Somebody was asking just where and when any "commission" had been set up already
for discussion of rapprochement.  I found this in the October Epistle of the
Sobor, 2000:

     < Taking into consideration all the above, the Hierarchal Council of the
     < Russian Church Abroad establishes a constantly active commission at the
     < Synod for questions concerning unification of the Russian Church.

Does anyone know if
a) this commission is the same one that will also meet jointly, or whether it is
different?
b) Whether our "separate" commission has been appointed yet?

If it is the same commission as appointed in 2000, no one should be surprised if
it has already met.  If it's not the same, does anyone know if it has met yet?

--DD

I just came across this homily by St. Metr. Philaret, of Moscow.  St. Philaret
was revered by almost everybody in his own time; both Staretz Amvrosy of Optina
and Staretz Makary spoke highly of him and respected him.  Staretz Amvrosy
called him a "great man and said, "...seeing how the reposed Fr. [Staretz]
Makary piously respected this hierarch -- even in his absence -- I have always
understood him favorably, accounting him to be a man who is wise -- most wise." 
(from the letters of Staretz Amvrosy)

--Dimitra
________________________________________________________________________________\
___________________

Union of Churches
St. Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow

'At the beginning of the Divine Liturgy, between the first prayerful petitions
to God the Lord, the Orthodox Church pronounces the following:

"For the peace of the whole world, for the welfare of the holy churches of God,
and for the union of all, let us pray to the Lord."

Hearing this, some, filling their heart with love, peaceableness and tolerance,
pray not only for "for the welfare and the union," that is for the preservation
in unity of "the holy churches of God" Orthodox, particular, comparing the
Universal Church, such as those of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch,
Jerusalem, Russia, but for the reunion of churches which fell away from
Orthodoxy, such as the Roman and Armenian.

But some, maintaining a firm zeal about Orthodoxy pray only for "the union of
the holy churches of God" which are Orthodox.

Who would not respect a zeal for Orthodoxy? Who does not recognize the
worthiness of all-encompassing love? Which of the two meanings of the prayer
mentioned above is one to embrace and unite with the prayer of the Orthodox
Church? Or better yet, which of the two meanings is primary one, taught to us by
the Orthodox Church itself with the words of its established ritual?

Does the Orthodox Church correctly pray only for the Orthodox churches? Teaching
us by her prayers to reach out with our love to the edges of "the whole world,"
does it limit its boundaries of love when it comes to churches? Does it not want
the salvation of the heterodox churches through their return and their union
with the Orthodox Church?

How does the Orthodox Church formulate her prayer for the union of churches?
"For the peace of the whole world, and for the welfare of the holy churches of
God, and for the union of all, let us pray to the Lord." If the prayer was to
have a limited meaning only for Orthodox churches, then it would have been
proper to phrase the words as follows: "For the welfare and the union of all
God's holy churches let us pray to the Lord." But that is not the case and the
prayer is divided into two parts:

"for the welfare of the holy churches of God," and
"and for the union of all."
This prayer is offered always, both in time of peace and in time of discord for
the Church. Therefore the first part of the prayer has the following meaning:
"for the welfare," that is for the peace and unity of the Orthodox "holy
churches of God" so that the welfare already granted to them would be preserved
where it exists and where there is something in some kind of discord, then it
should be restored anew by God's grace. By the same token the second part of the
prayer should be understood to be "for the union" of churches that it may be
preserved where it exists, and be restored where it does not.'



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to Theology-Ecclesiology on the Holy Trinity Cathedral home page.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you have any questions or comments please contact us.

Modified 4/1/99- webmaster@...

Fr. Boldewskul has kindly answered this question on the orthodox-synod list.

--DD

On 3 Jun 2004 10:25:52 -0000, orthodox-rocor@yahoogroups.com wrote:
  Somebody was asking just where and when any "commission" had been set up
already for discussion of rapprochement.  I found this in the October Epistle of
the Sobor, 2000:

       < Taking into consideration all the above, the Hierarchal Council of the
       < Russian Church Abroad establishes a constantly active commission at the
       < Synod for questions concerning unification of the Russian Church.

  Does anyone know if
  a) this commission is the same one that will also meet jointly, or whether it
is different?
  b) Whether our "separate" commission has been appointed yet?

  If it is the same commission as appointed in 2000, no one should be surprised
if it has already met.  If it's not the same, does anyone know if it has met
yet?

  --DD

2004.05.31 Guardian:
Tsar Vladimir's bell rings out to repair Stalin's destruction

Nick Paton Walsh in Moscow
Monday May 31, 2004
The Guardian

The largest church bell in Russia rang yesterday in the sacred
Orthodox town of Sergei Possad for the first time since it was torn
down from its tower during a Stalinist purge against religion in 1930.

  The huge Tsar Bell, which is 4.55 metres high and weighs 72 tons,
was hoisted into the tower of the Trinity St Sergius monastery in
April after being blessed by Patriarch Alexei II, the head of the
Russian Orthodox faith.

  It rang for the first time for 5,000 worshippers yesterday to
celebrate the Russian Orthodox holiday of Holy Trinity at the
monastery, one of the holiest sites in Russia, some 35 miles north
east of Moscow, Interfax reported.

  The Tsar Bell is a slightly lighter replacement, made last year, for
the 1748 original. It is decorated with iconic religious figures and
an inscription saying it was made during the rule of Vladimir Putin.

  The bell was cast at a shipyard in the president's home town of St
Petersburg and slowly hauled to the monastery. Two other smaller
bells were put in place at the monastery in 2002, both also bearing
the president's name, in deference to a centuries old tradition when
the tsar's name was engraved on the bell.

  Mr Putin's administration has been criticised for its authoritarian
tsarist nature, and the president has actively encouraged the
Orthodox religion, embracing a national anthem which deems Russia
a "holy land" that is "protected by God" yet uses the same tune as
the old atheist Soviet anthem.

  The Orthodox Church's influence has bloomed in recent years. The
Russian branch of the church is nearing an agreement with its foreign
cousin that would further increase its reach and congregation.

  The original bell was one of 40 destroyed at the monastery during
Stalin's campaign to enforce atheism on Russia. The Tsar Bell has a
chequered history: another version, made in 1735, was damaged in a
fire. It hence never rang and is now on show at the Kremlin.

  Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004

2004.05.30 AP:
Massive Russian church bell rings for first time

Moscow-AP -- A colossal church bell is pealing for the first time
from its perch at one of Russia's holiest sites.
The 79-ton Czar Bell rang out over thousands of faithful gathered
today at the Trinity St. Sergius monastery northeast of Moscow.

It's modeled after one made in 1748 and destroyed during Joseph
Stalin's campaign against religion in the 1930s.

The 15-foot-high bell was cast at a shipyard in St. Petersburg and
hauled to the Russian Orthodox monastery on a special truck.

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 brought a strong revival in
the Russian Orthodox church.

Copyright 2004 Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Christ is in our midst!

Now this is something that needs to be said! I endorse the
view of this article. It's also something, btw, that the
Russian Church (MP) needs to think about and bear in mind
as well.

> Let Orthodoxy stand up and be counted
>
>   A self-assured, traditional and successful Orthodox
> Greek Church (like
> the one that Anastasios has set up in Albania, for
> instance) should not be
> afraidof competition as the Greek state-run universities
> are
>
>   MARK DRAGOUMIS
>
> HERE is a question: How can Prince Charles, heir to the
> British throne and
> future Defender of the Faith openly express his
> predilection for Orthodoxy
> and seek inner peace every now and then on Greece's Holy
> Mountain Mt Athos?
>
>   The answer - as with so many things British - may lie
> in the fact that
> while the concept of "defender" is unambiguous and as
> permanent as the
> British monarchy itself, the notion of "faith" is more
> flexible. Henry the
> VIII was the one to be given the title Defender of the
> Faith by the pope
> himself in recognition for his sturdy defence of Roman
> Catholicism during
> the early part of his reign. The title was rescinded by
> Rome when Henry
> VIII created the Protestant Church of England and was
> later restored to him
> by a Protestant parliament. So which faith Prince Charles
> will eventually
> be defending is not written in stone. It could very well
> be his own.
>
>   Charles is not alone in being attracted by Orthodoxy (a
> Greek word
> meaning "correct belief"). After a few centuries of
> Protestant
> indoctrination that has personalised belief and made
> Christianity short on
> ritual and strong on message attuned to social change, a
> certain number
> amongst its faithful have found themselves longing for
> more traditional, if
> not more secure, religious moorings. This happens in the
> US and now also in
> Britain. One of Orthodoxy's most eminent converts is of
> course John
> Tavener, the composer, whose music lifts you up to
> Paradise and aptly
> conveys the infinite boredom of living there for all
> eternity amongst the
> righteous.
>
>   Conventional wisdom has it that the Orthodox Church is
> hopelessly
> antiquated, inward looking, rigid and obsolete in its
> absurd dogmatism that
> has not, however, managed to shield it from the
> quarrelsome and
> grudge-bearing attitudes that have always plagued those
> human institutions
> which remain unchanged for eons. Conventional wisdom,
> however,
> underestimates the attractiveness of dogma.
>
>   A recent book, namely The Human Story: A New History of
> Mankind's
> Evolution by Robin Dunbar, points out the well-known fact
> that we share
> 98.5 percent of our DNA with chimpanzees. Dunbar also
> reminds us that our
> virtually only real distinguishing feature (contained in
> the residual 1.5
> percent of our DNA?) is our knowledge of impending death
> that has given
> rise to religious beliefs since the dawn of humanity. The
> need to believe
> in an afterlife, to prepare for it and be suitably
> rewarded having done so,
> is much more than an ordinary cost-benefit calculation.
> It requires the
> occasional shock and awe (no relation) of brief
> encounters with the deity
> either on holy mountains or by participating in the right
> rites. In order
> to create the proper genuflecting feeling of gratitude,
> humility and hope
> of redemption - usually referred to as spirituality - a
> number of
> propitious conditions must be created. Orthodoxy's mix of
> mesmerising
> Byzantine chants and the glitter of gold-trimmed
> sacerdotal vestments with
> all the paraphernalia that such pomp and circumstance
> require, impresses
> people. So the conservatism of the Orthodox Church is no
> deterrent for
> those seeking to approach God through their emotions.
> Quite the contrary.
> In the hope that this will not sound too impious, the
> same applies mutatis
> mutandis to the Communist parties. Those that transformed
> themselves, that
> "modernised" and "adapted to a changing world" were
> engulfed within loose,
> inchoate political formations that retained nothing of
> the original Marxist
> orthodoxy. Those that stuck it out like the Greek one,
> soldier on regardless...
>
>   What is indeed obsolete beyond words in Greece is to
> have coopted the
> church into the government (or was it the other way
> round?). Turning
> priests into civil servants responsible for catering to
> the religious needs
> of believers is absurd. Even more absurd is to mandate
> the minister of
> education and religious affairs (no other EU country has
> such a ministry)
> to sort out the differences between the Greek Church in
> Athens and the
> Ecumenical Patriarch in Istanbul. Mrs Yiannakou is such
> an intelligent,
> decisive and knowledgeable person that it is a waste of
> her time and her
> talents to burden her with such conflict-resolution
> duties. What is needed
> is - to use a barbaric but accurate word -
> "disintermediation". Not
> necessarily between God and his vicars on earth, as the
> Protestants have
> done, but at least between the priesthood in Athens and
> the patriarch, a
> hierarch whose international standing, not least with the
> British monarchy,
> should be preserved.
>
>   As for what should be done in Greece, it is worth
> remembering that there
> is a Greek word that has been allowed to fall into disuse
> of late. It is
> called anexithriskia (religious tolerance or, in modern
> terms, the
> constitutional protection of all faiths). A modern
> version of it would
> entail freedom to proselytise (still an offence in
> Greece), freedom to
> worship, no interference by the state in the religious
> life and lawful
> religious practices of its citizens and no favours to any
> of the approved
> faiths in the realm. A separation of church and state
> would not only save
> Mrs Yiannakou trips to Istanbul but would also mean that
> the Holy Synod
> would, for once, have to face some competition in Greece.
> And why not? If
> Orthodoxy is winning converts in Britain (where there are
> now 129 Orthodox
> parishes) without any help from the authorities why
> should it fear rivals
> in Greece as long as it stands on its own two feet? A
> self-assured,
> traditional and successful Orthodox Greek Church (like
> the one that
> Anastasios has set up in Albania, for instance) should
> not be afraid of
> competition as the Greek state-run universities are. The
> latter, after all,
> are painfully aware of how intellectually challenged they
> have become, to
> use a modern euphemism.
>
>   There is one issue outstanding between the Holy Synod
> in Athens and the
> patriarchate in Istanbul that has not been mentioned
> here. Patriarch
> Vartholomeos blessed Sakis Rouvas before his appearance
> at the recently
> held Eurovision Song Contest in Istanbul. His Holiness
> the Metropolitan of
> Kalavryta, Amvrosios, on the other hand, has been
> vituperating on TV
> against the "porn lyrics" of "Shake it". The only reason
> that this issue
> was not mentioned in this column is that yours truly
> liked the song and
> would thus prefer not to have to utter a biased opinion
> in taking sides in
> this theological dispute.
>
>   ATHENS NEWS , 28/05/2004, page: A99 Article code:
> C13068A996
------------------------------
Forwarded by Rd. Constantine

