Interfax-29 April 2010, 14:25Moscow, April 29, Interfax - The Moscow City Court on May 12 will hear an appeal, challenging a court ruling, supporting the decision to close the criminal case related to the murder of the last Russian tsar Nicholas II and his family.
The court was to hear the complaint, filed by Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna's defense lawyer, on Wednesday. But the judges argued that they would need time to read the complaint. The ruling alone is laid down in three volumes, they said.
Moscow's Basmanny Court on March 19 turned down defense lawyer German Lukyanov's complaint against the decision to close the case of murder of Nicholas II and his family.
"The court took the side of the Prosecutor General's Office and of the federal prosecutor's Investigation Department, disregarding the ruling by the Supreme Court Presidium to rehabilitate Nicholas II and his family," Lukyanov told Interfax then.
The family of the last Russian emperor and his nearest entourage - eleven people in all - were shot on July 17, 1918.
On October 1, 2008 the Supreme Court Presidium ruled to rehabilitate Nicholas II and his family members. But on January 15, 2009, a court ruling was passed to close the criminal case of the Romanov family murder.
The House of Romanov disagreed with the conclusion of the Investigation Department that the royal family had fallen victim to plain criminals, and argued that the tsar and his relatives were killed by the regime.
ROCA Bishops Council Epistle
The Bishops Council of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad greets its faithful members in these joyous days with the Paschal salutation:
Christ is Risen!
In many ways, the future of our Church depends on each of its members. The faithful of the Church must understand that the Christian way of life is yet another embodiment of the sermon of the Gospel. The entire way of the Church is the way of unity in Christ. As an example of such unity, the past of the Russian Church Abroad is with us to this day, and since it is a Holy Legacy, we desire to remain faithful to it. We bear in mind the admonitions of the Saint Patriarch Tikhon and all our First Hierarchs – Metropolitans Anthony, Anastasy, Philaret, and Vitaliy – and we stand firm in that immaculate Orthodox confession, to which the entire Orthodox Church has held throughout the years. “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.” (Hebrews 13:8).
In the manner of our Lord, we have strived to unite everyone and offered an invitation to members of the divided ROCA to begin a dialogue, but unfortunately our voice has not been heard by many to this day. Nevertheless, we do not cease to hope that the flock which finds itself in disunity will respond one day to our call to gather our Church together.
In these sorrowful days, the actions of many of those who call themselves Orthodox attest to their loss of the spirit of Christ. Having conducted and justified praying together with heretics and entering into arrangements with the mighty of this world for the sake of their material well-being, they have lost the very ability to distinguish good and evil. Still we call upon our flock to not become bitter and continue to entreat God to turn the hearts of those who recently were our brothers and who are now our persecutors.
In light of the new wave of harassment which Christians are experiencing from the governments of the lands they find themselves in (we are experiencing this in Argentina), as well as from the Moscow Patriarchate, we call upon all of you, dear fathers, brothers and sisters to stand firm in the Truth. Neither tribulation, nor distress, nor persecution, nor famine, nor nakedness, nor peril, nor sword will keep you from Christ’s love! (Romans 8:35) God will give those who Love Him the strength to overcome all tribulations!
May the words of the Victor over this world console us in these days and for all time: “Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.” (Luke 12:32)
+Metropolitan Agafangel
+Archbishop Andronik
+ Archbishop Sofroniy
+ Archbishop Ioann
+Bishop Georgiy
+Bishop Afanasy
+Bishop Gregory
+Bishop Kirill
+Bishop Dionisiy
Odessa, 2010
Vladyka Agafangel's Report
REPORT
Of Metropolitan Agafangel
to the ROCA Synod of Bishops
Odessa, 2010
Change is constantly occurring in the life of our Church, whether of a material nature, or, unfortunately, of a spiritual nature. Though the material and spiritual are intertwined, I will first discuss the spiritual, since this is always more important for any religious person.
As to the spiritual, it must be said that religiosity in general is slowly disappearing from this world. That is why in our current circumstances, the words of Apostle Paul, “Quench not the Spirit” (1 Thessalonians 5:19), are so relevant for us Christians. What does it mean for us not to quench the spirit? It means to follow unwaveringly the Divine Tradition of the Holy Orthodox Church. This is difficult to do in today’s world, as globalism and the obsession with one’s comfort and convenience in this world crowds out belief in the Crucified Christ and this reduces this belief and makes it an appendage of everyday life. This applies not only to us, but to all of mankind.
We feel this pressure, unfortunately, also from those who would seem, by what they call themselves, to be our brothers. With the ascension of the new First Hierarch of the Moscow Patriarchate, the efforts if not to eliminate us then at least to, as they say now, marginalize us (and not only us) have intensified greatly. That is why we must always be wary not of the declarations of the current MP church administration, but their actions. Sadly for some time now, it has not been possible to believe completely in their words and statements. Just the opposite, there are many questionable actions that cause us to be very careful.
Nevertheless, we should, I believe, refrain from any categorical statements regarding the Moscow Patriarchate as a whole, but we must continue to speak out about its administration and the “church ideology” which the administration espouses. After the events of 2007, the danger of us isolating ourselves has grown tenfold. Due to the conditions of increasing globalism, we are duty bound, in my opinion, to make every effort to establish and maintain contacts with everyone who shares our views. To that end, it is very beneficial for us to associate with our brothers, the Old Calendar Churches of Greece, Romania, and Bulgaria, something that should also be encouraged and developed on the parish level.
We have not unfortunately received any useful answers from those who are now called the “fragments,” and to whom we invited to simply begin a dialogue. The head of the ROAC, Metropolitan Valentin (Rusantsev), first set a precondition for discussions with us, which is completely unacceptable and not possible. Archbishop Tikhon, the head of the ROTC, initially responded to our letter and offered to meet in the beginning of 2010, but then that decision was rescinded and a commission was formed instead to address the issue. This alone shows that RTOC is not prepared to even discuss the matter of uniting the Russian Church. There is information that would indicate that they hope to establish relations with the Greek Synod of Archbishop Chrysostomos to create a separate, extremist entity. We were not able to find the address of Archbishop Vladimir, the head of the ROCA(V). It cannot be found on the Internet and our letter sent to a monastery in California was returned with the postal stamp that there is no such address. In other words, we have not been able to establish contact with Archbishop Vladimir to this day. In light all of this information, one can say that no one in the administrations of all the groups that left the ROCA earlier is even interested in discussing uniting as one church. As a result, we have no choice but to leave our hand extended to all those who were a part of ROCA earlier in the hope of eventual dialogue, while tending to the life of our church with whatever resources we have among ourselves.
A significant event in our life was when we completed, with the blessing of the Synod of Bishops, the rite of preparing chrism during Passion Week in Odessa. The ingredients for the chrism were obtained mostly in Greece and donated by Hegumena Aleksandra. Bishop Georgiy came to Odessa with two priests for the rite and our clerics also participated. The chrism was sanctified on Bright Saturday. There are about seven liters.
Other very important events in the life of our Church since the last Sobor, were the efforts by Mother Agapia to acquire land and property for a monastery in New York State, the building and blessing of a new church in the monastery in Egorovka, the registration of our Synod and the opening of a bank account for the Synod. Besides the construction in New York and Egorovka, churches and rectories are being built in Ukraine - in Odessa (three sites), in Malin, in Dneprodzerzhinsk, and Bolgrad; in Russia – in the village of Dudachkino, outside of St. Petersburg in the Pskov oblast; and in Moldavia – in Kongaz and Chadyr-Lung. We could build even more churches in Odessa, but we do not have enough priests to serve in the new parishes. Our mission in Haiti is rebuilding after the earthquake.
Unfortunately, there is no progress in finding a place for our Synod in the USA, as we do not have any property that can be used for the Synod or the diocese. We are compelled, unfortunately, to abandon our plans to locate the Synod in the house belonging to the Holy Trinity parish, as donations to our Synod account are not sufficient to pay for the basic expenses, let alone the mortgage payments. If the situation does not change this year, then I believe we must decide to move our Synod to another location, where the setting will be more conducive for its survival.
Our Assistance Fund continues its work in Washington, D.C. under the leadership of Dimitri Gontscharow. The Fund needs our continued support and a larger mailing list of regular donors.
Our mission in Haiti carries on its work with the efforts of Archpriest Gregory Williams. A large sum of money, by our standards, of about $50,000 was gathered for rebuilding after the earthquake on that island.
In Odessa, largely through the efforts of Archpriest Valeriy Alekseyev, the correspondence school of the Sts. Cyril & Methodius seminary has prospered for years. The ability to teach the courses over the Internet is the next challenge, since many of those interested live all over and cannot come to Odessa. It would be good to make it available throughout our church.
The publication of various materials is slowly getting established in Odessa. “The Russian Zoar” is unfortunately the only regular periodical being published. The Synod publication of “Church Life” has been reinstated. The only “active” source of information in other types of media is our Synod Internet website. There are also several other so-called “Live Journals” on the Internet. Our presence on the Net is inadequate and it would be good for the parish rectors to create websites, which would contain news about their parishes. This information is very important for the entire Church, as it strengthens our unity and the appreciation of each other among our members. At the last meeting of the New York diocese, it was decided to publish a periodical newsletter that would be distributed on the Internet and in our parishes. The first, test issue of “The Sower” has been released. We ask that all bishops and rectors help to distribute this newsletter.
We have not been able to organize any church events – youth and choir conferences, pilgrimages, conferences, etc. For the most part it is because of inadequate funds and infrastructure. In the matter of funds, it must be noted that at this time we do not even gather enough to conduct our Bishops Councils and Synods. With the money that is deposited in the Synod account, we cannot pay travel expenses for the bishops, without which our future work for the Church is made more difficult.
In general, it can be said that the life of our Church is developing and becoming more stable. There are many eyes upon us, from various groups that are searching for true Orthodoxy, as well as from the MP. Whether the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad can go on largely depends on us. Therefore, let us try to continue preserving the legacy we have received from the Fathers, which can only be accomplished through a living faith, hope, and love among our members.
The humble servant of the Bishops Council,
+Metropolitan Agafangel
Odessa, 2010
We Lost in Argentina?
It appears so.
From Reader Daniel:
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Subject: Apparently bad news-? Let's Hope Not-/Awaiting more Information from South America, etc.
If one looks at daily-courier or guest-2, the first article is about an April 15 , 2010 ARGENTINIAN court decision, which....if I understand the google English translation, apparently says that our people lost the court case & it was decided in favour of ROCOR-MP.
