love "doth not behave itself unseemly" (I Corinthians 13,5).
+ Bishop Kyrill 16th February 1998
Three years later...
The following is an unedited exchange between the webmaster of this site and Bishop Kyrill of Seattle concerning the re-posting of the above letter.
Subject: Re: a letter from Bishop Kyrill
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 12:45:01 -0600
> Dear in Christ Father Andrew,
> Personally, I have no quarrel with you - despite your "friendly"
> phone message several months past. I have not changed my views. They
> have remained the same - as we have discussed in Mulino.
>
Dear Bishop Kyrill,
Forgive me but you have changed your views by your actions. I remember a Bishop who inspired me when he said that he would not "seek after shiny miters" and "let them take our churches we will serve in living rooms!" I remember a Bishop who would not serve with the Serbs and made a point about it... but now what do we see? The metropolitan told me many years ago "everyone will deny and condemn ecumenism, but when we look at their actions we see something else." I do not call you an ecumenist. I only see that you have bent yourself to the winds of Archbishop Mark. I still remember you telling me how he accompanied you on a walk around central park in New York trying to recruit you. I remember your expressed outrage, also your call to defend the Metropolitan. Now what do we see? Even Ludmilla asked you to give the gift of your loyalty to the metropolitan who we both know is being taken advantage of because of his "weakness" at this time. Forgive me Vladika you have changed and I grieve.
> I feel that
> my statement need not be posted at this time -
>
"At this time?" Why not? It shows to people that indeed the church IS talking different then it did just a few years ago. Besides it was on the "official site" It is a public document.
> why did you return it
> to the website after you were instructed to remove it?
>
Because it need to be re-posted. Besides I received requests for it.
> Please remove
> it immediately.
>
I cannot...
> I simply want you to know that no one in their right
> mind wishes to join with the Moscow Patriarchate - the leader of which
> just recently stated that ecumenism is necessary in that it is
> impossible to ignore other Christians (ed. hetrodox).
>
Then say so publicly! Then allow the Metropolitan's letter to be distributed.
Also then tell me very clearly and without "a politicians guile" why the synod is...
1. seeking an "autonomy"
2. seeking communion with the georgians
3. asking ecumenists "Patriarch Pavel" for help in the "much desired
union"
Of course I understand that all this goes beyond the MP in its present form...
> Our beloved
> Church Abroad has not changed her position of 80 years past. If
> language, syntax lead people to feel otherwise, it is very
> unfortunate.
>
"very unfortunate!" Then why do the bishops show an unprecedented coldness and cruelty to those who asked questions? One of the most "milk toast" of our priests up here recently said to Bishop Michael... "Vladika all the bishops had to do is answer our questions at the first and all of this would have stopped immediately." Even father Christopher Birchall wrote this to Bishop Gabriel in January. But what do we see... we are assaulted and insulted by the likes of Lebedeff, Whitford, Shaw, Potopovs, etc. We see the French clergy brave in their stand for the truth of our church and the Mark machine trying to crush them to NO avail, we see every continent issuing statements. There has been NO peace in the church since your "errors of syntax" and NO attempts at calming the flock only threats and name calling. No Vladika please do not insult my intelligence with these low level attempts. You see I know too much of what is behind the scenes. I wish I didn't I would like to be back in those days of innocence. But I am not.
> May God keep us united in the spirit of the 80 years past
>
As disseminated by who Vladika? By that refuse called the western clergy statement?
> and the
> Mother of God cover us with her omophorion.
>
He and She will keep the true members and sons and Daughters of the confessing Church Abroad in full unity of this I am sure of. Metropolitan Philaret two weeks before his righteous end said that "after my death our beloved Church Abroad will break three ways... first the greeks will leave us as they where never a part of us... then those who live for this world and its glory will go to Moscow... what will remain will be those souls faithful to Christ and His Church." I never forgot this and believed that it would happen. Now I do.
Priest Andrew Kencis
I am prepared to lose everything, if needs must, for Christ.. as are many others. This is the fruit of eight months of prayer and tears and trying to make sense of what we see.
> +Bishop Kyrill
>
P.S. I am using internet in Boise, where I am presently - I do not have inetrnet...
>Pity it IS a tool that can be used for good.
>
source: http://monasterypress.com/oldkyrill.html
(originally posted on the official Synodal web site)
Please view (2001 -jh) addition at bottom of page.
It was with great sadness that I read the "statement" of the participants in the ninth meeting between clergy of the ROCOR and the MP on the territory of Germany. This statement, I am deeply convinced, is an irresponsible collection of demagogic phrases, containing not even one healthy thought that could lead to the resolution of the myriad ecclesiastical problems of the Russian Orthodox Church at the end of the 20th century.
Recently, more than ever before, the question of the unification of the MP and the ROCOR is being trumpeted. Very sadly, these statements most often issue from the mouths of people for whom yearning for ecclesiastical truth is foreign, and who sow discord into the minds of their spiritual children. In order that my position might be understood correctly I would like the following points to be taken into consideration:
1. The tragic disunity of the Russian Church occurred in 1927 because of the signing of the sadly notorious Declaration of Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky). It is well known that up to this day neither that act itself, nor any of its ardent supporters have been officially condemned within Russia by the administration of the MP - while, realistically, that would be the first step that could lead to the healing of the ecclesiastical situation in Russia.