=====
======================================================
    +    Reader Constantine Wright
IC|XC      http://constans_wright.tripod.com
+--+--+ Traditional Orthodox Christian
NI|KA      http://www.new-ostrog.org/paper1.html
    +    Member of St. Nicholas Orthodox Church of
         the Patriarchate of Jerusalem in the Americas
======================================================

Here is a letter of Protopresbyter Valentin Sventitsky, a prominent
pastor-martyr of the Russian Orthodox Church of the XX century, that he sent
to Metropolitan Sergiy (Stragorodsky) in 1931.

The 1927 Declaration of Metropolitan Sergiy caused his open dissent and he
broke the communion with him.
In 1928 o. Valentin was arrested for the 2nd time and was sent to Siberia.
There in exile he wrote his famous "Dialogs" about Church and Spiritual
life. There, in exile o. Valentin had suffered his decision to repent about
his separation and to return to the communion with Metropolitan Sergiy.
He wrote the letter to Metropolitan Sergiy as well as to his spiritual
children.

I wish all today's opponents, continuing to hamper the ongoing process of
healing the division
in  the Russian Orthodox Church, healing that has been bequeathed by
Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky) and St.John (Maksimovich) and is desired by
the majority of the faithful in ROCA, hearken attentively to the words of
this prominent Russian Orthodox martyr, o. Valentin, and, instead of
undermining the unity of the Church, do what he did.
May Lord humble their hearts and open their minds to help them to see, hear,
understand and do. Amin
r.B. Aleksiy (Lester)

" Your Eminence, the Most gracious Archipastor and Father. I am diying.  My
conscience have already been disturbed for a long time, that I have badly
sinned before Holy Church, and now facing death it has become quite obvious
to me.

I beg you to forgive my sin and to reunite me with the Holy Orthodox Church.
I bring a repentance that I have conceived pride to not recognize you,
contrary to the Holy Canons, as the lawful First Bishop; having put my
personal reason and personal feeling  higher than the Councilar (Sobornyi)
reason of the Church, I have dared to not obey the Holy Canons. My fault is
especially terrible because I have involved many human souls into this error
(fallacy, delusion). I do not need anything: neither freedom, nor changes of
external circumstances for now I am waiting for my departure, but, for the
sake of Christ, please accept my repentance and allow me to die in the union
with the Holy Orthodox Church.

11/IX - 1931 Valentine Sventsitsky

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear brethren,


Researching the lives of St. Barlaam, St. Joasaph and St. Abenner, Orthodox
Christians saints of India who lived in the 4th. century, I have found many
times the information that modern scholarship regard their lives as "legendary",
a "Christianized version" of Buddha's biography, and some arguments are
presented in support of this opinion. It is also common to find texts denying
that St. John Damascene has wrote the "Life of Sts. Barlaam and Joasaph" that is
usually published under his name.

Does anyone know a good and scholarly study regarding these modern objections
from an Orthodox point of view?


Thanks in advance.


In Christ,
Felipe Ortiz
unworthy cathecumen
São Paulo, Brazil


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I've received word that Hieromonk Averky at the Jordanville Monastery
is near death. Is this true? The Father Averky that I am aware of is
40-ish. Is this the same monk? What is his malady?

Al

"Researching the lives of St. Barlaam, St. Joasaph and
St. Abenner, Orthodox Christians saints of India who
lived in the 4th. century, I have found many times the
information that modern scholarship regard their lives
as "legendary", a "Christianized version" of Buddha's
biography, and some arguments are presented in support
of this opinion. It is also common to find texts
denying that St. John Damascene has wrote the "Life of
Sts. Barlaam and Joasaph" that is usually published
under his name. Does anyone know a good and scholarly
study regarding these modern objections from an
Orthodox point of view?"

You will find some limited comments at:

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/phronema/rose_mind1.aspx

Here is an old post of mine on this subject:

The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church makes
the amazing claim:

"The name `Josaphat' appears to be a corruption of
`Bodisatva'"

Now, talk about imaginative.... other than the common
use of the vowel "o", the sound "sa" and the "t" sound
-- nothing.  One Could just as easily draw a parallal
between Bodisatva, and the Name "Bud Smith".

As for the word "Balavariani" -- this is the first
time I've seen this one sited in this discussion.
What is your source for what you say here?

>The juicy stuff is in parts III-V:

[snip]

>[this parallels the Buddhist story precisely-- the
prince is foretold to
>not succeed his father in kingship in exchange for
religion. Thus, the
>king surrounds his son with "goodness" to isolate him
from real
>life]

This is a part of the story which is similiar --
however, similarities could also be drawn between the
nativity of Christ, or the life of the Great Martyr
Catherine.

There are also some striking differences between the
account of Ss. Josaphat and Barlaam and the life of
Buddha -- not the least of which is that the former
ends in Martyrdom.

There are no direct verbal parallels to speak of, so
we can not point to evidence of direct literary
dependancy.  At the most, one might argue that the
account of Ss. Josaphat and Barlaam that St. John of
Damascus recounts may have been influenced by the
account of Buddha's life -- but to say anything beyond
that, is pure speculation, completely lacking in the
faintest hints of evidence.