The full implications of this, would SEEM to not be good for our church, in Argentina at least, and also regarding ownership of church properties, etc. for the other anti-MP jurisdictions either.
Declaration of Bishop Daniel
Vertograd Orthodox Journal
Friday June 8, 2007
Declaration of The Right Reverend Daniel, Bishop of Erie, on forming of a Provisional Supreme Ecclesiastical Authority of the Church Abroad
In connection with the canonical crisis which occured in ROCA, which was caused by the joining of the First Hierarch, the Synod and virtually all Diaspora bishops, safe for Agafangel, bishop of Tavria and Odessa and me, bishop Daniel of Erie, to the Moscow Patriarchy, and the loss by the First Hierarch of the right of being a Primate (prava Predstoyatel' stva),
Taking into account that since Metropolitan made a schism, enough time has passed, but open declarations by the other bishops of ROCA, against the Act of abolishing the canonical order of ROCA, did not appear,
I, bishop Daniel, following Ukase 362 p.3 of His Holiness Patriarch, the Holy Synod and the Supreme Ecclesiastical Council of the Orthodox Church of Russia from 7/20 of November 1920 and fulfilling the duties delegated to me by the Ukase, I declare that today, 9/22 of May 2007 I, on the rights of the oldest bishop by ordination, formed a Provisional Supreme Ecclesiastical Authority (PSEA) of ROCA composed of the bishops remaining in the Church Abroad - I, bishop Daniel of Erie, and Agafangel, bishop of Tavria and Odessa.
In connection with the poor state of my health, I will not be able to actively take part in the restoration of the canonical order of ROCA, the management of the PSEA, the convocation and carrying, with the rights of President of the Fifth All-Diaspora Council.
I voluntarily delegate my rights for this constructive endeavour to the Right Reverend Agafangel, who will be obliged to keep me posted on activities, but foremost, he must listen to the voice of the Church - the voice of the clergy and laypeople. In connection with that, for participation in the administration of the Church, I commission to reinstate, at the Fifth All-Diaspora Council, the Supreme Ecclesiastical Council of ROCA made of clergy and laypersons.
If God allows, I would joyously participate, together with bishop Agafangel, in the Hirotoniyas of new bishops for the Church Abroad, but I would like to draw for this important endeavour, our brethren - the Greek Metropolitan Cyprian, the Romanian [Metropolitan] Vlasie and the Bulgarian [Bishop] Photii.
For that cause it is necessary to restore immediately full Eucharistic Communion with the Old Calendar Synods, and to conduct joint meetings with them in the future.
I do not rule out the possibility of reinforcement of the episcopate of ROCA with [bishops] from the Russian groups which have left ROCA recently, and even from the MP.
It seems to me, that the admission of bishops in their present order is possible for all of the aforementioned structures, except for RTOC (Russkaya Istinno-Pravoslavna ya Cerkov', Russian True Orthodox Church - the "Tikhonites" ). Regarding the breadth of economy, in each particular case it is difficult to say, but in general, we should admit from the MP the way it was accepted for them before, and from the Autonomous Russian Church and Mansonville - through supplementing of hierarchical ordinations.
I entrust the Right Reverend Agafangel with sending out as a Circular letter from my name the given Declaration to all the Dioceses of ROCA for the administration in the necessary cases.
Bishop Daniel of Erie
9/22 of May 2007.
Translation of the Relics of St. Nicholas
Taking into account that since Metropolitan made a schism, enough time has passed, but open declarations by the other bishops of ROCA, against the Act of abolishing the canonical order of ROCA, did not appear,
I, bishop Daniel, following Ukase 362 p.3 of His Holiness Patriarch, the Holy Synod and the Supreme Ecclesiastical Council of the Orthodox Church of Russia from 7/20 of November 1920 and fulfilling the duties delegated to me by the Ukase, I declare that today, 9/22 of May 2007 I, on the rights of the oldest bishop by ordination, formed a Provisional Supreme Ecclesiastical Authority (PSEA) of ROCA composed of the bishops remaining in the Church Abroad - I, bishop Daniel of Erie, and Agafangel, bishop of Tavria and Odessa.
In connection with the poor state of my health, I will not be able to actively take part in the restoration of the canonical order of ROCA, the management of the PSEA, the convocation and carrying, with the rights of President of the Fifth All-Diaspora Council.
I voluntarily delegate my rights for this constructive endeavour to the Right Reverend Agafangel, who will be obliged to keep me posted on activities, but foremost, he must listen to the voice of the Church - the voice of the clergy and laypeople. In connection with that, for participation in the administration of the Church, I commission to reinstate, at the Fifth All-Diaspora Council, the Supreme Ecclesiastical Council of ROCA made of clergy and laypersons.
If God allows, I would joyously participate, together with bishop Agafangel, in the Hirotoniyas of new bishops for the Church Abroad, but I would like to draw for this important endeavour, our brethren - the Greek Metropolitan Cyprian, the Romanian [Metropolitan] Vlasie and the Bulgarian [Bishop] Photii.
For that cause it is necessary to restore immediately full Eucharistic Communion with the Old Calendar Synods, and to conduct joint meetings with them in the future.
I do not rule out the possibility of reinforcement of the episcopate of ROCA with [bishops] from the Russian groups which have left ROCA recently, and even from the MP.
It seems to me, that the admission of bishops in their present order is possible for all of the aforementioned structures, except for RTOC (Russkaya Istinno-Pravoslavna ya Cerkov', Russian True Orthodox Church - the "Tikhonites" ). Regarding the breadth of economy, in each particular case it is difficult to say, but in general, we should admit from the MP the way it was accepted for them before, and from the Autonomous Russian Church and Mansonville - through supplementing of hierarchical ordinations.
I entrust the Right Reverend Agafangel with sending out as a Circular letter from my name the given Declaration to all the Dioceses of ROCA for the administration in the necessary cases.
Bishop Daniel of Erie
9/22 of May 2007.
Translation of the Relics of St. Nicholas
http://vertograd-eng.blogspot.com/2007/06/declaration-of-right-reverend-daniel.html
Address of Bishop Daniel
Версия для печати.
Опубликовано на сайте Портал-Credo.Ru
28-03-2006 19:28
Address of Bishop Daniel of Erie vicar of the Chairman of the Synod of bishops, servicing old-rite believers. To the Clergy, Monastics and Parishioners of The ROCA on the Threshhold of the IV th Pan-abroad Sobor 2006 in San Francisco
Speaking: Bishop Daniel, Vicar of the First Hierarch of the Church Abroad on Old-Believers Affairs.
I wish to address you and share some of my thoughts on matters which are troubling us, which I had written down a year ago, yet have not lost their significance at the current time.
Dear Vladika's, Fathers, Brothers and Sisters in the Lord!
At one time I had addressed you in connection with the dialogue which is being conducted between our Church Abroad and the Moscow Patriarchate. I feared that this dialogue would lead to the unification of our Churches under the authority of the Moscow Patriarchate, and subsequently, to the complete annihilation of our independence, which we have had for more than eighty years now.
I was reassured that the issue was not unification of the Churches, and not our subordination to Moscow, but merely improving relations between our Churches.
I have nothing against that, and allowed myself to be persuaded that nothing threatens the existence of our Church as self-sufficient and independent.
Then I received an entire package of documents from our Church's Synod of Bishops on these matters and it took me quite a while to read them and think them over.
Therefore, I find it indispensable to address you again, since the documents that were sent to me far surpass my worst fears, and I will unlikely be able to personally be present in conciliar discussion of these issues.
In the beginning much is said about mutual relations between the Church and the state, about ecumenism from an Orthodox point of view, and we can only rejoice at this, since in the recent past, or "yesterday" on a historical scale, the Moscow Patriarchate was under full and unequivocal submission to the godless, communist authority, which seized our Fatherland and would have belonged to any organization on instructions from that authority.
Our Church never was in a union with the godless authority and never belonged to any ecumenical organizations, therefore none of this has any direct relationship to us. One can only hope that the Moscow Patriarchate will not elude these principles.
All the talk that unification or subordination to the Moscow Patriarchate is not being conjectured is absolutely unsubstantiated.
At first nothing is mentioned about commemorating the first hierarch, probably so as not to aggravate the flock abroad, but then it turns out that the election of the First Hierarch of the Church Abroad is subject to confirmation by the Patriarch and the Synod of Bishops of the Moscow Patriarchate, and the name of the First Hierarch will be commemorated only after the name of the Patriarch; a commemoration which hitherto had not been mentioned.
The Patriarch together with his bishops is given the right to ratify, and consequently not ratify, i.e., the right to veto all important decisions on leadership within our Church, including election of bishops.
Is this not the union of the Churches and is this not the subordination of our Church unto Moscow?
What is this?
According to the candid admission of the Patriarchate, our Church must become one of its self-governing parts - similar to the Churches of Latvia or Estonia. To say thereby, that no unification or subordination is presumed, as it is done in the draft letter to Metropolitan Kiprian, simply means to consciously lead people into delusion, i.e. to deceive them.
In becoming dependent on the Patriarch et al, our Church will no longer remain independent, i.e., autocephalous de facto, as it had been and continues to be now more than eighty years, having something greater than autonomy, namely independence. Our Church has no need for any autonomy, no matter how alluring this autonomy may seem to poorly informed people.
It is revealing that the word "independence", which precisely defines our position as of today, is painstakingly avoided by the compilers of the documents under review, with reference to the Church Abroad, and it is quite clear why the Moscow Patriarchate wishes to deprive us of this self-sufficiency and independence and make us subordinate unto itself, using any kinds of truths or falsehoods.
In view of the fact that it has become clear where further talks with the Moscow Patriarchate are leading: to unification with it, under the power of the Patriarch of Moscow, it appears to me to be advisable to cease further talks with the Moscow Patriarchate until such time that their position on this matter is clarified.
If they agree to recognize our independence, then we may have discussions with them on equal grounds, about improving relations between our two independent Churches, even to the point of Eucharistic communion, but if not, we can continue our independent existence with no need of Moscow's blessing.
The compilers of the documents under review omit from view the fact that religion and patriotism are different subjects. Orthodoxy and the Moscow Patriarchate are not one and the same. One may be Russian and still be Orthodox, and not belong to the Moscow Patriarchate.
Ethnic Greeks belong to various autocephalous Churches, such as Alexandria, Antioch an others. Their adherence to these Churches does not make them Orthodox to greater or lesser degrees than others, and they do not cease being Greeks.