2. The division between the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia has been deepened by the failure of the MP to recognize many of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia. These have, in fact, been sacreligiously rejected by the MP, which has demanded that they first be politically rehabilitated by civil authorities, something that has never occurred in the history of the Orthodox Church. But having been freed from the control of the government, the MP could a long time ago have unequivocally glorified all the New Martyrs. In reality, the Patriarchate is looking and waiting to see in which direction the political winds will blow. And how shameful and hurtful it is to read in the Joint Declaration of Archbishop Mark of Berlin and Archbishop Theophan (MP), that the main issue that is dividing us, specifically the blood of millions of New Martyrs, they call "misunderstandings" and the result of some kind of "lack of knowledge," which is incomprehensible to me (see p. 1 of the "Declaration").
3. The current administration of the MP is constantly trampling on the Canons and the dogmas of the Holy Church by actively participating in the pan-heresy of the 20th century - ecumenism - and in the World Council of Churches. In recent times the process of secularization of the Church within Russia has increased and the conversion of its administration from a totalitarian structure into a commercial one has become the norm of life. (We know of many examples of dioceses opening commercial ventures, including selling tobacco and alcohol, involvement with money laundering and collaboration with the Mafia). Not stopping at this, the MP continues, just as it was in previous decades, to be the handmaiden of a government which is foreign to the national interests of Russia. It is also becoming an increasingly active force on the political arena.
4. The fact of the existence of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia as the free part of the Russian Church is a great help to the Orthodox people of Russia, who are trying to defend the glory of Orthodoxy from attacks by all detractors. Our voice is the only one which for almost eighty years has been carrying the truth of God into Russia. We also hear the cries and sighs of the stalwart defenders of the purity of the faith in the motherland. These cries are especially loud at the present time. And if "unification" with the MP, which Archbishop Mark is trying to accomplish, has become so timely, then why are there so many pastors within Russia who are struggling to find a way out of the spiritual dead-end that the post-Soviet church administration is ardently trying to lead them into? (We know well that the price of searching for the truth is very high - sometimes it even costs lives - for example, take the threats that were received by the recently murdered Archpriest Alexander Zharkoff in St. Petersburg just before his transfer under the omophorion of the Russian Church Abroad). From the very beginning of its canonical existence the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia has considered itself to be the temporarily self-administering free part of the Russian Church, whose calling is to serve God's truth and love. At the present time, however, we are faced with ever more frequent attempts by anti-church forces to accuse the ROCOR of lacking love in the matter of the unification of the two parts of the Russian Church.
Based on all the above I consider that the time for unification has not yet come. The MP and the ROCOR have never been so far apart from one another as at the present time.
We have always sympathized with the Church in Russia when it languished under the yoke of the atheist powers. Now that it has become "freed" from them, the MP has openly turned against us and against its Orthodox populace within Russia, (take, for example, the statements of Patriarch Alexis about the ROCOR, the Hebron affair, and the attempts to take away our churches in Europe and America).
But in this difficult time every hierarch must be responsible as never before for his episcopacy and for every one of his words, spoken or written. We must clearly realize that true unity of the two parts of the Russian Church is found not in the unification of the administration of the Church, but in unification in faith, in standing firmly in it, and in love.
The question of such unity can be resolved only at a forthcoming free All-Russian Sobor of the Russian Orthodox Church similar to the free Great All-Russian Sobor of 1917-1918, if all of the conditions required for the convocation of such a council will be met. God willing, at this future Sobor, it will be possible in open and honest discussions to resolve all of the problems of our ecclesiastical being that have developed during the 20th century. Meanwhile, those who, on their own, circulate various Epistles in the spirit of "unity" and "love" in actuality confuse our flock all the more, and sow even more discord in the minds and souls of the faithful, denying them true love, because, according to the words of the Apostle, love "doth not behave itself unseemly" (I Corinthians 13,5).
+ Bishop Kyrill 16th February 1998
Three years later...
The following is an unedited exchange between the webmaster of this site and Bishop Kyrill of Seattle concerning the re-posting of the above letter.
Subject: Re: a letter from Bishop Kyrill
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 12:45:01 -0600
> Dear in Christ Father Andrew,
> Personally, I have no quarrel with you - despite your "friendly"
> phone message several months past. I have not changed my views. They
> have remained the same - as we have discussed in Mulino.
>
Dear Bishop Kyrill,
Forgive me but you have changed your views by your actions. I remember a Bishop who inspired me when he said that he would not "seek after shiny miters" and "let them take our churches we will serve in living rooms!" I remember a Bishop who would not serve with the Serbs and made a point about it... but now what do we see? The metropolitan told me many years ago "everyone will deny and condemn ecumenism, but when we look at their actions we see something else." I do not call you an ecumenist. I only see that you have bent yourself to the winds of Archbishop Mark. I still remember you telling me how he accompanied you on a walk around central park in New York trying to recruit you. I remember your expressed outrage, also your call to defend the Metropolitan. Now what do we see? Even Ludmilla asked you to give the gift of your loyalty to the metropolitan who we both know is being taken advantage of because of his "weakness" at this time. Forgive me Vladika you have changed and I grieve.
> I feel that
> my statement need not be posted at this time -
>
"At this time?" Why not? It shows to people that indeed the church IS talking different then it did just a few years ago. Besides it was on the "official site" It is a public document.
> why did you return it
> to the website after you were instructed to remove it?
>
Because it need to be re-posted. Besides I received requests for it.
> Please remove
> it immediately.
>
I cannot...
> I simply want you to know that no one in their right
> mind wishes to join with the Moscow Patriarchate - the leader of which
> just recently stated that ecumenism is necessary in that it is
> impossible to ignore other Christians (ed. hetrodox).
>
Then say so publicly! Then allow the Metropolitan's letter to be distributed.