Even if we accept this as a fact -- which it is not --
to claim that Ss. Josaphat and Barlaam are therefore
fictional, or that their lives are a Christianized
version of the life of the Buddha is unsupportable.

>[So, the young prince sees sickness, age, and death,
like the
>story of Buddha which leads him on a spiritual
journey]

And how many of the lives of the saints do we find
this same thing in?

Quite a few.



=====
*****************************************************************
Fr. John Whiteford
St. Jonah Orthodox Church
Parish Home Page:           http://www.saintjonah.org/
Parish Discussion Group:   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saintjonah/
ROCOR Discussion Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox-rocor/

Father Averky from Jordanville, formerly from Hawaii is near death,  I spoke
to him on the phone yesterday (about 18 hours ago) he believes that it is
only a matter of time before he reposes.  This Father Averky is a convert of
30+ years.  So I thought he was over 50 years old.

He has been suffering from diabetes, peritonitis, and gangrene to both legs
amongst numerous other problems.  He has been in health care for a few weeks
at

Contact info:
Father Averky (Moreno)
Rm 510
Bassett Healthcare
One Atwell Rd.
Cooperstown, NY 13326


Irene


----- Original Message -----
From: "aggreen1" <aggreen1@...>
To: <orthodox-rocor@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 10:17 PM
Subject: [orthodox-rocor] Hieromok Averky


I've received word that Hieromonk Averky at the Jordanville Monastery
is near death. Is this true? The Father Averky that I am aware of is
40-ish. Is this the same monk? What is his malady?

Al





Posts to this list need to be signed with your full (and real) name.

Yahoo! Groups Links






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.701 / Virus Database: 458 - Release Date: 7/06/04

Ps I forgot to add  Ph: 1-607-547-3456 (ask for Rm. 510, Father Averky, and
you may have to add "Moreno" because that's how they have him listed)

Father said something about the machines have been turned off now,  I
haven't heard anything further.

irene
----- Original Message -----
From: "Caryn Boyd" <isis_0801@...>
To: <orthodox-rocor@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: [orthodox-rocor] Hieromok Averky


Father Averky from Jordanville, formerly from Hawaii is near death,  I spoke
to him on the phone yesterday (about 18 hours ago) he believes that it is
only a matter of time before he reposes.  This Father Averky is a convert of
30+ years.  So I thought he was over 50 years old.

He has been suffering from diabetes, peritonitis, and gangrene to both legs
amongst numerous other problems.  He has been in health care for a few weeks
at

Contact info:
Father Averky (Moreno)
Rm 510
Bassett Healthcare
One Atwell Rd.
Cooperstown, NY 13326


Irene





---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.701 / Virus Database: 458 - Release Date: 7/06/04

> This Father Averky is a convert of
> 30+ years.  So I thought he was over 50 years old.

JRS: I seem to recall that he said he was 38 ca. 1980. If so, that
would make him about 61-62 by now.

He has been ill for some years.

In Christ
Fr. John R. Shaw

See:

http://inbn.net/

See also, for more:

http://www.saintjonah.org/multimedia.htm

=====
*****************************************************************
Fr. John Whiteford
St. Jonah Orthodox Church
Parish Home Page:           http://www.saintjonah.org/
Parish Discussion Group:   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saintjonah/
ROCOR Discussion Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox-rocor/

At 06:31 PM 6/8/2004, you wrote:

>Ps I forgot to add  Ph: 1-607-547-3456 (ask for Rm. 510, Father Averky, and
>you may have to add "Moreno" because that's how they have him listed)

Actually, it's room 512, and he's listed as "John Moreno."

Fr. Anthony


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Fr. Anthony Nelson                    * Emergency Cell Phone Email:
St. Benedict Russian Orthodox Church  * Up to 160 characters maximum
Oklahoma City, OK USA 405-672-1441    * total allowed including return
mailto:fr.anthony@...        * address and Subject headers.
http://www.orthodox.org/stbenedict/   * mailto:fra-mobile@...

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Felipe,
   To my knowledge there has not been a good scholarly response to this idea
about the Lives of Ss Barlaam and Joasaph from an Orthodox perspective, at
least not in English. It does seem like a good idea for someone to do it though.
Actually, I was rather disappointed that almost nothing was said about it in
the introduction to the edition of the story published by the Institute for
Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies.
   On the question of St John's authorship, while Frederick Chase, in the
introduction to his translation of St John's 'Fount of Knowledge', adheres to
the
'christianized version of the story of Buddha' theory, he does say the
following:

The legend [sic] in its present form was certainly composed at the Monastery
of St Sabbas by a monk named John. It cannot be proved that this John was or
was not the Damascene, so there is no reason why we should not continue to
consider the Damascene as the author of this edifying christianized version of
the
story of Buddha. (xxv)

Seems like a good, common sense opinion to me.

forgive me,
aaron


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The argument that this story is a Christianized story
of the Buddha might have some weight if there were
significant parallels between the two stories, but
there are only a few superficial elements that one can
find in lives of the saints as well.

There is no manuscript evidence or verbal parallels
between Buddhist texts and the text in question.  Any
connection is based purely on speculation and
conjecture.

-Fr. John Whiteford



--- aaronandbrighid@... wrote:
> Dear Felipe,
>   To my knowledge there has not been a good
> scholarly response to this idea
> about the Lives of Ss Barlaam and Joasaph from an
> Orthodox perspective, at
> least not in English. It does seem like a good idea
> for someone to do it though.
> Actually, I was rather disappointed that almost
> nothing was said about it in
> the introduction to the edition of the story
> published by the Institute for
> Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies.
>   On the question of St John's authorship, while
> Frederick Chase, in the
> introduction to his translation of St John's 'Fount
> of Knowledge', adheres to the
> 'christianized version of the story of Buddha'
> theory, he does say the
> following:
>
> The legend [sic] in its present form was certainly
> composed at the Monastery
> of St Sabbas by a monk named John. It cannot be
> proved that this John was or
> was not the Damascene, so there is no reason why we
> should not continue to
> consider the Damascene as the author of this
> edifying christianized version of the
> story of Buddha. (xxv)
>
> Seems like a good, common sense opinion to me.
>
> forgive me,
> aaron
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~-->
> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion
> Toolbar.
> Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
>
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/m.VolB/TM
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
> Posts to this list need to be signed with your full
> (and real) name.
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>      orthodox-rocor-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>


=====
*****************************************************************
Fr. John Whiteford
St. Jonah Orthodox Church
Parish Home Page:           http://www.saintjonah.org/
Parish Discussion Group:   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saintjonah/
ROCOR Discussion Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox-rocor/

I posted this on another list and got no comment. Do3es anyone on
this list have further insight from The Church's perspective?