Our common descent from Russian ancestors does not oblige us to submit to the Patriarch of Moscow, particularly since he and the majority of his circle were appointees of the soviet regime, hostile to Russia, yet now they create the impression that nothing extraordinary happened, and that we must submit to their authority.
We must decidedly set this aside!
If we were to submit to the Patriarch's authority, not only would we lose our self-sufficiency and independence, but also the many thousands of our flock, descendants of those Russian refugees for the fulfillment of whose spiritual needs our Church was established, as well as the majority of our clergy and a part of the hierarchy.
All church rules have as their only, if not sole purpose, the spiritual benefit of the flock. If our Church joins now with the Moscow Patriarchate, then many thousands of these people will be left without a Church. Who needs that?
Can it be that our pastoral conscience will permit this to happen?
Many thousands of people belong to our Church. If they have a desire to be under the authority of the Moscow Patriarchate, they can join it at any time, but they are not doing that. That means, they prefer to be in a Church which is independent of it, and they do this consciously and not by happenstance. Can it be that the majority of people who belong to our Church belong to it through misunderstanding? It is ridiculous to even imagine this!
If we were to join Moscow now, then we would betray our brethren who trusted us. This would be an act of the self-anihilation of our Church, in other words, suicide.
What would we receive in return? Decidedly nothing! We would not become Orthodox, since we never ceased being Orthodox. If there is not one but two independent Russian Churches, then what is wrong with that? There are many Greek Churches. The number of independent Orthodox Churches was never a subject in the teaching of the faith.
Also, important questions such as to be or not to be with certain Churches cannot be decided by a simple majority of votes. In this case unanimity is necessary, or an almost unanimous decision by all the members of a given Church. It's doubtful that we have unanimity in this matter of interest to us. Therefore, it is better for us to adhere to our old status quo and set aside unification with the Moscow Patriarchate as a frivolous fancy.
This interview with His Eminence Bishop Daniel was recorded live by G. Soldatow.
The video and taperecording of this address are in the editorial office of"Fidelity".
March, 2006
Source: http://sbn-nathanael.livejournal.com/
© Портал-Credo.Ru, 2002-2010. При полном или частичном использовании материалов ссылка на portal-credo.ru обязательна.
Пишите нам: editor@portal-credo.ru
Interview with Bishop Daniel
№217: Exclusive interview of ROCOR Bishop Daniel
EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH ROCOR BISHOP DANIEL
Subdeacon Nathanael Kapner: "Can you tell us a little about your background dear Vladyka?"
Bishop Daniel (Alexandrov): "I was born in Odessa of the Ukraine in 1930. My great grandfather on my mother's side was the last governor of Alaska. After the sale of Alaska in the the late 19th Century, my great grandfather moved back to Russia. So you see, my family already had some kind of "stake" in America.
~ "My grandfather on my father's side was an officer in the White Army. And my father, who also served in the White Army was awarded The Cross Of St George, for taking a machine gun from a Bolshevik.
~ "In 1938 we moved to the Urals, for the Bolsheviks discovered that my father once served in the White Army --- and consequently he lost his job as a technician for a Magnetics Observatory. My father was then forced to find another job. He finally found a menial job where he could only work a as a common laborer in a steel factory in the Urals. We settled in the Ural area on April 1st 1938. On April 4th, only three days later, my father was arrested and disappeared."
Sbn Nathanael: "Did you ever learn what happened to your father?"
Bishop Daniel: "We never knew what happened to our father. It was only after the Soviet archives were opened for examination a few years ago, that I learned that my father was executed shortly after his arrest. This was the barbarity of the Bolsheviks."
Sbn Nathanael: "How did you end up coming to America?"
Bishop Daniel: "This is quite a long story. To make it short, we eventually moved back to Odessa where my mother, an accomplished violinist, supported the family by teaching and performing. By this time the Roumanians occupied Odessa and we had complete religious freedom.
~ "But eventually Stalin and the communists moved in, and we were forced to flee to Switzerland. From there we made our way to America in 1949, where my mother's father resided, having settled there as a merchant marine some years prior to our arrival. He died shortly after our arrival."
Sbn Nathanael: "How did you begin your work amongst the Old Believers?"
Bishop Daniel: "Our parish, "The Church Of The Nativity in Erie PA," is of the Old Rite, or as it is properly known, "The Old Ritualists." I myself had no family members in the "Old Ritualists." But having lived amongst them, I grew to have a great respect for them. The Old Believers are conservatives and I wished to bring them into our church.
~ "I realized that the some of the Old Believers that I was aquainted with had no priesthood. Since they were priestless, I wanted to help them so that they could receive the fullness of the Churchs' Sacraments."
Sbn Nathanael Kapner: "Can you tell us sonething about your career with the ROCOR?"
Bishop Daniel: "I graduated from the Jordanville Seminary in 1956. Metropolitan Laurus was a fellow student of mine. I was ordained to the priesthood in the early 70s. I soon became a parish priest and all the while, I kept in contact with the Old Believers.
~ "In the early nineties, I was contacted by Metropolitan Vitaly, regarding the Synod's wish to ordain me as a bishop. I was very troubled by this and could not sleep all night.
~ "The very next morning, I called Metropolitan Vitaly and said, "Does the Synod want yet another bishop? No, Vladyka, I am not interested in becoming another bishop. But if it is for the purpose of helping the flock of the Old Believers, then yes, I will accept.
~ "I was soon consecrated as a vicar Bishop *to the Metropolian*---not connected with the "Eastern
Diocese" as such. For the Eastern Diocese is "New-Rite" Orthodox. My espiscopal rank is to aid and perpetuate the Old Rite Believers, along with their particular concerns and customs."
Sbn Nathanael: "Vladyka. This week you issued already two statements expressing your strong objections to the MP-ROCOR union.
~ "In both statements you spoke of the dangers of the ROCOR relinquishing their independence to the Moscow Patriarchy. Why is this "independence of the ROCOR" sucn an issue for you?"
[See These Two Statements @ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ortho
Bishop Daniel: "I made these statements for I have been recently asked to sign some documents that favor the union. But I can not hide my objections to this union. So I have now publicly stated what I truly believe is the correct path for our Church.
~ "The ROCOR has enjoyed independence for over 80 years. Why should we *now* give away our independence as a gift to the MP? We already have our independence. We do not need the MP to grant to us what we already have!
~ "For uniting with the MP will mean our self-destruction. This self destruction could even be called suicide. For though in the best of circumstances, the Moscow Patriarchy promises us our continued independence, it will soon be taken away."
Sbn Nathanael: "But doesn't Metropolitan Laurus assert that the ROCOR will remain administratively independent?"
Bishop Daniel: "This is nothing but conjecture. Let's see what will happen in reality!
~ "'Autonomy' is usually an ecclestiastical framework when a church belongs to another.
'Autocephaly' is a scenario when a church is entirely independent. The ROCOR has enjoyed virtual 'autocephaly' for over 80 years. This is better than any kind of 'autonomy' that the Moscow Patriarchy could possibly grant to us.
~ "I compare this situation to the Roman Catholic Church. Many Orthodox Churches have full independence--yet in matters of the faith they are the same. And this is acceptable.
~ "But with the Roman Catholic Church, they claim to be the only true church and would want to subjugate all other churches to their authority.
~ "Why should we subdue our church to the authority of the MP who are much larger than us and far more powerful? We are being forced into this union. Even lay people can choose who they would like as their spiritual fathers.
~ "But we at the ROCOR, who are being forced into this union, do not trust the Moscow Patriarchy. Only a few years ago. the Moscow Patriarchy was supporting the Soviet government. The Moscow Patriarchy never took a strong stand on matters of the faith. We are Russian emigres, and it is quite understandable that we do not want anything even resembling a soviet-influenced church."
Sbn Nathanael: "Bishop Agafangel of the Ukraine is against the ROCOR uniting with the Moscow Patriarchy. Have you been in contact with him?"
Bishop Daniel: "No. But I have heard from others that he shares the same thoughts as I do."
Sbn Nathanael: "Why do you think Metropolitan Laurus is pressing for unification with the MP?
Bishop Daniel: "I cannot tell you---I do not understand. Is Metrpolitan Laurus being forced by circumstances?"
Sbn Nathanael: "What circumstances would be forcing Metropolitan Laurus to press for unification?"
Bishop Daniel: "Other bishops."
Sbn Nathanael: "Like Mark of Berlin?"
Bishop Daniel: "Yes."
Sbn Nathanael: "What is your opinion of Abp Mark Of Berlin?"
Bishop Daniel: "I am surprized. Archbishop Mark is a German and he has been welcomed into our Russian Church. He has been elevated to such a point that he is presently 2nd to the Metropolitan himself.
~ "And now Archbishop Mark works to destroy our church! I am at completely opposite poles from him. If we follow the will of Archbishop Mark and unite with the MP, the ROCOR church will not be the same church that we belonged to for over 80 years!”
Sbn Nathanael: "Will you leave the ROCOR if the Synod votes for the union?"
Bishop Daniel: "If the Synod votes for the union, the ROCOR will be absorbed into the Moscow Patriarchy. Yes I will leave."
Subdeacon Nathanael Kapner, Reporting
28 March 2006
http://elmager.livejournal.com/56905.html
EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH ROCOR BISHOP DANIEL
Subdeacon Nathanael Kapner: "Can you tell us a little about your background dear Vladyka?"
Bishop Daniel (Alexandrov): "I was born in Odessa of the Ukraine in 1930. My great grandfather on my mother's side was the last governor of Alaska. After the sale of Alaska in the the late 19th Century, my great grandfather moved back to Russia. So you see, my family already had some kind of "stake" in America.
~ "My grandfather on my father's side was an officer in the White Army. And my father, who also served in the White Army was awarded The Cross Of St George, for taking a machine gun from a Bolshevik.
~ "In 1938 we moved to the Urals, for the Bolsheviks discovered that my father once served in the White Army --- and consequently he lost his job as a technician for a Magnetics Observatory. My father was then forced to find another job. He finally found a menial job where he could only work a as a common laborer in a steel factory in the Urals. We settled in the Ural area on April 1st 1938. On April 4th, only three days later, my father was arrested and disappeared."
Sbn Nathanael: "Did you ever learn what happened to your father?"
Bishop Daniel: "We never knew what happened to our father. It was only after the Soviet archives were opened for examination a few years ago, that I learned that my father was executed shortly after his arrest. This was the barbarity of the Bolsheviks."
Sbn Nathanael: "How did you end up coming to America?"
Bishop Daniel: "This is quite a long story. To make it short, we eventually moved back to Odessa where my mother, an accomplished violinist, supported the family by teaching and performing. By this time the Roumanians occupied Odessa and we had complete religious freedom.