Also then tell me very clearly and without "a politicians guile" why the synod is...
1. seeking an "autonomy"
2. seeking communion with the georgians
3. asking ecumenists "Patriarch Pavel" for help in the "much desired
union"
Of course I understand that all this goes beyond the MP in its present form...
> Our beloved
> Church Abroad has not changed her position of 80 years past. If
> language, syntax lead people to feel otherwise, it is very
> unfortunate.
>
"very unfortunate!" Then why do the bishops show an unprecedented coldness and cruelty to those who asked questions? One of the most "milk toast" of our priests up here recently said to Bishop Michael... "Vladika all the bishops had to do is answer our questions at the first and all of this would have stopped immediately." Even father Christopher Birchall wrote this to Bishop Gabriel in January. But what do we see... we are assaulted and insulted by the likes of Lebedeff, Whitford, Shaw, Potopovs, etc. We see the French clergy brave in their stand for the truth of our church and the Mark machine trying to crush them to NO avail, we see every continent issuing statements. There has been NO peace in the church since your "errors of syntax" and NO attempts at calming the flock only threats and name calling. No Vladika please do not insult my intelligence with these low level attempts. You see I know too much of what is behind the scenes. I wish I didn't I would like to be back in those days of innocence. But I am not.
> May God keep us united in the spirit of the 80 years past
>
As disseminated by who Vladika? By that refuse called the western clergy statement?
> and the
> Mother of God cover us with her omophorion.
>
He and She will keep the true members and sons and Daughters of the confessing Church Abroad in full unity of this I am sure of. Metropolitan Philaret two weeks before his righteous end said that "after my death our beloved Church Abroad will break three ways... first the greeks will leave us as they where never a part of us... then those who live for this world and its glory will go to Moscow... what will remain will be those souls faithful to Christ and His Church." I never forgot this and believed that it would happen. Now I do.
Priest Andrew Kencis
I am prepared to lose everything, if needs must, for Christ.. as are many others. This is the fruit of eight months of prayer and tears and trying to make sense of what we see.
> +Bishop Kyrill
>
P.S. I am using internet in Boise, where I am presently - I do not have inetrnet...
>Pity it IS a tool that can be used for good.
>
source: http://monasterypress.com/oldkyrill.html
Sep 3, 2008
A Tribute Archpriest Lev Lebedeff
(Translator's introduction)
On Wednesday 29th April, 1998 clergy and faithful members of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia were shocked to learn of the sudden death of one of the most outstanding theological writers of our times, Archpriest Lev Lebedeff. Fr. Lev had flown from his home in Kursk to New York at the Metropolitan's request to address the Bishops' Council which was due to meet the following week. Shortly after his arrival at the Synod headquarters in New York City he went to his room to rest and died in his sleep.
Fr. Lev's writings regularly appeared in Russian in our Church's most serious publications, particularly "Russkiy Pastyr" ("Russian Shepherd"), published in San Francisco, to which he was a regular contributor. Taking copies of this journal from the shelf at random one finds lengthy articles in almost every issue providing in depth analysis of the most varied problems: "The Spiritual Essence of Modern Business and Commerce," "The Ontological Basis of Church Symbolism," "The Nature of the Church and Its Hierarchy." They are less well known to our English speaking readers, probably due to their demanding nature and lack of suitable translations.
The following articles are presented as a tribute to the departed archpriest. It concerns matters which are currently of great concern to our Church. They will repay close and careful reading. One is also left with a profound sense of our calling to be the "People of the Church," which is something that hopefully will remain with the reader long after the present controversy has subsided. (By 'present controversy' the author refers to the dialogues then occurring between ROCOR and the MP -jh)
Protodeacon Christopher Birchall
3rd May 1998
To read more click here.
On Wednesday 29th April, 1998 clergy and faithful members of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia were shocked to learn of the sudden death of one of the most outstanding theological writers of our times, Archpriest Lev Lebedeff. Fr. Lev had flown from his home in Kursk to New York at the Metropolitan's request to address the Bishops' Council which was due to meet the following week. Shortly after his arrival at the Synod headquarters in New York City he went to his room to rest and died in his sleep.
Fr. Lev's writings regularly appeared in Russian in our Church's most serious publications, particularly "Russkiy Pastyr" ("Russian Shepherd"), published in San Francisco, to which he was a regular contributor. Taking copies of this journal from the shelf at random one finds lengthy articles in almost every issue providing in depth analysis of the most varied problems: "The Spiritual Essence of Modern Business and Commerce," "The Ontological Basis of Church Symbolism," "The Nature of the Church and Its Hierarchy." They are less well known to our English speaking readers, probably due to their demanding nature and lack of suitable translations.
The following articles are presented as a tribute to the departed archpriest. It concerns matters which are currently of great concern to our Church. They will repay close and careful reading. One is also left with a profound sense of our calling to be the "People of the Church," which is something that hopefully will remain with the reader long after the present controversy has subsided. (By 'present controversy' the author refers to the dialogues then occurring between ROCOR and the MP -jh)
Protodeacon Christopher Birchall
3rd May 1998
To read more click here.
Sep 2, 2008
Lubyanka Won
Putin Re: the Signing of the Act: Proof that Lubyanka Won
("Lubyanka" is a term for KGB Headquarters -jh)
By Archpriest Michael Ardov (ROAC in Russia -jh)
Translated from Nasha Strana No. 2822
The Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR) has ceased to exist. But not as a result of the events of May 17th. That was only the epilogue. In the Russian language newspaper Nasha Strana (Our Country), S.V. Volkov wrote these remarkable words: The ROCOR ceased to exist the moment the idea was accepted by its Synod that talks with the Moscow Patriarchate (MP) were possible.