Al
_________________________

This is an interesting web site...a brief history of Masonry in
Russia:
http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/freemasonry/russianfm.html

The site says that Tsar Nicholas II was a Mason! "An independent
lodge of the so-called Martiniste Rite was formed among the entourage
of Czar (sic) Nicholas II under the name of 'The Cross and the Star'.
Nicholas was said to have been a member of this lodge, which
suspended its work in 1916. Other Martiniste lodges
opened ... 'Apollonius' in St Petersburg (1910), 'St John' in Moscow
(1911), 'St Andrew' in Kiev (1912). A very curious lodge existed
among the Russian Navy League, calling themselves 'Philaletes';
beside philanthropic and intellectual work, it pursued a political
aim in opposition to that of the Grand Orient lodges, namely the
support of the monarchy of Nicholas II. Probably this movement arose
in connection with the Paris branch of the Swiss Order of the
Chevaliers 'Philaletes' which established two lodges in St
Petersburg: 'The Pyramid of the North' and 'The Star of the North'.
Both pursued studies of mysticism and symbolism." (Boris Telepneff,
An Outline of the History of Russian Freemasonry, cited by Angel.)"

_____________________________

RUSSIAN FREEMASONRY: A NEW DAWN

This paper was delivered by V.W. Bro. Richard L. Rhoda, P.G.J.D., and
Senior Warden of the Maine Lodge of Research at its annual meeting
held at Orient Lodge No. 15 on June 29, 1996. RUSSIAN FREEMASONRY: A
NEW DAWN

AN OVERVIEW FROM 1731 TO 1996

http://members.aol.com/houltonme/rus.htm

_____________________________

Here's the home page of the Grand Lodge of Russia:

http://www.freemasonry.ru/index_e.html

_____________________________

Freemasonry In Russia

http://www.freemason.org/cfo/julyaugust2000/russia.htm

_____________________________

CATHERINE THE GREAT AND HER RELATIONS WITH THE FREEMASONS

http://members.aol.com/forumlead/History/Freemasonry-catherine.htm

_____________________________

FREEMASONRY IN RUSSIA AND POLAND AUTHORISED TRANSLATION REVISED BY
THE AUTHOR Dr. ERNEST FRIEDRICHS MASTER AT THE MILITARY SCHOOL
GROSSLICHTERFELDE

Published by the International Office for Masonic Intercourse BERNE
(Switzerland) Printed by Büchler & Co
1908

http://www.freemasonry.ru/Publications/FiRaP.htm

_____________________________

Another Russian Masonic web site: Freemasonry and Freemasons: Three
Centuries in Russia

http://www.masonry.ru/index.eng.htm
_____________________________

The Russian Masonic Hymn

"How Glorious Is Our Lord in Zion"

A Russian spiritual (non-church) hymn, one of the masterpieces by the
Russian genius composer Dimitry Stepanovich Bortnyansky (1751-1825),
who created it basing on traditional folk and church melodies.
Bortnyansky was a faithful Freemason and author of many religious and
Masonic musical works.

For a considerable period of time served as the national anthem of
the Russian Empire, until it was replaced by "Bozhe Czarya Hrany",
actually the translation of the British anthem "God save the King"
sung to the melody of the same.

"How Glorious Is Our Lord:" has always inspired various audiences by
its crystal clarity and spiritual might. The melody is supposed to be
created between 1790 and 1801. It was included into the ceremony of
military cadets' and officers' promotion to ranks, also played after
a cannon volley and an order "To the prayer! Hats off!".

Since 1856 by the October of 1917 the 37 bells of the main tower of
Moscow Kremlin tolled Bortnyansy's hymn at 3 p.m. and at 9 p.m. (at
noon and at 6 p.m. they tolled the Guard's "Preobrazhensky March").
Since the August of 1918 these melodies were replaced by "The
International" and the bolshevick mourning song "You Have Fallen
Victims".

Traditionaly, "How Glorious Is Our Lord..." is considered the anthem
of Russian Freemasonry, for originally it was sung at every Masonic
meeting in this country during the Feast of Brotherly Love. This
tradition is being nowadays revived, and this inspiring hymn was, in
particular, played at the installation of the Grand Master of the GLR
in 1995 and at the consequitive Annual Assemblies of GLR.

The lyrics was composed by Gavrila Romanovich Derzhavin (1743-1816),
one of the greatest poets in the history of Russia, one of the
founding fathers of Russian secular literature and Russian
Classicism, a prominent Freemason and the author of many Masonic
hymns and songs, as well as of numerous philosophic and symbolic
essays.

How glorious is Our Lord in Zion,
Our tongue cannot tell.
Glorious is He on His Heavenly Throne,
Great is He in epics of the Earth.
Everywhere, Oh Lord, Thou art glorious,
And equal in Thy glory day or night.
Thy Lamb of Golden Fleece Embodies Thee for us.
We praise Thee With psalter of ten strings.
Oh receive our thanksgiving Like fragrant incense.

Thou illuminest mortals with the Sun.
Thou lovest us, Oh Lord, as Thy offsprings.
Thou satiatest us with meals
And foundest us the City in Zion.
Thou visitest sinners, Oh Lord,
And feedest them with Thy Holy flesh.

Oh Lord, into Thy abode May our voices enter,
And may our affections
Ascend to Thee, like morning dews!
We shall erect Thy altar in our hearts,
Thee, Oh Lord, we sing praise!

It is interesting to note the date of President
Reagan's Letter.  Exactly 16 years to the day prior to
9-11-01.  That may or may not be of any significance,
but in any case, the letter is.

Formated version:
http://www.saintjonah.org/reagan.htm

TELEGRAM OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA TO THE COUNCIL OF BISHOPS OF THE RUSSIAN
ORTHODOX CHURCH OUTSIDE OF RUSSIA

           I am honored to have this opportunity to
extend warm greetings to the Council of Bishops of the
Russian Orthodox Church Abroad as you gather in
Montreal.