~ "But eventually Stalin and the communists moved in, and we were forced to flee to Switzerland. From there we made our way to America in 1949, where my mother's father resided, having settled there as a merchant marine some years prior to our arrival. He died shortly after our arrival."
Sbn Nathanael: "How did you begin your work amongst the Old Believers?"
Bishop Daniel: "Our parish, "The Church Of The Nativity in Erie PA," is of the Old Rite, or as it is properly known, "The Old Ritualists." I myself had no family members in the "Old Ritualists." But having lived amongst them, I grew to have a great respect for them. The Old Believers are conservatives and I wished to bring them into our church.
~ "I realized that the some of the Old Believers that I was aquainted with had no priesthood. Since they were priestless, I wanted to help them so that they could receive the fullness of the Churchs' Sacraments."
Sbn Nathanael Kapner: "Can you tell us sonething about your career with the ROCOR?"
Bishop Daniel: "I graduated from the Jordanville Seminary in 1956. Metropolitan Laurus was a fellow student of mine. I was ordained to the priesthood in the early 70s. I soon became a parish priest and all the while, I kept in contact with the Old Believers.
~ "In the early nineties, I was contacted by Metropolitan Vitaly, regarding the Synod's wish to ordain me as a bishop. I was very troubled by this and could not sleep all night.
~ "The very next morning, I called Metropolitan Vitaly and said, "Does the Synod want yet another bishop? No, Vladyka, I am not interested in becoming another bishop. But if it is for the purpose of helping the flock of the Old Believers, then yes, I will accept.
~ "I was soon consecrated as a vicar Bishop *to the Metropolian*---not connected with the "Eastern
Diocese" as such. For the Eastern Diocese is "New-Rite" Orthodox. My espiscopal rank is to aid and perpetuate the Old Rite Believers, along with their particular concerns and customs."
Sbn Nathanael: "Vladyka. This week you issued already two statements expressing your strong objections to the MP-ROCOR union.
~ "In both statements you spoke of the dangers of the ROCOR relinquishing their independence to the Moscow Patriarchy. Why is this "independence of the ROCOR" sucn an issue for you?"
[See These Two Statements @ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ortho
Bishop Daniel: "I made these statements for I have been recently asked to sign some documents that favor the union. But I can not hide my objections to this union. So I have now publicly stated what I truly believe is the correct path for our Church.
~ "The ROCOR has enjoyed independence for over 80 years. Why should we *now* give away our independence as a gift to the MP? We already have our independence. We do not need the MP to grant to us what we already have!
~ "For uniting with the MP will mean our self-destruction. This self destruction could even be called suicide. For though in the best of circumstances, the Moscow Patriarchy promises us our continued independence, it will soon be taken away."
Sbn Nathanael: "But doesn't Metropolitan Laurus assert that the ROCOR will remain administratively independent?"
Bishop Daniel: "This is nothing but conjecture. Let's see what will happen in reality!
~ "'Autonomy' is usually an ecclestiastical framework when a church belongs to another.
'Autocephaly' is a scenario when a church is entirely independent. The ROCOR has enjoyed virtual 'autocephaly' for over 80 years. This is better than any kind of 'autonomy' that the Moscow Patriarchy could possibly grant to us.
~ "I compare this situation to the Roman Catholic Church. Many Orthodox Churches have full independence--yet in matters of the faith they are the same. And this is acceptable.
~ "But with the Roman Catholic Church, they claim to be the only true church and would want to subjugate all other churches to their authority.
~ "Why should we subdue our church to the authority of the MP who are much larger than us and far more powerful? We are being forced into this union. Even lay people can choose who they would like as their spiritual fathers.
~ "But we at the ROCOR, who are being forced into this union, do not trust the Moscow Patriarchy. Only a few years ago. the Moscow Patriarchy was supporting the Soviet government. The Moscow Patriarchy never took a strong stand on matters of the faith. We are Russian emigres, and it is quite understandable that we do not want anything even resembling a soviet-influenced church."
Sbn Nathanael: "Bishop Agafangel of the Ukraine is against the ROCOR uniting with the Moscow Patriarchy. Have you been in contact with him?"
Bishop Daniel: "No. But I have heard from others that he shares the same thoughts as I do."
Sbn Nathanael: "Why do you think Metropolitan Laurus is pressing for unification with the MP?
Bishop Daniel: "I cannot tell you---I do not understand. Is Metrpolitan Laurus being forced by circumstances?"
Sbn Nathanael: "What circumstances would be forcing Metropolitan Laurus to press for unification?"
Bishop Daniel: "Other bishops."
Sbn Nathanael: "Like Mark of Berlin?"
Bishop Daniel: "Yes."
Sbn Nathanael: "What is your opinion of Abp Mark Of Berlin?"
Bishop Daniel: "I am surprized. Archbishop Mark is a German and he has been welcomed into our Russian Church. He has been elevated to such a point that he is presently 2nd to the Metropolitan himself.
~ "And now Archbishop Mark works to destroy our church! I am at completely opposite poles from him. If we follow the will of Archbishop Mark and unite with the MP, the ROCOR church will not be the same church that we belonged to for over 80 years!”
Sbn Nathanael: "Will you leave the ROCOR if the Synod votes for the union?"
Bishop Daniel: "If the Synod votes for the union, the ROCOR will be absorbed into the Moscow Patriarchy. Yes I will leave."
Subdeacon Nathanael Kapner, Reporting
28 March 2006
http://elmager.livejournal.com/56905.html
Bishop Daniel Reposes in Erie
Prayer request
please pray for the newly departed Bishop Daniel of Erie
Bishop Daniel (Alexandrow) of Erie
Today, Monday April 13/26, 2010, news has been received that this morning Bishop Daniel of Erie reposed in the Lord. Vechnaya Pamyat! Memory Eternal! to a much suffering man who is finally free.
RocorMP site:
Concerning the Legacy of the ROCOR and Her Successors
This post has been removed at the request of the author, as it does not reflect his views with any accuracy.
Today is Fr. Gregory's Name Day
New Hieromartyr Gregory V, patriarch of Constantinople
Many Years Dear Shepherd "Papa"!
The Third Rome in History and in Prophecy
Can it really be that no one today is even slightly familiar with the "Povest' o belom klobuke" ("The Tale Of The White Cowl") -- that very same Cowl which was placed upon the head of Patriarch St. Tikhon, nearly a century ago?
The "Povest'" (which is an integral part of Russian Church history) clearly states that St. Constantine was baptized by Pope St. Sylvester shortly after the miraculous victory that Christ gave him over his pagan rival, Maxentius, at the battle on the Milvian Bridge (AD 312) and not "on his deathbed" by Eusebius of Nicomedia, as modern "scholarship" so likes to assert.
For that service, in gratitude, Constantine bestowed upon St. Sylvester the dignity of wearing a White Cowl, which is symbolic of the purity of the Orthodox Faith and the Radiant Third-day Resurrection of Christ.
Soon after the Church in Rome fell to the Appollinarian heresy, the then-Pope, commanded to do so by an Angel of the Lord who appeared to him in a threatening dream, sent the Cowl to the Patriarch of Constantinople.
Later, a "radiant youth" (also an Angel of the Lord) appeared to the then-Patriarch of Constantinople and commanded that he send the Cowl on to the Holy Russian Land:
"For Old Rome hath fallen away from the glory and the faith of Christ through pride and self-will; in New Rome, which is in the City of Constantine, the Christian faith will likewise perish through Hagarene (Muslim) violence; while upon the Third Rome, which is in the Russian Land, the Grace of the Holy Spirit hath shone forth" ... for "there truly is the faith of Christ glorified" ... "and honoured ... more than anywhere else on earth".
"The Tale Of The White Cowl" further predicts the establishment of a patriarchate in Rus' ("... and the great rank of Patriarch ... will be given to the Russian Land in its time, and that nation will be called radiant [or: Holy] Rus'").
This prophecy would only find fulfillment in 1589, one hundred thirty six years after the "infidel Turks" broke down the gates of the City of Constantine and a century and a half after the Greeks had betrayed their Faith in Florence.
With the establishment of the Russian Patriarchate, the White Cowl became the headgear of Russia's Patriarchs (St. Tikhon being the last to wear it legitimately).
Thus, the Third Rome was spiritually linked with the First, by way of the Second (II [IV] Esdras 11). And, inasmuch as "a Fourth [Rome] there shall not be", the "Povest'" informs us that "at the end [of the Age] all Christian realms will come together into a single Russian Tsar'dom [i.e., the Third Rome resurrected], on account of the Orthodox Faith ... and the Lord will exalt the Russian Tsar' over many nations...".
This prophecy was also passed on to us by, among others, St. Seraphim of Sarov, who informs us that even the antichrist will tremble at the mere mention of the Russian Tsar'!
We know, for example (according to the prophecies of St. Feofan of Poltava) that "[i]n Russia, the startsy [elders] used to say, through the will of the people, the Monarchy and Autocratic rule will be restored. The Lord has forechosen the future Tsar'.
"He will be a man of burning faith, of brilliant mind and of iron will. First of all, he will bring about order in the Orthodox Church by removing all the false, heresy-preaching and lukewarm hierarchs. And very many indeed -- almost all, with few exceptions -- will be those removed by him: while new ones, true and steadfast hierarchs, will take their place.
"Through the female line, he will be from the lineage of the Romanovs. Russia will be a mighty state, but only for 'a short time'. ... After that, the antichrist will come into the world, with all the horrors of the end, as described in the 'Apocalypse'."
Elsewhere, St. Feofan states:
"Oh, Russia, Russia! How terribly has she sinned before the loving kindness of the Lord.
"The Lord God favoured Russia, and He gave her that which He had not given to a single other nation on earth. And this nation turned out to be so ungrateful.
"She left Him; she rejected Him; and it is therefore that the Lord has given her over to be tormented by devils. The devils took up their residence in the souls of men, and the nation of Russia became possessed; literally, devil-ridden.
"And all the terrible things that we hear about what went on -- and what continues to go on -- in Russia: all the sacrilege, all the militant atheism and theomachy, -- all of this stems from her being possessed by devils.
"But, through the inexpressible mercy of God, this possession will pass and the nation will be healed. The nation will turn to repentance; to faith.
"That will occur, which none expects. Russia will be resurrected from the dead, and the entire world will be astonished.
"Orthodoxy in her will be reborn and triumph. But that Orthodoxy which had existed formerly will be no more.