The ROCOR had stood on two principles.
The first one was a consistent stance of anti-Sovietism and anti-Communism. It exposed the regime of the Bolsheviks as criminal. In 1922, the bishops who led the ROCOR sent an appeal to the Genoa Conference in which they asked, “Peoples of the world, help the good and beautiful Russian nation, which has fallen into the hands of villains, gangsters on a world scale, and help them gain their liberty. Give them weapons, send them your volunteers, because if you don’t, these monsters will soon come after you as well.” At every stage of their development, be it during the “détente” of the Brezhnev era, or the “peaceful co-existence” of Khrushchev’s, when excited Western liberals started coming to the USSR and flirting with the Soviets, the ROCOR consistently said that the Soviet regime was criminal.
And the second principle upon which the true leaders and children of the ROCOR stood was strict and traditional Orthodoxy, which prohibits ecumenism, and every religious, secular, and even social contact with heretics. They condemned the papal new calendar and kept themselves from all contact with those who followed it.
Now, however, it has become clear that for at least a part of the flock in emigration, anti-Sovietism had been more important than Orthodoxy. And even though now, by all appearances, the Communists here are gone from power, nevertheless the
purity of Orthodoxy has remained in second place.
During the Yeltsin era, the ROCOR had gained some strength, and had even opened many parishes inside Russia. It was then, in 1993, when I came to understand that no one in the MP was going to repent, and that there would be no catharsis on her
part, that I left the MP for the ROCOR.
By the way, it was a complete disgrace that Yeltsin was buried according to the Rite of a Funeral for an Emperor. I have no strong dislike for him. But he was a man who was completely areligious. As such, he once accepted to be decorated by the witches of Juno, and became some kind of doctor of occult sciences as well. Such people ought to be excommunicated from the Church altogether, let alone be carried into the church for a funeral. But since politics were involved, he was given a triumphant send-off.
The thing is, Patriarch Alexis is a demagogue, with a big helping of Hollywood thrown in.
As far as Metropolitan Laurus is concerned, he never says a word; he just watches and listens. When he was elected First Hierarch, after his predecessor, Metropolitan Vitaly, was disgracefully kicked out, and then when he was enthroned, he
didn’t utter even one word on the occasion—the first time in the history of the Church.
The merging of the ROCOR with the MP could only have happened after the death of its senior bishops. First, the ROCOR Synod’s most distinguished member was put out of business, (I wrote about him in my memoirs, and I am glad that I got to meet him, even if only in the 94th year of his life; he died at 95), this was Bishop Gregory, né Count Grabbe. He directed the affairs of the ROCOR Synod for almost fifty-five years under three of its First Hierarchs. Unfortunately, a revolution took place in the ROCOR in 1986, without the involvement of Lubyanka, as it seems to me, and Bishop Gregory was removed. This was the beginning of the end. Nevertheless, there were still three bishops, not counting Metropolitan Vitaly—Anthony of Geneva, Anthony of San Francisco, and Anthony of Los Angeles— for whom union with the MP would have been impossible. But after the three Anthony’s died, they got rid of Metropolitan Vitaly, and the way to union with the MP was given the green light.
It is a good thing when people get together, so that the Lord should rejoice and that the spirit of peace should prevail. But for this to happen, people should join together in truth; they should repent and ask for forgiveness from God and from each other. But, by no means, are all unions good ones. Let us call to mind the Union of Brest-Litovsk, or the Union of the Council of Florence, which led to disastrous misfortunes and even worse relations between Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy. If a local Sobor of all Russian Orthodox people were called, which the MP has no intention of doing, and everything were resolved openly, then one could truly rejoice. But as long as everything is being done behind closed doors, by some kind of commission, in secrecy, then the only people who could be happy with that would be those who are very far from the real problems of the Church.
Since the 1920’s, the entire Orthodox Church has been in a crisis of the cruelest nature. The holy Apostle Paul once wrote that the Antichrist would not appear until such time as “he who restraineth” is taken away. For us, that means the Orthodox Emperor. In 1917, “He Who restraineth” was taken away, and what followed was a total disaster. In Russia, the monstrous Renovationist Movement, fully supported by the Cheka, blossomed forth. And in Greece, with lightning speed and shortsightedness, and I would say simply stupidity, the Greek Churches began one by one to go over to the papal new calendar, and for one political purpose alone. They thought that after doing so, it would be easier to unite with the Anglican Church, and that then the English would come and help them get Constantinople back!
And now, in “World Orthodoxy,” there is not one truly Orthodox patriarch left; they all participate in the ecumenical movement and serve according to the new calendar.
The Moscow Patriarchate does not yet serve according to the new calendar in Russia, but only because they are afraid of causing a schism. But outside of Russia, there are scads of MP parishes serving according to the new calendar; in America,
almost all of their parishes use the new calendar; in England, the late Bishop Anthony Bloom also had parishes using the new calendar. And in Estonia too, from where Patriarch Ridiger hails.
On the other hand, about 20% of the Greek faithful use the old calendar. There is a very strong Romanian old calendarist church that was ruthlessly persecuted by Ceausescu. There are old calendarist Bulgarians; the Serbian Church also uses the old calendar, for the time being. And the ROCOR was a megaphone and a beacon of light for all of them because Metropolitan Philaret kept his ship absolutely on course, together with the help of his first mate, Bishop Gregory Grabbe. They wrote three Sorrowful Epistles decrying ecumenism, and addressed them to all of the churches of World Orthodoxy, explaining to one and all that the MP was not a free church but rather a puppet of the Communist authorities.