           You deserve the highest commendation for
your efforts in support of the return of religious and
civil freedom to the Russian people.  Your work
furthers the interests of all members of the human
family, because it is inspired by faith in the Creator
and by the desire for liberty that burns in the hearts
of every man, woman, and child on earth.

           The values you hold aid in the preservation
of your own great heritage and in the strengthening of
religious principles within each nation where your
Church is located.  In safeguarding the wondrous
beauty and timeless grandeur of the ancient faith and
culture of your motherland, you provide all mankind
with the hope that this magnificent institution will
one day be restored to its former place in the life of
the Russian nation and people.

           You have my best wishes for your meeting and
continued success in all your efforts.




             Ronald Reagan

9-11-1985


******************************************************



TELEGRAM OF THANKS TO PRESIDENT REAGAN,
EPISTLE OF THE SOBOR OF BISHOPS OF THE RUSSIAN
ORTHODOX CHURCH ABROAD


Deeply-respected Mr. President!



           The bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church
Abroad, who have come from every continent to assemble
in council, were deeply touched by your words of
greeting and ask you to accept the expression of their
gratitude.

           While we are honored by the attention you
have shown us, we value still more your grasp of the
situation of the Russian Orthodox Church and the
Russian people who have suffered since 1917 under the
yoke of atheistic communism.  Millions and millions of
martyred clergy and faithful from different social
strata appeal to our Lord, but we rarely see such
profound understanding on the part of government
authorities as we have encountered from you.

           In thanking you with all our heart, we pray
that the Lord will preserve you in good health and
strengthen you in your endeavors which have such
importance for the United States and the whole world.
May the Lord confer His blessing upon you in that
position in which He placed you in order to fulfill
His divine will.




Metropolitan Philaret


President of the Sobor of Bishops

                                                 of the
Russian Orthodox Church Abroad




    Bishop Gregory,


    Secretary, Sobor of Bishops




Orthodox Life, No. 4, 1985, p. 32f.


=====
*****************************************************************
Fr. John Whiteford
St. Jonah Orthodox Church
Parish Home Page:           http://www.saintjonah.org/
Parish Discussion Group:   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saintjonah/
ROCOR Discussion Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox-rocor/

Bless, Father,
   I hope it didn't sound like I was approving Chase's comment there at the
end that it is a 'christianized version of the story of Buddha'. I was only
pointing out his opinion on the authorship, which Felipe was also asking about.
I
think your observations about this issue are quite right. However, as it's
become the sort of thing that scholars repeat without even thinking, I think
some
qualified person should publish a refutation of this silliness.

Kissing Your Right Hand,
aaron


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------

Activists cite poor record on rights
By Stephanie Dornschneider
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published June 9, 2004

----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
Russian activists are warning of a deterioration in human rights
under President Vladimir Putin, who arrived in the United States
yesterday for the Group of Eight summit in Sea Island, Ga.
     Despite recent democratic reforms, there remained strong efforts
by the government to destroy isolated islands of democracy in Russia,
the activists told the Helsinki Commission, a U.S. agency composed of
members of Congress and the executive branch.
     "We do not see any active liberal political parties in Russia,"
Arseni Roginsky, chairman of the International Memorial Society, said
Monday. "The government was created by presidential forces and has
become even more conservative."
     Mr. Roginsky added that fundamental human rights such as freedom
of speech are limited by Russian authorities, that the Russian
parliament was fully under the control of the ruling elite, and that
independent businesses are attacked as soon as they tried to develop
a social position of their own.
     Alexei Simonov, the head of the Glasnost Defense Foundation,
criticized Russian media. He said that the number of reformist
Russian outlets is very small.
     "We have glasnost, but its field is growing smaller and smaller,"
he said, in a reference to the Russian word for "openness" and, more
specifically, to political reforms instituted under former Soviet
leader Mikhail Gorbachev.
     The reformist press in Russia consists of just 50 newspapers, all
with circulations of no more than 5,000, and four magazines with
circulations of up to 1,500.
     Mara Polyakova, the director of the Independent Council for Legal
Expertise, said that new democratic laws are being passed in Russia,
but that there are no mechanisms to implement them.
     Russian judges, for example, are supposed to be independent, but
remain subject to appointment by the executive branch, she said.
     Ludmilla Alexeeva, the president of the International Helsinki
Federation for Human Rights, said various religious groups in Russia
are under pressure.
     "The Russian Orthodox Church seems to be trying to be the same
kind of church it used to be under the czars," she said.
     The Russian Orthodox Church claims to represent 85 percent to 99
percent of the population.
     But, Mrs. Alexeeva said, only 2 percent of the population
actively practices the religion.
     The four advocates said they would continue seeking solutions and
publicly speaking about their concerns.
     Mr. Roginsky said there is a "double approach" by the United
States toward Russia at a time of threats by terrorists: First,
Russia is a "loyal partner in the struggle against terrorism," and
only secondarily, there is "something that isn't quite right with
democracy" there.




Copyright © 2004 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------

Return to the article

June 1, 2004

Interview of His Eminence Metropolitan Laurus with
Russkiy Vestnik

1. Your Eminence, it is known that you visited Russia
more than once. Now this is your first official visit
to Russia in your capacity as First Hierarch of the
Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. What are
your feelings with regard to this visit to Russia?

I was pleased and joyful that I could openly visit the
holy places. Before it was different, I had to come
quietly, venerate the holy relics and leave. Now
everything is different. I could not imagine how much
I would see and feel, how I would be a witness of such
unforgettable events. During the consecration of the
Church of the Life-Giving Trinity, built in honor of
the 1000th anniversary of the baptism of Russia, there
were a great many people, everything was performed
with great solemnity. But particularly exciting was
the participation of our delegation in the ceremony of
the laying of the foundation of the church in honor of
the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia in Butovo,
where divine liturgy was served by Patriarch Alexy II
with a host of bishops and priests.

2. Your visit is one of the first steps on the path to
the possible unification of the Churches. What meaning
could this process have for ROCOR?