"The great startsy have said that Russia will be reborn; that the people themselves will restore the Orthodox Monarchy. A mighty Tsar' will be placed upon the Throne by God Himself.
"He will be a great reformer, and he will be strong in the Orthodox faith. He will cast down the unfaithful hierarchs of the Church.
"He himself will be an outstanding personality, with a pure and holy soul. He will possess a strong will. He will be of the Romanov Dynasty, through the maternal line.
"He will be God's Chosen One, obedient to the Lord in all things. He will transform Siberia.
"But this Russia will exist only for a very short time. Soon thereafter will come to pass that of which the Apostle John speaks in his 'Apocalypse'."
The "Povest'" (which is an integral part of Russian Church history) clearly states that St. Constantine was baptized by Pope St. Sylvester shortly after the miraculous victory that Christ gave him over his pagan rival, Maxentius, at the battle on the Milvian Bridge (AD 312) and not "on his deathbed" by Eusebius of Nicomedia, as modern "scholarship" so likes to assert.
For that service, in gratitude, Constantine bestowed upon St. Sylvester the dignity of wearing a White Cowl, which is symbolic of the purity of the Orthodox Faith and the Radiant Third-day Resurrection of Christ.
Soon after the Church in Rome fell to the Appollinarian heresy, the then-Pope, commanded to do so by an Angel of the Lord who appeared to him in a threatening dream, sent the Cowl to the Patriarch of Constantinople.
Later, a "radiant youth" (also an Angel of the Lord) appeared to the then-Patriarch of Constantinople and commanded that he send the Cowl on to the Holy Russian Land:
"For Old Rome hath fallen away from the glory and the faith of Christ through pride and self-will; in New Rome, which is in the City of Constantine, the Christian faith will likewise perish through Hagarene (Muslim) violence; while upon the Third Rome, which is in the Russian Land, the Grace of the Holy Spirit hath shone forth" ... for "there truly is the faith of Christ glorified" ... "and honoured ... more than anywhere else on earth".
"The Tale Of The White Cowl" further predicts the establishment of a patriarchate in Rus' ("... and the great rank of Patriarch ... will be given to the Russian Land in its time, and that nation will be called radiant [or: Holy] Rus'").
This prophecy would only find fulfillment in 1589, one hundred thirty six years after the "infidel Turks" broke down the gates of the City of Constantine and a century and a half after the Greeks had betrayed their Faith in Florence.
With the establishment of the Russian Patriarchate, the White Cowl became the headgear of Russia's Patriarchs (St. Tikhon being the last to wear it legitimately).
Thus, the Third Rome was spiritually linked with the First, by way of the Second (II [IV] Esdras 11). And, inasmuch as "a Fourth [Rome] there shall not be", the "Povest'" informs us that "at the end [of the Age] all Christian realms will come together into a single Russian Tsar'dom [i.e., the Third Rome resurrected], on account of the Orthodox Faith ... and the Lord will exalt the Russian Tsar' over many nations...".
This prophecy was also passed on to us by, among others, St. Seraphim of Sarov, who informs us that even the antichrist will tremble at the mere mention of the Russian Tsar'!
We know, for example (according to the prophecies of St. Feofan of Poltava) that "[i]n Russia, the startsy [elders] used to say, through the will of the people, the Monarchy and Autocratic rule will be restored. The Lord has forechosen the future Tsar'.
"He will be a man of burning faith, of brilliant mind and of iron will. First of all, he will bring about order in the Orthodox Church by removing all the false, heresy-preaching and lukewarm hierarchs. And very many indeed -- almost all, with few exceptions -- will be those removed by him: while new ones, true and steadfast hierarchs, will take their place.
"Through the female line, he will be from the lineage of the Romanovs. Russia will be a mighty state, but only for 'a short time'. ... After that, the antichrist will come into the world, with all the horrors of the end, as described in the 'Apocalypse'."
Elsewhere, St. Feofan states:
"Oh, Russia, Russia! How terribly has she sinned before the loving kindness of the Lord.
"The Lord God favoured Russia, and He gave her that which He had not given to a single other nation on earth. And this nation turned out to be so ungrateful.
"She left Him; she rejected Him; and it is therefore that the Lord has given her over to be tormented by devils. The devils took up their residence in the souls of men, and the nation of Russia became possessed; literally, devil-ridden.
"And all the terrible things that we hear about what went on -- and what continues to go on -- in Russia: all the sacrilege, all the militant atheism and theomachy, -- all of this stems from her being possessed by devils.
"But, through the inexpressible mercy of God, this possession will pass and the nation will be healed. The nation will turn to repentance; to faith.
"That will occur, which none expects. Russia will be resurrected from the dead, and the entire world will be astonished.
"Orthodoxy in her will be reborn and triumph. But that Orthodoxy which had existed formerly will be no more.
"The great startsy have said that Russia will be reborn; that the people themselves will restore the Orthodox Monarchy. A mighty Tsar' will be placed upon the Throne by God Himself.
"He will be a great reformer, and he will be strong in the Orthodox faith. He will cast down the unfaithful hierarchs of the Church.
"He himself will be an outstanding personality, with a pure and holy soul. He will possess a strong will. He will be of the Romanov Dynasty, through the maternal line.
"He will be God's Chosen One, obedient to the Lord in all things. He will transform Siberia.
"But this Russia will exist only for a very short time. Soon thereafter will come to pass that of which the Apostle John speaks in his 'Apocalypse'."
Apostolic Canon 62
"According to many canonical rules, all of the so-called bishops, archbishops and metropolitans of the Moscow Patriarchate, being KGB agents, are apostates from Christ. The 62nd Apostolic Canon deprives them of these titles, and if they repent, it calls for them to be accepted as laymen and not to be ordained. Similar orders are found in numerous (24) canonical rules. From this, we see that the Divine Canons do not admit the Divine Gifts to apostates - KGB agents."
- Archbishop Anthony of Los Angeles
"Last Will and Testament" (1995)
"Last Will and Testament" (1995)
Communist Paper Questions Putin's Orthodoxy
MYTH OF THE "ORTHODOX PRESIDENT"
by Konstantin Dushenov,
Sovetskaia Rossiia, 4 January 2002
In the recent past several of the news media, some of the habitues of Orthodox political gatherings of the capital, and even persons who wear clerical garb have exerted literally titanic efforts in order to create in our imagination the image of "Orthodox President" Putin. There would be nothing extraordinary about this; in recent years all politicians, recalling the high moral authority of the church, have tried in one way or another to demonstrate their affiliation with it even if not essentially so.
This time the propaganda campaign of the "Putinites" is directed not just at the so called ordinary voter. This "ordinary voter" does not pay attention to religious and political niceties and to have the necessary effect on him it is simply enough to show several times a staged portrayal of Putin talking with the patriarch or standing in a church with a lighted candle. Today the chief efforts of the presidential propagandists are aimed at creating a recognition of the "Orthodoxy" of Putin specifically among the churched portion of the population, the Orthodox public in the full sense of this word.
Why is this necessary to them? After all there are not very many of us! We do not occupy highly placed power positions nor influential bureaucratic responsibilities nor profitable commercial heights. We rarely turn out for elections which means that we have little effect on voting results. Nevertheless the heat of the "Orthodox Putin" image is constantly being increased. Last year its height was reached in the chorus of publications in a whole series of central and local news media of an article by the father superior of Moscow's Presentation monastery, Archimandrite Tikhon Shevkunov, under the striking title "Putin and his family are Christians; that's the main thing."
The article was published on 8 December 2001 by the leading liberal democratic newspaper of the country, Izvestiia, which usually is not at all inclined toward spreading Christian views in public. Strictly speaking, this was not even an article but a reprint of an interview which Archimandrite Tikhon gave to the Athens newspaper "Khora" in preparation for Putin's visit to Greece which happened on 7-9 December.
The contents of this rather wide ranging article can be reduced to several main theses.
First, from the article it emerges that Fr Tikhon is President Putin's official spiritual advisor. This is not just that he is a personal acquaintance with whom Putin likes to talk occasionally "about a religious matter," but a genuine, full-fledged confessor in the strict Orthodox sense of the word. This is what Izvestiia presents him as to the readers in the editorial preface; and indeed the archimandrite himself responded to the reporter's question "Is the confession of an ordinary person different from that of the president?" by saying: "The prayerful responsibility of a priest for every human soul is great," clearly giving one to understand that it is he who bears this heavy burden of responsibility for the soul of the current master of the Kremlin.
Second, Shevkunov tries to persuade the reader that Putin is a genuine Orthodox Christians and a full-fledged member of the Russian Orthodox church, and not just a "candleholder" from among the unprincipled governmental officials and sly politicians who go to church once a year on Pascha in order to stand for thirty minutes with a lighted candle before the gaze of the TV cameras. "Putin is a truly Orthodox Christian," the archimandrite affirms. "And not just a nominal one but a person who makes his confession and communion and is conscious of his responsibility before God for the high service entrusted to him and for his own immortal soul."
True, it remains not entirely clear how such a zealous Christian could publicly repudiate Christ. Meanwhile a fact remains a fact: in September 2000, during his visit to USA, Putin gave a TV interview to the worldwide television company CNN. The host of the program, Larry King, asked him literally the following: "There is a lot of talk about your religious views. I have been told that you wear a cross. Have you been baptized? Are you a believer? What are your views on religion?"
And here is what our "Orthodox president" answered to this: "I believe in man. I believe in his good intentions. I believe that we all have been placed here to do good. And the main thing is to achieve this and to achieve comfort." In principle, for a bureaucrat who was educated during the epoch of "developed socialism," such an answer is not at all unusual. If Grandpa Yeltsin had said this, nobody would be surprised; after all, he showed up for Pascha and had the sense to greet "dear Russians" on Christmas.
But on the lips of a man who aspires to be Orthodox, what he said was simply amazing. This is not only not an Orthodox confession, it is not even a Christian confession at all. To speak about comfort in response to a question about faith can only be done by a person who is immeasurably distant from the Russian religious tradition.
Third, Archimandrite Tikhon paints for us not simply the image of Putin the Christian but the image of an Orthodox ruler who extends his personal religious conviction to his public service as a kind of Kremlin patron for the native church. "As a part of the church body, the president cannot but feel the problems that disturb all Orthodox people," Shevkunov affirms, and he gives what from his point of view is a pertinent example. "In our country, as in Greece also, there exists a schism that it grievous to us. In our case it is with the Russian foreign church. When he recently was in America, Vladimir Vladimirovich met with a representative of the synod of the foreign church, Bishop Gavriil, and invited him and the primate of the foreign church, Metropolitan Laurus, to Moscow. May God grant that this wound will be finally healed by our joint efforts."