But for us who belong to the smaller but genuinely Orthodox jurisdictions, the fall of the ROCOR means that we have become completely marginalized. However, we do not mind this so much; Christians have often been marginalized throughout history.
Both the first Christians and our Lord Jesus Christ Himself were marginalized by the Pharisees in Jerusalem.
I must say that the parishes and the parishioners of the ROCOR are not at all like ours in Russia, beaten down and kept in line in an almost militaristically disciplined way by the bishops of the MP. And herein lies a certain miscalculation by the politicians and the secret service agents that prepared the union.
They surely do not understand that the bishops abroad do not have the same authority as the bishops in the Russian Federation. Some of them they bought off, some of them they threatened, some of them they enlisted as agents, and they thought — the synod is ours, and now we will just pick up the rest. Of course, some of them they did get. But very many of the parishes, priests and lay people will leave because they do not live under the same system as in the Russian Federation. The most important, the most well known monastery belonging to the ROCOR in Europe, the Lesna Convent in France, has already left Metropolitan Laurus, precisely because of the union with the MP. It’s not the first, however, and it won’t be the last either.
But the discipline in the MP is like in the army; one step to the left or to the right and you’re a deserter. Here in Russia, the Church is separated from the government, but the government is not separated from the Church. And therefore, in all of their political games, the Patriarchate always openly and joyously sings the same tune as those who are in power.
For a long time now, the authorities in our country have been confiscating the property of the ROCOR. Beginning in 1945, in West Berlin, they immediately took the cathedral, which had been built by emigrant Russians, for emigrant Russians. Then, in 1948, when Stalin promoted recognition of the state of Israel via the United Nations, the Israelis rewarded him by giving all of the property of the ROCOR, which was then on the territory controlled by them, to the MP.
But Laurus was pushed into union with the MP by seducers behind the scenes because the Soviets and Lubyanka had no more consistent and principled enemy than the ROCOR. Final victory was achieved due to the fact that decidedly all of the ROCOR bishops had been enlisted as agents.
Now Laurus’ synod will be in communion with each and every ecumenist in the world. These people are not interested in what is canonical. They are all under the anathema of Patriarch Tikhon as aiders and abettors of the Bolsheviks, even if they have it made in the shade.
The Act of May 17th was clearly directed by Putin. It took place because of the cowardice or complacency of the producers of the patriarchate— and it looked monstrous. Had such an event taken place during the days of the Tsar of all Russia, Who was besides everything else the Anointed One of God and the Defender of the Faith, He would never have gone up onto the amvon in order to read something. Maybe He would have received all of the bishops in some hall or other later on, and from His throne said something. But that He should have gotten up on the amvon—this would never happen. The right way to do it was this: the bishops should have been standing on the amvon, and below them, below the amvon, the layman Putin. The presence of Putin was glaring proof that Lubyanka had finally defeated the last bastion of Orthodoxy—the ROCOR.
Some church people are sometimes suspected of working for the secret service. But as far as Patriarch Ridiger is concerned, his case file can be found in Estonia, and the Estonian authorities rather gleefully published the whole thing already some time ago. So this is really an open secret.
Don’t the ROCOR clergy understand that they will be replaced? In Boston, where Father Roman Lukianov served, there is now a priest who came from the MP. And the ROCOR is already full of these “dear Fathers” from the Russian Federation. There is a new operational policy at hand. The best and the brightest of Gundyaev’s Department of Foreign Relations of the MP will soon be making their way to the US.
source: http://www.roacusa.org/Putin%20on%20the%20Signing%20of%20the%20Act.pdf
June 14, 2007
To read another (revealing) letter of Fr. Michael go to:
http://rocorhistory.blogspot.com/2008/09/letter-from-fr-michael.html
("Lubyanka" is a term for KGB Headquarters -jh)
By Archpriest Michael Ardov (ROAC in Russia -jh)
Translated from Nasha Strana No. 2822
The Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR) has ceased to exist. But not as a result of the events of May 17th. That was only the epilogue. In the Russian language newspaper Nasha Strana (Our Country), S.V. Volkov wrote these remarkable words: The ROCOR ceased to exist the moment the idea was accepted by its Synod that talks with the Moscow Patriarchate (MP) were possible.
The ROCOR had stood on two principles.
The first one was a consistent stance of anti-Sovietism and anti-Communism. It exposed the regime of the Bolsheviks as criminal. In 1922, the bishops who led the ROCOR sent an appeal to the Genoa Conference in which they asked, “Peoples of the world, help the good and beautiful Russian nation, which has fallen into the hands of villains, gangsters on a world scale, and help them gain their liberty. Give them weapons, send them your volunteers, because if you don’t, these monsters will soon come after you as well.” At every stage of their development, be it during the “détente” of the Brezhnev era, or the “peaceful co-existence” of Khrushchev’s, when excited Western liberals started coming to the USSR and flirting with the Soviets, the ROCOR consistently said that the Soviet regime was criminal.
And the second principle upon which the true leaders and children of the ROCOR stood was strict and traditional Orthodoxy, which prohibits ecumenism, and every religious, secular, and even social contact with heretics. They condemned the papal new calendar and kept themselves from all contact with those who followed it.
Now, however, it has become clear that for at least a part of the flock in emigration, anti-Sovietism had been more important than Orthodoxy. And even though now, by all appearances, the Communists here are gone from power, nevertheless the
purity of Orthodoxy has remained in second place.