Our Church Abroad waited for long years in the hope
that the time would come when we could reunite and be
together in Russia, with the Russian people, that we
would pray together, serve together. But it did not
happen. We did not live in peace, we spoke out with
accusations against each other. But recently, stronger
and stronger voices were heard within the bosom of the
Church Abroad on the need for some kind of action in
terms of dialog. The same began to occur in Russia.
And so, President V.V. Putin, during his visit to
America, passed on an invitation to us from Patriarch
Alexy II to visit Russia. Such a step required a
response. Maybe it is providential that we came to
Russia on the eve of the laying of the foundation of
an important church, dedicated to the New Martyrs and
Confessors of Russia on the grounds of the Butovo
Polygon, the site of the martyric end of a multitude
of clergymen and faithful Orthodox Christians who gave
their lives for their faith in Christ.

3. You held discussions with Patriarch Alexy II. Were
the goals set for the delegation of ROCOR achieved?
What were your impressions of your conversations with
His Holiness? What concrete steps could be taken in
the future?

Our conversations, our participation in divine
services, our acquaintance with monastery and parish
life all made a very good impression on us. We have
seen the need to continue the work of the two
committees we created. Each of them can, at their own
meetings, discuss those problems which arise over the
course of negotiations, then they will have joint
sessions for working out mutual statements. These
statements will be discussed at sessions of the Synods
and Councils. It is possible that our Church will then
convene an All-Diaspora Council. I do not exclude the
possibility that the Moscow Patriarchate will hold an
All-Russian Council. After this, if need be, a joint
All-Russian Council can be held.

http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/01newstucture/pagesen/news04/linterviewvestn\
ik.html




=====
*****************************************************************
Fr. John Whiteford
St. Jonah Orthodox Church
Parish Home Page:           http://www.saintjonah.org/
Parish Discussion Group:   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saintjonah/
ROCOR Discussion Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox-rocor/

NIZHNY NOVGOROD: May 25, 2004

The question of the unification of the Russian
Orthodox Church in Russia and the Russian Orthodox
Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR) is practically
decided. At this time the delegation of ROCOR is
traveling throughout Russia at the invitation of
Patriarch Alexy II of All Russia and President Putin.
Our brethren in the faith are acquainting the
descendants of Russian _migr_s with the holdings of
the ROC and are showing them the holy sites that
representatives of ROCOR could not visit before. In
Nizhny Novgorod, the President of the committee on
discussions on the unification of the two churches on
the ROCOR side, Archbishop Mark of Berlin and Germany,
gave an exclusive interview to Tatyana Vitebskaya,
correspondent for Izvestia.

Vladyka Mark, how do you evaluate the negotiations
being held by your delegation and Patriarch Alexy II
of All Russia?

The Church Abroad lived for 80 years with the
knowledge that it is an indissoluble part of the
Russian Church, without electing a patriarch for
itself. At the same time, we know that the ROC was
subjected to persecutions in the USSR, so we could not
come into contact with it—it was not free. The
Regulations of our church state that as soon as the
godless regime disappears, we are obligated to enter
into contact with the Church in Russia. This is what
we are now doing. We had meetings with His Holiness
the Patriarch, the members of the Synod and the
committees on the negotiations. The secretary of our
committee said that he did not expect how quickly he
would gain mutual understanding with the secretary of
the other committee.

In what way do your views correspond with those of the
ROC, and in which matters do you disagree?

Naturally, we have a great deal more that unites us:
one faith, one Lord and one cross. We diverge in
secondary, external matters: let us say, the
relationship with the state, the relationship of the
church with the heterodox. During the godless regime
in Russia, the Church had to find a way to survive.
And it did it in such a way that we could not accept
as correct. For example, it was a bitter experience
for us while speaking out in defense of the Pochaev
Lavra, which was under threat of closure, while
holding demonstrations, that bishops from Russia came
and declared that there were no persecutions of the
Church. We feel that we must issue a document which
would clarify that this path is unacceptable in the
future. When the state aims to destroy the faith, we
cannot remain silent or be servile.

Has the relationship between the state and the
Orthodox Church changed today?

At its core, it has changed. In our day, people of
faith or even those who are indifferent are not
subject to persecution as it was in the past.

But now we see many political figures who before
supported the government which you rejected as
unacceptable now standing in church. How does the
ROCOR look upon this?

Motivations can be completely different, one cannot
peer into the soul of another. We do not wish to judge
how earnestly a person attends church, we wish to
leave undisturbed that freedom which God has granted.
For us this is not important, but what is important is
that there is a chance to sow the seeds of faith. This
gives hope for the future that the Russian people will
regain their foundations. For you can and must speak
Russian normally even without believing. For example,
voskresenie ["resurrection"— the word used for
ÒSundayÓ — transl.] is a day of the week. If you call
this day of the week using this word—you are already a
Christian whether you like it or not.

What impressions did you get from your visit to
Russia?

We saw many examples of terrible ruination and at the
same time of unbelievably speedy building and
reconstruction. The representatives of our delegation
still need clarification on many points. For example,
I was in a monastery. Since I am the abbot of a
monastery myself, I asked: how are the monks
supported? I was told: they have sponsors. As an
abbot, I am dissatisfied with this, because monks must
live by the work of their own hands, they must earn
their keep. Maybe I am wrong, since I do not know the
situation in Russia today. I myself am responsible for
the monastic brethren, I stand at the [printing]
machines, I produce things and I know that this is
feeds our monastery. A priest of mine receives far
less from the diocese than from the government in the
form of social aid. And our priests truly live poorly.
But in Russia, these problems apparently don't exist
today.

In Russia there is a great deal of talk about the
administrative question of the unification of the two
branches of the church. In part, about how the
property of the ROC and the Russian Orthodox Church
Outside of Russia would be administered?

His Holiness the Patriarch more than once stated that
we must proceed from the situation as it has
developed. If there is one church, then naturally, a
church in a given city must be subjected to the local
bishop who lives in communion with all Orthodox
Christians.

That is, the complete unification of the churches is
still possible?

I think that this is only a matter of time.

Tatyana Vitebskaya, Nizhny Novgorod

http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/01newstucture/pagesen/news04/mizvestia.html


=====
*****************************************************************
Fr. John Whiteford
St. Jonah Orthodox Church
Parish Home Page:           http://www.saintjonah.org/
Parish Discussion Group:   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saintjonah/
ROCOR Discussion Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox-rocor/

Father John, the bless!