This modest image of Putin as "father of the nation," as the general unifier and reconciler, began to circulate in the liberal news media a short time before. On 26 November 2001 this same Izvestiia published an expansive interview with Bishop Gavriil, who commented that the efforts of the president to unify the church were "unprecedented." Other newspapers also wrote no less enthusiastically about the "forty-minute conversation" that occurred during a special meeting of Putin with Bishop Gavriil.
It is necessary to say that they were striving for glory. Before the eyes of the reader there arises involuntarily the picture of a thoughtful and thorough exchange of opinions between the president and the church hierarch, during the course of which they discussed the most vitally disturbing problems of Russian Orthodoxy and mapped out ways for their spiritual and organizational solution.
However Bishop Gavriil himself describes what happened quite differently. "The widely disseminated report about my meeting with Russian President V.V. Putin does not accurately describe what happened," he writes in a special statement of 17 November 2001. "The first hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, Most Reverend Metropolitan Laurus, received an invitation to a reception held by Russian President V.V. Putin at the Russian embassy in Washington on the occasion of the president's visit to USA. Metropolitan Laurus, for reasons not of his doing, could not go to the reception and he sent me as his representative.
"At the reception, where there were approximately 250 persons, the Russian president gave a speech which lasted about twenty minutes. After this about forty guests were conducted into a separate room where we could be introduced directly to the president. I was among these guests. When my turn came, after mutual greetings, the Russian president asked me to convey his congratulations and greetings to the newly elected first hierarch, Metropolitan Laurus. I promised to do that and, in my turn, I invited the Russian president to visit our parishes in America and especially the Holy Trinity monastery in Jordanville. The president thanks me for the invitation and in turn invited me to come to Moscow for a visit.
"At this, the meeting with the president, which lasted not forty minutes as said in several reports but perhaps forty seconds, came to an end."
In translation from the language of diplomacy into the Russian language, this means that the first hierarch of ROCOR simply refused to meet with Putin and Bishop Gavrill whom he sent in his place restricted himself to the minimal conversation that elementary human courtesy requires. If one keeps in mind this obvious fact, then the image of the "unifying president" drawn by Tikhon and his cohorts fades substantially.
Finally, fourth, the archimandrite draws from what is said the completely logical conclusion that might be stated thus: Putin is the Peter I of today. As if he, "our Russian Orthodox president," is taking upon himself in the conditions of the twenty-first century the sacral, mystical service of the "restrainer" of world evil which in ancient times was the proper task of the Russian emperor, God's annointed, alone. "In 1917 the thousand-year-old succession of rulers of the country who were Orthodox Christians was interrupted," Fr Tikhon says. "In this sense now the connection of the ages has been restored in the person of the current president."
The outright blasphemy of such flattery is evident to every Orthodox person. One can have different views of the autocratic form of rule, but even for an opponent of the monarchy it should be clear that the summit and magnitude of tsarist service, which was sealed by the sacrament of ecclesiastical anointing and crowned with the public profession of the Orthodox creed, is not the same as the pathetic "charisma" of the president elected by the duped masses at the so-called national election.
However, the presidential image makers can dupe the "dear Russians" as they wish.There's no point in exposing their insincerity. In the final analysis in imposing on the mass consciousness the monumental form of the "father president" they are simply earning their huge salary. But the recognition of Putin as Orthodox on the part of the church itself would mean the spiritual death of Russia because then after him everybody would be able to call himself "Orthodox" to serve their personal or political goals.
In such a case the borders of the church would be washed away and its sacramental treasures would be trampled and desecrated and thrown to the destructive behavior of the masses. And the recognition of Putin as the legal successor of the centuries-old sovereign service of the Russian "gatherers of the lands" and the heir of the special grace of the Russian autocratic anointed ones would be more fatal for the work of the Russian regeneration.
Of course, it is possible to deceive people. But God is not mocked. And thus any attempts by politicians "to play" at Orthodoxy and to use the church for their selfish ends are doomed. God is no respecter of persons. Before the face of the Almighty, the president and the bum, the banker and janitor, the marshal and private are equal. Indeed, the church was left on earth by the Lord Jesus Christ for the salvation of all, but it does not embrace everybody. It sets up its immutable conditions and a person, even if he is president of Russia, who does not fulfil them is not received by the church into its gracious midst but remains outside in the perishing world no matter what he says nor how his ideologues, image makers, and advisors try to persuade everybody to the contrary.
At the same time, however, there remains the question: what goals are being pursued by those who are trying to make of Putin an "Orthodox president"?
It seems there are several main goals. For example, with the help of such a maneuver the rapacious new Russian "elite," who are immeasurably distant from their own people, could get used to the idea that the current "market Orthodoxy" is not horrible but is even useful. After all, look--Putin's become Orthodox, and it's all right. They have not stopped receiving him in either America or the European capitals. Even the Jews love him as before. Church hierarchs and representatives of the "patriotic public" are finally satisfied; the long-sought "unity of people and regime" has been achieved through their emotional unity in the bosom of the ancient Russian religious tradition.
In their turn, believers can be accustomed to the idea that a kind of special, "watered-down" version of Orthodoxy is permitted their "rulers," which does not require them to observe the canons and rules of church discipline (such as fasts, for example) nor a public confession of their faith nor a confirmation of their faith by deeds. Moreover, even public renunciation of Christ for the sake of "higher political purposes" is recognized as permissible.
Of course such a version is convenient for the rulers; without too much difficulty it is possible to appeal to the enormous, centuries-old moral authority of the holy church. But for Russia as a whole, for the church, and for the people this is simply fatal because it undermines the deepest confessional and ascetic bases of Russian national self-awareness and the church's doctrine of salvation.
This blasphemous "reduction" or, simply speaking, fatal distortion of our holy faith is convenient only to those dark forces that have labored for many centuries to make Christianity impotent and to turn it from a strict religion of intense spiritual struggle and sacrificial self-discipline into a kind of rosy cocktail for the masonic fashionable salons of the contemporary world at war with God.
Will they really be able to deceive us again? God forbid. Lord, hear, save, and have mercy upon us. (tr. by PDS, posted 7 January 2002)
http://www2.stetson.edu/~psteeves/relnews/0201b.html
by Konstantin Dushenov,
Sovetskaia Rossiia, 4 January 2002
In the recent past several of the news media, some of the habitues of Orthodox political gatherings of the capital, and even persons who wear clerical garb have exerted literally titanic efforts in order to create in our imagination the image of "Orthodox President" Putin. There would be nothing extraordinary about this; in recent years all politicians, recalling the high moral authority of the church, have tried in one way or another to demonstrate their affiliation with it even if not essentially so.
This time the propaganda campaign of the "Putinites" is directed not just at the so called ordinary voter. This "ordinary voter" does not pay attention to religious and political niceties and to have the necessary effect on him it is simply enough to show several times a staged portrayal of Putin talking with the patriarch or standing in a church with a lighted candle. Today the chief efforts of the presidential propagandists are aimed at creating a recognition of the "Orthodoxy" of Putin specifically among the churched portion of the population, the Orthodox public in the full sense of this word.
Why is this necessary to them? After all there are not very many of us! We do not occupy highly placed power positions nor influential bureaucratic responsibilities nor profitable commercial heights. We rarely turn out for elections which means that we have little effect on voting results. Nevertheless the heat of the "Orthodox Putin" image is constantly being increased. Last year its height was reached in the chorus of publications in a whole series of central and local news media of an article by the father superior of Moscow's Presentation monastery, Archimandrite Tikhon Shevkunov, under the striking title "Putin and his family are Christians; that's the main thing."
The article was published on 8 December 2001 by the leading liberal democratic newspaper of the country, Izvestiia, which usually is not at all inclined toward spreading Christian views in public. Strictly speaking, this was not even an article but a reprint of an interview which Archimandrite Tikhon gave to the Athens newspaper "Khora" in preparation for Putin's visit to Greece which happened on 7-9 December.
The contents of this rather wide ranging article can be reduced to several main theses.
First, from the article it emerges that Fr Tikhon is President Putin's official spiritual advisor. This is not just that he is a personal acquaintance with whom Putin likes to talk occasionally "about a religious matter," but a genuine, full-fledged confessor in the strict Orthodox sense of the word. This is what Izvestiia presents him as to the readers in the editorial preface; and indeed the archimandrite himself responded to the reporter's question "Is the confession of an ordinary person different from that of the president?" by saying: "The prayerful responsibility of a priest for every human soul is great," clearly giving one to understand that it is he who bears this heavy burden of responsibility for the soul of the current master of the Kremlin.
Second, Shevkunov tries to persuade the reader that Putin is a genuine Orthodox Christians and a full-fledged member of the Russian Orthodox church, and not just a "candleholder" from among the unprincipled governmental officials and sly politicians who go to church once a year on Pascha in order to stand for thirty minutes with a lighted candle before the gaze of the TV cameras. "Putin is a truly Orthodox Christian," the archimandrite affirms. "And not just a nominal one but a person who makes his confession and communion and is conscious of his responsibility before God for the high service entrusted to him and for his own immortal soul."
True, it remains not entirely clear how such a zealous Christian could publicly repudiate Christ. Meanwhile a fact remains a fact: in September 2000, during his visit to USA, Putin gave a TV interview to the worldwide television company CNN. The host of the program, Larry King, asked him literally the following: "There is a lot of talk about your religious views. I have been told that you wear a cross. Have you been baptized? Are you a believer? What are your views on religion?"
And here is what our "Orthodox president" answered to this: "I believe in man. I believe in his good intentions. I believe that we all have been placed here to do good. And the main thing is to achieve this and to achieve comfort." In principle, for a bureaucrat who was educated during the epoch of "developed socialism," such an answer is not at all unusual. If Grandpa Yeltsin had said this, nobody would be surprised; after all, he showed up for Pascha and had the sense to greet "dear Russians" on Christmas.
But on the lips of a man who aspires to be Orthodox, what he said was simply amazing. This is not only not an Orthodox confession, it is not even a Christian confession at all. To speak about comfort in response to a question about faith can only be done by a person who is immeasurably distant from the Russian religious tradition.