During the Yeltsin era, the ROCOR had gained some strength, and had even opened many parishes inside Russia. It was then, in 1993, when I came to understand that no one in the MP was going to repent, and that there would be no catharsis on her
part, that I left the MP for the ROCOR.
By the way, it was a complete disgrace that Yeltsin was buried according to the Rite of a Funeral for an Emperor. I have no strong dislike for him. But he was a man who was completely areligious. As such, he once accepted to be decorated by the witches of Juno, and became some kind of doctor of occult sciences as well. Such people ought to be excommunicated from the Church altogether, let alone be carried into the church for a funeral. But since politics were involved, he was given a triumphant send-off.
The thing is, Patriarch Alexis is a demagogue, with a big helping of Hollywood thrown in.
As far as Metropolitan Laurus is concerned, he never says a word; he just watches and listens. When he was elected First Hierarch, after his predecessor, Metropolitan Vitaly, was disgracefully kicked out, and then when he was enthroned, he
didn’t utter even one word on the occasion—the first time in the history of the Church.
The merging of the ROCOR with the MP could only have happened after the death of its senior bishops. First, the ROCOR Synod’s most distinguished member was put out of business, (I wrote about him in my memoirs, and I am glad that I got to meet him, even if only in the 94th year of his life; he died at 95), this was Bishop Gregory, né Count Grabbe. He directed the affairs of the ROCOR Synod for almost fifty-five years under three of its First Hierarchs. Unfortunately, a revolution took place in the ROCOR in 1986, without the involvement of Lubyanka, as it seems to me, and Bishop Gregory was removed. This was the beginning of the end. Nevertheless, there were still three bishops, not counting Metropolitan Vitaly—Anthony of Geneva, Anthony of San Francisco, and Anthony of Los Angeles— for whom union with the MP would have been impossible. But after the three Anthony’s died, they got rid of Metropolitan Vitaly, and the way to union with the MP was given the green light.
It is a good thing when people get together, so that the Lord should rejoice and that the spirit of peace should prevail. But for this to happen, people should join together in truth; they should repent and ask for forgiveness from God and from each other. But, by no means, are all unions good ones. Let us call to mind the Union of Brest-Litovsk, or the Union of the Council of Florence, which led to disastrous misfortunes and even worse relations between Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy. If a local Sobor of all Russian Orthodox people were called, which the MP has no intention of doing, and everything were resolved openly, then one could truly rejoice. But as long as everything is being done behind closed doors, by some kind of commission, in secrecy, then the only people who could be happy with that would be those who are very far from the real problems of the Church.
Since the 1920’s, the entire Orthodox Church has been in a crisis of the cruelest nature. The holy Apostle Paul once wrote that the Antichrist would not appear until such time as “he who restraineth” is taken away. For us, that means the Orthodox Emperor. In 1917, “He Who restraineth” was taken away, and what followed was a total disaster. In Russia, the monstrous Renovationist Movement, fully supported by the Cheka, blossomed forth. And in Greece, with lightning speed and shortsightedness, and I would say simply stupidity, the Greek Churches began one by one to go over to the papal new calendar, and for one political purpose alone. They thought that after doing so, it would be easier to unite with the Anglican Church, and that then the English would come and help them get Constantinople back!
And now, in “World Orthodoxy,” there is not one truly Orthodox patriarch left; they all participate in the ecumenical movement and serve according to the new calendar.
The Moscow Patriarchate does not yet serve according to the new calendar in Russia, but only because they are afraid of causing a schism. But outside of Russia, there are scads of MP parishes serving according to the new calendar; in America,
almost all of their parishes use the new calendar; in England, the late Bishop Anthony Bloom also had parishes using the new calendar. And in Estonia too, from where Patriarch Ridiger hails.
On the other hand, about 20% of the Greek faithful use the old calendar. There is a very strong Romanian old calendarist church that was ruthlessly persecuted by Ceausescu. There are old calendarist Bulgarians; the Serbian Church also uses the old calendar, for the time being. And the ROCOR was a megaphone and a beacon of light for all of them because Metropolitan Philaret kept his ship absolutely on course, together with the help of his first mate, Bishop Gregory Grabbe. They wrote three Sorrowful Epistles decrying ecumenism, and addressed them to all of the churches of World Orthodoxy, explaining to one and all that the MP was not a free church but rather a puppet of the Communist authorities.
But for us who belong to the smaller but genuinely Orthodox jurisdictions, the fall of the ROCOR means that we have become completely marginalized. However, we do not mind this so much; Christians have often been marginalized throughout history.
Both the first Christians and our Lord Jesus Christ Himself were marginalized by the Pharisees in Jerusalem.
I must say that the parishes and the parishioners of the ROCOR are not at all like ours in Russia, beaten down and kept in line in an almost militaristically disciplined way by the bishops of the MP. And herein lies a certain miscalculation by the politicians and the secret service agents that prepared the union.
They surely do not understand that the bishops abroad do not have the same authority as the bishops in the Russian Federation. Some of them they bought off, some of them they threatened, some of them they enlisted as agents, and they thought — the synod is ours, and now we will just pick up the rest. Of course, some of them they did get. But very many of the parishes, priests and lay people will leave because they do not live under the same system as in the Russian Federation. The most important, the most well known monastery belonging to the ROCOR in Europe, the Lesna Convent in France, has already left Metropolitan Laurus, precisely because of the union with the MP. It’s not the first, however, and it won’t be the last either.
But the discipline in the MP is like in the army; one step to the left or to the right and you’re a deserter. Here in Russia, the Church is separated from the government, but the government is not separated from the Church. And therefore, in all of their political games, the Patriarchate always openly and joyously sings the same tune as those who are in power.
For a long time now, the authorities in our country have been confiscating the property of the ROCOR. Beginning in 1945, in West Berlin, they immediately took the cathedral, which had been built by emigrant Russians, for emigrant Russians. Then, in 1948, when Stalin promoted recognition of the state of Israel via the United Nations, the Israelis rewarded him by giving all of the property of the ROCOR, which was then on the territory controlled by them, to the MP.
But Laurus was pushed into union with the MP by seducers behind the scenes because the Soviets and Lubyanka had no more consistent and principled enemy than the ROCOR. Final victory was achieved due to the fact that decidedly all of the ROCOR bishops had been enlisted as agents.
Now Laurus’ synod will be in communion with each and every ecumenist in the world. These people are not interested in what is canonical. They are all under the anathema of Patriarch Tikhon as aiders and abettors of the Bolsheviks, even if they have it made in the shade.
The Act of May 17th was clearly directed by Putin. It took place because of the cowardice or complacency of the producers of the patriarchate— and it looked monstrous. Had such an event taken place during the days of the Tsar of all Russia, Who was besides everything else the Anointed One of God and the Defender of the Faith, He would never have gone up onto the amvon in order to read something. Maybe He would have received all of the bishops in some hall or other later on, and from His throne said something. But that He should have gotten up on the amvon—this would never happen. The right way to do it was this: the bishops should have been standing on the amvon, and below them, below the amvon, the layman Putin. The presence of Putin was glaring proof that Lubyanka had finally defeated the last bastion of Orthodoxy—the ROCOR.
Some church people are sometimes suspected of working for the secret service. But as far as Patriarch Ridiger is concerned, his case file can be found in Estonia, and the Estonian authorities rather gleefully published the whole thing already some time ago. So this is really an open secret.
Don’t the ROCOR clergy understand that they will be replaced? In Boston, where Father Roman Lukianov served, there is now a priest who came from the MP. And the ROCOR is already full of these “dear Fathers” from the Russian Federation. There is a new operational policy at hand. The best and the brightest of Gundyaev’s Department of Foreign Relations of the MP will soon be making their way to the US.
source: http://www.roacusa.org/Putin%20on%20the%20Signing%20of%20the%20Act.pdf
June 14, 2007
To read another (revealing) letter of Fr. Michael go to:
http://rocorhistory.blogspot.com/2008/09/letter-from-fr-michael.html
Agent Drozdov's KGB File
EXCERPTS FROM THE KGB JOURNAL
CONCERNING THE RECRUITMENT OF PATRIARCH ALEXIS II (RIDIGER)
INTO THE ESTONIAN KGB IN 1958
From the official Estonian State Archive (record group 131, file 393, pages 125-126) signed by the chairman of the Estonian KGB, Col. I.P. Karpov
(Translated for The Wall Street Journal by George Soroka)
"Agent 'Drozdov' -- born in 1929, a priest of the Orthodox church, with a post-secondary education, graduate theological degree, and possessing perfect command of Russian, Estonian, and weak German. Recruited 28 February 1958 on the basis of patriotic feelings for exposing and exploiting anti-Soviet elements among the Orthodox clergy, among whom he has ties which are of operational interest to the KGB. During recruitment, consideration was given (after consolidating our hold [on him] through practical work) to his future promotion, as opportunities allow, to the office of bishop of Tallinn and Estonia.
During the period of collaboration with the KGB, 'Drozdov' made a positive impression, being precise in his appearance, energetic and sociable. He has a good understanding of the theoretical questions concerning theology and the international situation. With regard to fulfilling our assignments, he reacts with willingness and has already provided a number of materials worthy of attention which are being utilized to document the criminal activities of a member of the governing body of the Iykhviskii Orthodox church, GURKIN and his wife, who is misusing her official position by registering pensions for certain citizens (accepted bribes). Attending to this matter will represent an opportunity to strengthen 'Drozdov' in practical work with the KGB.
In addition, 'Drozdov' also presented valuable material concerning the case being formulated against the priest POVEDSKII. At the present time he is working on perfecting his German.
After assigning the agent to practical work with the organs of governmental security on concrete agency matters, we are planning to also utilize him for promoting our interests among capitalist governments as a member of church delegations."
(See also RUSSIAN PATRIARCH WAS KGB AGENT, FILES SAY http://www.orthodox.net/russia/2000-09-23-irish-times.html)
source: http://www.roacusa.org/news.html September 12, 2007
CONCERNING THE RECRUITMENT OF PATRIARCH ALEXIS II (RIDIGER)
INTO THE ESTONIAN KGB IN 1958
From the official Estonian State Archive (record group 131, file 393, pages 125-126) signed by the chairman of the Estonian KGB, Col. I.P. Karpov
(Translated for The Wall Street Journal by George Soroka)
"Agent 'Drozdov' -- born in 1929, a priest of the Orthodox church, with a post-secondary education, graduate theological degree, and possessing perfect command of Russian, Estonian, and weak German. Recruited 28 February 1958 on the basis of patriotic feelings for exposing and exploiting anti-Soviet elements among the Orthodox clergy, among whom he has ties which are of operational interest to the KGB. During recruitment, consideration was given (after consolidating our hold [on him] through practical work) to his future promotion, as opportunities allow, to the office of bishop of Tallinn and Estonia.