Third, Archimandrite Tikhon paints for us not simply the image of Putin the Christian but the image of an Orthodox ruler who extends his personal religious conviction to his public service as a kind of Kremlin patron for the native church. "As a part of the church body, the president cannot but feel the problems that disturb all Orthodox people," Shevkunov affirms, and he gives what from his point of view is a pertinent example. "In our country, as in Greece also, there exists a schism that it grievous to us. In our case it is with the Russian foreign church. When he recently was in America, Vladimir Vladimirovich met with a representative of the synod of the foreign church, Bishop Gavriil, and invited him and the primate of the foreign church, Metropolitan Laurus, to Moscow. May God grant that this wound will be finally healed by our joint efforts."
This modest image of Putin as "father of the nation," as the general unifier and reconciler, began to circulate in the liberal news media a short time before. On 26 November 2001 this same Izvestiia published an expansive interview with Bishop Gavriil, who commented that the efforts of the president to unify the church were "unprecedented." Other newspapers also wrote no less enthusiastically about the "forty-minute conversation" that occurred during a special meeting of Putin with Bishop Gavriil.
It is necessary to say that they were striving for glory. Before the eyes of the reader there arises involuntarily the picture of a thoughtful and thorough exchange of opinions between the president and the church hierarch, during the course of which they discussed the most vitally disturbing problems of Russian Orthodoxy and mapped out ways for their spiritual and organizational solution.
However Bishop Gavriil himself describes what happened quite differently. "The widely disseminated report about my meeting with Russian President V.V. Putin does not accurately describe what happened," he writes in a special statement of 17 November 2001. "The first hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, Most Reverend Metropolitan Laurus, received an invitation to a reception held by Russian President V.V. Putin at the Russian embassy in Washington on the occasion of the president's visit to USA. Metropolitan Laurus, for reasons not of his doing, could not go to the reception and he sent me as his representative.
"At the reception, where there were approximately 250 persons, the Russian president gave a speech which lasted about twenty minutes. After this about forty guests were conducted into a separate room where we could be introduced directly to the president. I was among these guests. When my turn came, after mutual greetings, the Russian president asked me to convey his congratulations and greetings to the newly elected first hierarch, Metropolitan Laurus. I promised to do that and, in my turn, I invited the Russian president to visit our parishes in America and especially the Holy Trinity monastery in Jordanville. The president thanks me for the invitation and in turn invited me to come to Moscow for a visit.
"At this, the meeting with the president, which lasted not forty minutes as said in several reports but perhaps forty seconds, came to an end."
In translation from the language of diplomacy into the Russian language, this means that the first hierarch of ROCOR simply refused to meet with Putin and Bishop Gavrill whom he sent in his place restricted himself to the minimal conversation that elementary human courtesy requires. If one keeps in mind this obvious fact, then the image of the "unifying president" drawn by Tikhon and his cohorts fades substantially.
Finally, fourth, the archimandrite draws from what is said the completely logical conclusion that might be stated thus: Putin is the Peter I of today. As if he, "our Russian Orthodox president," is taking upon himself in the conditions of the twenty-first century the sacral, mystical service of the "restrainer" of world evil which in ancient times was the proper task of the Russian emperor, God's annointed, alone. "In 1917 the thousand-year-old succession of rulers of the country who were Orthodox Christians was interrupted," Fr Tikhon says. "In this sense now the connection of the ages has been restored in the person of the current president."
The outright blasphemy of such flattery is evident to every Orthodox person. One can have different views of the autocratic form of rule, but even for an opponent of the monarchy it should be clear that the summit and magnitude of tsarist service, which was sealed by the sacrament of ecclesiastical anointing and crowned with the public profession of the Orthodox creed, is not the same as the pathetic "charisma" of the president elected by the duped masses at the so-called national election.
However, the presidential image makers can dupe the "dear Russians" as they wish.There's no point in exposing their insincerity. In the final analysis in imposing on the mass consciousness the monumental form of the "father president" they are simply earning their huge salary. But the recognition of Putin as Orthodox on the part of the church itself would mean the spiritual death of Russia because then after him everybody would be able to call himself "Orthodox" to serve their personal or political goals.
In such a case the borders of the church would be washed away and its sacramental treasures would be trampled and desecrated and thrown to the destructive behavior of the masses. And the recognition of Putin as the legal successor of the centuries-old sovereign service of the Russian "gatherers of the lands" and the heir of the special grace of the Russian autocratic anointed ones would be more fatal for the work of the Russian regeneration.
Of course, it is possible to deceive people. But God is not mocked. And thus any attempts by politicians "to play" at Orthodoxy and to use the church for their selfish ends are doomed. God is no respecter of persons. Before the face of the Almighty, the president and the bum, the banker and janitor, the marshal and private are equal. Indeed, the church was left on earth by the Lord Jesus Christ for the salvation of all, but it does not embrace everybody. It sets up its immutable conditions and a person, even if he is president of Russia, who does not fulfil them is not received by the church into its gracious midst but remains outside in the perishing world no matter what he says nor how his ideologues, image makers, and advisors try to persuade everybody to the contrary.
At the same time, however, there remains the question: what goals are being pursued by those who are trying to make of Putin an "Orthodox president"?
It seems there are several main goals. For example, with the help of such a maneuver the rapacious new Russian "elite," who are immeasurably distant from their own people, could get used to the idea that the current "market Orthodoxy" is not horrible but is even useful. After all, look--Putin's become Orthodox, and it's all right. They have not stopped receiving him in either America or the European capitals. Even the Jews love him as before. Church hierarchs and representatives of the "patriotic public" are finally satisfied; the long-sought "unity of people and regime" has been achieved through their emotional unity in the bosom of the ancient Russian religious tradition.
In their turn, believers can be accustomed to the idea that a kind of special, "watered-down" version of Orthodoxy is permitted their "rulers," which does not require them to observe the canons and rules of church discipline (such as fasts, for example) nor a public confession of their faith nor a confirmation of their faith by deeds. Moreover, even public renunciation of Christ for the sake of "higher political purposes" is recognized as permissible.
Of course such a version is convenient for the rulers; without too much difficulty it is possible to appeal to the enormous, centuries-old moral authority of the holy church. But for Russia as a whole, for the church, and for the people this is simply fatal because it undermines the deepest confessional and ascetic bases of Russian national self-awareness and the church's doctrine of salvation.
This blasphemous "reduction" or, simply speaking, fatal distortion of our holy faith is convenient only to those dark forces that have labored for many centuries to make Christianity impotent and to turn it from a strict religion of intense spiritual struggle and sacrificial self-discipline into a kind of rosy cocktail for the masonic fashionable salons of the contemporary world at war with God.
Will they really be able to deceive us again? God forbid. Lord, hear, save, and have mercy upon us. (tr. by PDS, posted 7 January 2002)
http://www2.stetson.edu/~psteeves/relnews/0201b.html
A Prayer
Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit,
Both now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
The Orthodox episcopate of the Church of Russia; our Lord the Very Most Reverend Metropolitan Agafangel, First Hierarch of the Russian Church Abroad, and our Lord the Most Reverend Bishop Andronick; the brotherhood of this Holy Temple, and all Orthodox Christians: preserve, O Lord, for many years.
Both now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
The Orthodox episcopate of the Church of Russia; our Lord the Very Most Reverend Metropolitan Agafangel, First Hierarch of the Russian Church Abroad, and our Lord the Most Reverend Bishop Andronick; the brotherhood of this Holy Temple, and all Orthodox Christians: preserve, O Lord, for many years.
Exposing Putin
Vladimir Putin: His Religious Belief
and
His Role in the Union of the ROCOR with Moscow
The Accusation:
Archbishop Chrysostom made several statements when speaking to a group faithful in xxx late last year. These statements are frankly lies and your archbishop is quite plainly a liar. ...In one statement he claimed that Vladimir Putin was raised an atheist and came from a communist family. In fact he was raised by a pious Orthodox mother and secretly baptized an Orthodox Christian. He openly and courageously confesses his belief in God and his dedication to the Russian Orthodox religion. ...In the other one, he said that the ROCOR was joined to the Mother Church in Moscow by efforts of President Putin. The indisputable fact is that the millions of Russians in the Church Outside Russia wanted to join their Mother Church once that communism had fallen. Vladimir Putin played no role in this at all, except by helping to overthrow the Soviet regime.
* * *
The Rebuttal:
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010
To: Exarchate Clergy, Faithful, and Friends
From: Archbishop Chrysostomos
The writer of this comment, an educated and otherwise reasonable man, has simply let his ethnic sensitivities and lack of objectivity with regard to the matter at hand cloud his vision. He sent his commentary to a professor in our jurisdiction [SIR, Royal Path] who is equally erudite and reasonable, and he sent it on to me, asking that I reply to it. He did so, not because he endorses the comment [he observed that my critic's words "are shamefully and uncharacteristically rude", just as his views are incontrovertibly refuted by the factual record.] But he asked me, for the sake of supporting my claims, to write a response for a general audience and for his friend. I did so and am sharing my response with those of our clergy and faithful who may be interested in it. The matter is important and timely. This is what I wrote:
"My comments about Mr. Putin were quite accurate. While it is said that his mother was an Orthodox Christian and secretly baptized as a baby (a claim that cannot be confirmed or denied, since it is shrouded in secrecy), he was reared an atheist. As for his family's communist background, his patrilineal grandfather was also an atheist and a communist, having served as a cook for Lenin and then Stalin (a position of some importance, given the poisonings that marked the communist political world). I might note that I had a mentor (a KGB defector) who had personal knowledge of Putin's father, who was a member of the communist party, a militant atheist, and an active member, during World War II, in a sabotage and assassin squad of the NKVD (the predecessor of the KGB). These claims are not disputed in any biographical works about Putin or his father, to the best of my knowledge.
"Mr. Putin's claims to a 'religious awakening' came (conveniently or otherwise) only in the early 1990s, after the fall of communism. They were supposedly sparked by an automobile accident in which his wife was very seriously injured in 1993 and after his discovery of a Cross that his mother gave him in the ashes of a fire that destroyed his summer home (in 1996). As for his courageous confession of God, Putin is famous for a comment that he made in an interview with 'Time Magazine' when it named him its 'Man of the Year' in 2007. In it, he replies to a direct question abut his belief in God as follows: '... There are things I believe, which should not in my position, at least, be shared with the public at large for everybody's consumption because that would look like self-advertising or a political striptease.'*
"When, in this same interview, he was asked to describe his faith, he said: 'You could say that it is my deep conviction that the moral values without which humankind cannot survive cannot be other than religious values. Now, as regards a specific church or other establishment, that's a separate matter. As somebody said once, if God exists, he does know that people have different views regarding church' (ibid.)