During the period of collaboration with the KGB, 'Drozdov' made a positive impression, being precise in his appearance, energetic and sociable. He has a good understanding of the theoretical questions concerning theology and the international situation. With regard to fulfilling our assignments, he reacts with willingness and has already provided a number of materials worthy of attention which are being utilized to document the criminal activities of a member of the governing body of the Iykhviskii Orthodox church, GURKIN and his wife, who is misusing her official position by registering pensions for certain citizens (accepted bribes). Attending to this matter will represent an opportunity to strengthen 'Drozdov' in practical work with the KGB.
In addition, 'Drozdov' also presented valuable material concerning the case being formulated against the priest POVEDSKII. At the present time he is working on perfecting his German.
After assigning the agent to practical work with the organs of governmental security on concrete agency matters, we are planning to also utilize him for promoting our interests among capitalist governments as a member of church delegations."
(See also RUSSIAN PATRIARCH WAS KGB AGENT, FILES SAY http://www.orthodox.net/russia/2000-09-23-irish-times.html)
source: http://www.roacusa.org/news.html September 12, 2007
Sep 1, 2008
Traditional vs. Renovationist
Here is the difference between Traditional and Renovationist regarding liturgics.
Traditional:
The Church's system of liturgical services (i.e., the Typicon) is the divinely inspired mature growth of the Apostolic embryo. The full flower of God's revelation to His people as embodied in the Divine services organically emanated from the seed of the early Church.
Traditional:
We should have faith in Divine Providence and that the same Spirit who "guides us into all truth" also ordains the Church's order of worship.
Traditional:
The fourth century (in the wake of the "Peace of Constantine") saw a Spirit-guided organic development in the Divine services, as confirmed by the witness of the Church's consciousness in the following centuries up through our present day.
Traditional:
Our Task: to understand and grasp this revelation of God to His people as contained in the Divine services. This requires humility and ascetic struggle with a view towards purifying our hearts.
To read more click here: http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/ph_services.aspx.
Traditional:
The Church's system of liturgical services (i.e., the Typicon) is the divinely inspired mature growth of the Apostolic embryo. The full flower of God's revelation to His people as embodied in the Divine services organically emanated from the seed of the early Church.
Renovationist:
The Typicon as we know it today has become somewhat unintelligible and tremendously cumbersome; for it is encrusted with layers of extraneous and repetitive material that reflect a significant shift away from, and degeneration of, the worship forms of the early Church.
Traditional:
We should have faith in Divine Providence and that the same Spirit who "guides us into all truth" also ordains the Church's order of worship.
Renovationist:
The liturgical services mainly represent the product of a "naked chain of events," or historical cause and effect. The Holy Spirit does not ensure that our rites are kept pristine.
Traditional:
The fourth century (in the wake of the "Peace of Constantine") saw a Spirit-guided organic development in the Divine services, as confirmed by the witness of the Church's consciousness in the following centuries up through our present day.
Renovationist:
The fourth century saw a "break," or "abrupt shift" in the system of services resulting in "deviations" from the purity of the Apostolic era due to the overlaying of Hellenistic "strata" and the synthesis of new and conflicting "liturgical pieties."
Traditional:
Our Task: to understand and grasp this revelation of God to His people as contained in the Divine services. This requires humility and ascetic struggle with a view towards purifying our hearts.
Renovationist:
Our Task: to figure out what has gone wrong with our liturgical services and "fix the many problems" with them. This requires a spirit of doubt and suspicion, as well as heavy reliance upon Western scholarship.
To read more click here: http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/ph_services.aspx.
Concerning Fr. Alexander Schmemann
In case anyone wants to review why old ROCOR would not concelebrate with the OCA, here is an excerpt from a 1998 letter that explains one of the two major reasons:
... In essence, both Father Alexander Schmemann and Father Alexander Men were prominent representatives of the liberal approach to Orthodoxy that is still characteristic, today, of what is often called, here in the West—and especially in traditionalist circles—, the "Paris school" of theology (in reference to one faction of the Russian emigre community in France, which was organized under the Eparchy of Metropolitan Evloghy, following his separation from the jurisdiction of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad). Calling these two men "liberals" may seem subjective, at first, but in fact Father Alexander considered himself to be a spokesman for a more liberal Orthodoxy and was, from time to time, an outspoken critic of Orthodox traditionalism. This seems almost obvious to us, here in the West, but is, in fact, something rather astonishing to Orthodox in Eastern Europe, who have little knowledge of the kind of renovationism that holds forth in the so-called Orthodox Church in America (known as the Metropolia, before its recognition as an autocephalous Church by the Moscow Patriarchate), a jurisdiction in which Father Alexander spent the greater part of his life and which was an outgrowth of the Eparchy of Metropolitan Evloghy ...
To read more click here.
... In essence, both Father Alexander Schmemann and Father Alexander Men were prominent representatives of the liberal approach to Orthodoxy that is still characteristic, today, of what is often called, here in the West—and especially in traditionalist circles—, the "Paris school" of theology (in reference to one faction of the Russian emigre community in France, which was organized under the Eparchy of Metropolitan Evloghy, following his separation from the jurisdiction of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad). Calling these two men "liberals" may seem subjective, at first, but in fact Father Alexander considered himself to be a spokesman for a more liberal Orthodoxy and was, from time to time, an outspoken critic of Orthodox traditionalism. This seems almost obvious to us, here in the West, but is, in fact, something rather astonishing to Orthodox in Eastern Europe, who have little knowledge of the kind of renovationism that holds forth in the so-called Orthodox Church in America (known as the Metropolia, before its recognition as an autocephalous Church by the Moscow Patriarchate), a jurisdiction in which Father Alexander spent the greater part of his life and which was an outgrowth of the Eparchy of Metropolitan Evloghy ...
To read more click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