"While Mr. Putin was admittedly playing politics by claiming to adhere to the Russian constitution's separation of Church and State, this is hardly a courageous confession of his faith in God or of his 'Russian Orthodox religion.' I think that, given his background and despicable espionage in East Germany, he is very likely also playing a political game in his other, less official, endorsements of belief in God and in Eastern Orthodoxy. Whatever the case, statements like, 'There are things I believe...,' or recognizing that mankind cannot survive without moral and religious values are not a ringing endorsement of anything but a lukewarm statement about religion in general.
"As for the ROCOR and its union with Moscow in 2007, one would have to be blind and deaf not to have seen and heard Putin front and center, not only in activities that led up to the union, but at the union ceremony in Moscow itself. Another article in "Time Magazine," in May of 2007, rather convincingly supports my claim (vide infra**). As for the millions of Russians who belonged to the ROCOR at the time of the union (this second "Time Magazine" article reports its faithful as 1.5 million in number), since our Church was a Sister Church of the ROCOR before its union with Moscow, I am quite aware that these numbers are absurdly exaggerated, as the ROCOR faithful themselves fully well know.
"I make mention of this statistical misrepresentation, not because I think that numbers measure truth but, because so many believe so, population exaggeration also played some role in the 'hype' that led to the public reports on the ROCOR-Moscow union. Mr. Putin was not only pivotal to the union, but he and his colleagues employed the typical propaganda of the murderous organization in which he was formed, the KGB, which had a long history of overstating the importance of certain events and groups, when it served their purpose, and doing the opposite when it did not. Ask the Russian Jews!
"Our sensitive critic may disagree with me in my assessment of the ROCOR-Moscow union, which I believe that many naive people were duped into accepting it for something that it was not. But that disagreement does not make me a liar; nor, indeed, do any supposedly 'indisputable facts.' The factual record would seem to be on my side. In saying that, I do not mean to disparage those who supported, for whatever reason, the union between the ROCOR and Moscow. I simply mean to state that those who feel that this was a correct move should do so without invoking facts that are not facts and without dismissing as liars those who, in the face of facts that ARE facts, have substantial misgivings about the wisdom of this move, not just for the 'Russian Orthodox religion,' but for catholic Orthodoxy, of which Russian Orthodoxy is a part."
See:
*http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/personoftheyear/article/0,28804,1690753_1690757_1695787-2,00.html
**http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1622544,00.html
Sticky
√ ROCA News!/ New Convent Church, of Our Lady's Nativity, Consecrated in Yehorivka, Ukraine-
On 4/18/2010, Vladyka Metropolitan Agafangel, with our Bishop George of Bolgorod and with many priests and other clergy, with the sisterhood, and many laity, consecrated the finished BEAUTIFUL new church of Our Lady's Nativity, in the Womens' Monastery of St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco, near Yehorivka, Odessa region, Ukraine. The festive dinner, included over 70 participants.
There are several photos here.
See: http://sinod.ruschurchabroad.org
under date: "18/4/2010".......on the front page of our official ROCA church website.......
MNOGAYA LETA! MANY YEARS! to Mother Abbess Alexandra and her dear sisters and their helpers!....and to all who helped to make this new church possible!
Note: This is the monastic sisterhood, which was originally in Ishim, Siberia, but when the betrayal was underway, they fled for refuge to Odessa, to be under the protection of the sole ROCOR bishop (Met. Agafangel), to reject that false, 'union'.
Here are photos, of the entire history of the building of this convent church, with consecration photos.......... http://sinod.ruschurchabroad.org/nunnery-egorovka.htm
_________________________________________
On 4/18/2010, Vladyka Metropolitan Agafangel, with our Bishop George of Bolgorod and with many priests and other clergy, with the sisterhood, and many laity, consecrated the finished BEAUTIFUL new church of Our Lady's Nativity, in the Womens' Monastery of St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco, near Yehorivka, Odessa region, Ukraine. The festive dinner, included over 70 participants.
There are several photos here.
See: http://sinod.ruschurchabroad.org
under date: "18/4/2010".......on the front page of our official ROCA church website.......
MNOGAYA LETA! MANY YEARS! to Mother Abbess Alexandra and her dear sisters and their helpers!....and to all who helped to make this new church possible!
Note: This is the monastic sisterhood, which was originally in Ishim, Siberia, but when the betrayal was underway, they fled for refuge to Odessa, to be under the protection of the sole ROCOR bishop (Met. Agafangel), to reject that false, 'union'.
Here are photos, of the entire history of the building of this convent church, with consecration photos.......... http://sinod.ruschurchabroad.org/nunnery-egorovka.htm
_________________________________________
Editorial
Regarding the Difference Between
the 0fficial New Calendar State-Greek Church
and the 0fficial-Kremlin Controlled
Sergianist -Russian Pseudo-Church [MP]
and
Regarding the Use of Clerical Titles with Apostates
There are a number of parallels, but also important differences in the situations of the so-called 'dissident' or True-Orthodox churches, the Greek Old Calendarist and the anti-MP Russian churches, regarding their relationships with their respective 'state churches'.
For one point, you and I and other ROCOR refugees from that 'union' with the MP, are not 'extremist traditionalists', as some might label us. That label, no doubt DOES fit many of the ever-warring Greek Old Calendarists, who are mostly constantly anathematizing each other, in addition to condemning worldly-Orthodoxy in general. Thus, we, coming from the Russian-diaspora have the right and the duty, to speak simply, the truth, about our RUSSIAN! church orbit, in which the MP has never been our 'Mother Church'. The MP is not a valid real Orthodox patriarchate or THE Russian Church!!! And, it is not the continuation of Holy Confessor Patriarch Tikhon (Belavin's) Patriarcate!
It's current 'clergy' are thus bogus/pretend clergy. They have no right to steal/ursurp Orthodox clerical titles, nor to OUR calling them by such titles. The MP is outside of The Universal Orthodox Church.
But, with all Greek Old Calendarists, the New Calendar State Church of Greece, is (or WAS), their Mother Church! Such could also be said about the state churches of Bulgaria and Romania, I suppose-(?)
That national Greek church, formed after the Greek Revolution from the Turks, was originally, a fully/genuine local Orthodox church body. The communists did not create it, as they did with their Moscow Patriarchy which is a creation of Joseph Stalin in 1943.
The official stance of the Synod In Resistance, about their Mother Greek-State Church is: That state church, has fallen into SOME heresy,....from which, it MIGHT in the future recover, etc., etc., etc., but that it still does have 'grace'. (i.e. the so-called 'Resistance' or as their critics label them, their 'Cyprianite Ecclesiology'). That stance, has zero to do with our diaspora-Russian ROCA's position, regarding the KGB run, Moscow Patriarchy.
WE, therefore, who are in ROCA, CANNOT take such a kindly view of the MP and it's minions, as CAN SIR towards their State Greek Church. Nor can we, reverently call the MP clergy, by honorable Orthodox titles.
These are our Russian realities with the MP. Our brothers in the Synod In Resistance, have a different relationship, regarding this issue.
Just my personal observations.......
Reader Daniel Everiss
Holy Fire Comes To Imprisoned Patriarch
Guest_2 is asking for prayers for Jerusalem Patriarch Ireneos who has been imprisoned since February 2008. Through the Google translation it appears that the Holy Fire came to him at his cell and N0T to the pseudo-patriarch Theofilos who supplanted him.
http://www.gopoj.org/
And this is confirmed by the Patriarch's Secretary:
Re: Holy Fire at Pat. I's cell
And this is confirmed by the Patriarch's Secretary:
Re: Holy Fire at Pat. I's cell
| From: | |
| Sent: | Sat 4/17/10 4:50 PM |
| To: | Joanna Higginbotham (joannahigginbotham@live.com) |
My Dear Joanna,
Truly He is Risen!!!
It is true that the Holy Fire FIRST went to his Beatitude, Irenaeos I, at his cell [apartment] and then went to the people in a huge spiral !! It was a surprise to his Holiness because he was not expecting the Holy Fire. Of course, this shows who the true Patriarch of Jerusalem is!!
God bless you Joanna,
Fr. John
Secretary pro-tem to his Holiness IRENAEOS I, PATRIARCH of JERUSALEM and of all PALESTINE.
A Note From Reader Roman
written to Reader Daniel and shared here:
Tchtets Daniil!
I've been busy through the last days, so I couldn't properly reply to your message.
Firstly, I would say what a blessed and nice life you have there in the wilderness!!! It's exactly what I'm looking for! Rural area, no city, no noisy... I live in Brazil, Sao Paulo, a huge megalopolis with over 17 million inhabitants... the traffic is absolutely crazy and insane (and it makes us alike as well!!)
I've noticed when reading this blog that some points should be clarified, so that justice be upon those who actually deserve it. It must be aknowledged that I have not taken any pictures nor have I filmed any services at the Dormition Cathedral in Sofia, since I have not been there for Pascha!! Actually all the pictures and videos are hosted at a profile owned by a member of the Old Calendar Orthodox Church of Bulgaria and were taken/filmed by them!!! One may check it out in their's official website here: http://bulgarian-orthodox-church.org/news.htm So I must have NO credit, whether for those videos or those pictures, useless I am.
About my name, my Orthodox name with which I was christened is Roman (in honor of St. Roman, the Sweet-singer). My civil name is Gustavo Yonemura Ramirez (half Japanese, half Spanish-Argentinian) ;-)
Asking for your prayers, I joyfully greet you
INDEED, CHRIST IS RISEN!!!
Your useless servant,
Roman, The Sinner
Firstly, I would say what a blessed and nice life you have there in the wilderness!!! It's exactly what I'm looking for! Rural area, no city, no noisy... I live in Brazil, Sao Paulo, a huge megalopolis with over 17 million inhabitants... the traffic is absolutely crazy and insane (and it makes us alike as well!!)
I've noticed when reading this blog that some points should be clarified, so that justice be upon those who actually deserve it. It must be aknowledged that I have not taken any pictures nor have I filmed any services at the Dormition Cathedral in Sofia, since I have not been there for Pascha!! Actually all the pictures and videos are hosted at a profile owned by a member of the Old Calendar Orthodox Church of Bulgaria and were taken/filmed by them!!! One may check it out in their's official website here: http://bulgarian-orthodox-church.org/news.htm So I must have NO credit, whether for those videos or those pictures, useless I am.
About my name, my Orthodox name with which I was christened is Roman (in honor of St. Roman, the Sweet-singer). My civil name is Gustavo Yonemura Ramirez (half Japanese, half Spanish-Argentinian) ;-)
Asking for your prayers, I joyfully greet you
INDEED, CHRIST IS RISEN!!!
Your useless servant,
Roman, The Sinner