Thank you, Father John and Aaron, for your answers.

In Christ,
Felipe Ortiz


----- Original Message -----
From: <aaronandbrighid@...>
To: <orthodox-rocor@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: [orthodox-rocor] Sts. Barlaam and Joasaph (or Josaphat)


> Bless, Father,
>   I hope it didn't sound like I was approving Chase's comment there at the
> end that it is a 'christianized version of the story of Buddha'. I was
only
> pointing out his opinion on the authorship, which Felipe was also asking
about. I
> think your observations about this issue are quite right. However, as it's
> become the sort of thing that scholars repeat without even thinking, I
think some
> qualified person should publish a refutation of this silliness.
>
> Kissing Your Right Hand,
> aaron
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> Posts to this list need to be signed with your full (and real) name.
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

Dear brethren,


I am just a catechumen, new to the church, and I would like to understand
properly one of the last phrases of this interview.

Archbishop Mark of Berlin says: "If there is one church, then naturally, a
church in a given city must be subjected to the local bishop who lives in
communion with all Orthodox Christian."

I am trying to discover who is "the local bishop who lives in communion with
all (sic) Orthodox Christian". I presume that he is always the MP bishop, as
he is in communion with all churches of "World Orthodoxy", while our bishops
are in communion with Jerusalem, Serbia and three Old Calendar churches
only.

Am I misunderstanding his words, or does Archbishop Mark really mean that
all ROCOR parishes should be given to the "respective" MP bishops?

If this is true, so is Archbishop Mark eager to give the parishes under his
own rule in Germany and Great Britain to the MP Bishop Theofan of Berlin,
the MP Archbishop Longin of Düsseldorf, the MP Archbishop Anatoliy of London
and the MP Bishop Vasiliy of Oxford? And does he think that all ROCOR
bishops should do the same?

Is this absurd opinion (if this is really Archbishop Mark's opinion -- I
wish it is not) representative of our bishops' consensus?


In Christ,
Felipe Ortiz



----- Original Message -----
From: "Fr. John Whiteford" <frjohnwhiteford@...>
To: "The ROCOR Clergy" <rocorclergy@yahoogroups.com>; "The Rocor List"
<orthodox-rocor@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 9:47 PM
Subject: [orthodox-rocor] Archbishop Mark of Berlin and Germany:
"Unification of the Churches is a Matter of Time"


> NIZHNY NOVGOROD: May 25, 2004
>
> The question of the unification of the Russian
> Orthodox Church in Russia and the Russian Orthodox
> Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR) is practically
> decided. At this time the delegation of ROCOR is
> traveling throughout Russia at the invitation of
> Patriarch Alexy II of All Russia and President Putin.
> Our brethren in the faith are acquainting the
> descendants of Russian _migr_s with the holdings of
> the ROC and are showing them the holy sites that
> representatives of ROCOR could not visit before. In
> Nizhny Novgorod, the President of the committee on
> discussions on the unification of the two churches on
> the ROCOR side, Archbishop Mark of Berlin and Germany,
> gave an exclusive interview to Tatyana Vitebskaya,
> correspondent for Izvestia.
>
> Vladyka Mark, how do you evaluate the negotiations
> being held by your delegation and Patriarch Alexy II
> of All Russia?
>
> The Church Abroad lived for 80 years with the
> knowledge that it is an indissoluble part of the
> Russian Church, without electing a patriarch for
> itself. At the same time, we know that the ROC was
> subjected to persecutions in the USSR, so we could not
> come into contact with it-it was not free. The
> Regulations of our church state that as soon as the
> godless regime disappears, we are obligated to enter
> into contact with the Church in Russia. This is what
> we are now doing. We had meetings with His Holiness
> the Patriarch, the members of the Synod and the
> committees on the negotiations. The secretary of our
> committee said that he did not expect how quickly he
> would gain mutual understanding with the secretary of
> the other committee.
>
> In what way do your views correspond with those of the
> ROC, and in which matters do you disagree?
>
> Naturally, we have a great deal more that unites us:
> one faith, one Lord and one cross. We diverge in
> secondary, external matters: let us say, the
> relationship with the state, the relationship of the
> church with the heterodox. During the godless regime
> in Russia, the Church had to find a way to survive.
> And it did it in such a way that we could not accept
> as correct. For example, it was a bitter experience
> for us while speaking out in defense of the Pochaev
> Lavra, which was under threat of closure, while
> holding demonstrations, that bishops from Russia came
> and declared that there were no persecutions of the
> Church. We feel that we must issue a document which
> would clarify that this path is unacceptable in the
> future. When the state aims to destroy the faith, we
> cannot remain silent or be servile.
>
> Has the relationship between the state and the
> Orthodox Church changed today?
>
> At its core, it has changed. In our day, people of
> faith or even those who are indifferent are not
> subject to persecution as it was in the past.
>
> But now we see many political figures who before
> supported the government which you rejected as
> unacceptable now standing in church. How does the
> ROCOR look upon this?
>
> Motivations can be completely different, one cannot
> peer into the soul of another. We do not wish to judge
> how earnestly a person attends church, we wish to
> leave undisturbed that freedom which God has granted.
> For us this is not important, but what is important is
> that there is a chance to sow the seeds of faith. This
> gives hope for the future that the Russian people will
> regain their foundations. For you can and must speak
> Russian normally even without believing. For example,
> voskresenie ["resurrection"- the word used for
> ÒSundayÓ - transl.] is a day of the week. If you call
> this day of the week using this word-you are already a
> Christian whether you like it or not.
>
> What impressions did you get from your visit to
> Russia?
>
> We saw many examples of terrible ruination and at the
> same time of unbelievably speedy building and
> reconstruction. The representatives of our delegation
> still need clarification on many points. For example,
> I was in a monastery. Since I am the abbot of a
> monastery myself, I asked: how are the monks
> supported? I was told: they have sponsors. As an
> abbot, I am dissatisfied with this, because monks must
> live by the work of their own hands, they must earn
> their keep. Maybe I am wrong, since I do not know the
> situation in Russia today. I myself am responsible for
> the monastic brethren, I stand at the [printing]
> machines, I produce things and I know that this is
> feeds our monastery. A priest of mine receives far
> less from the diocese than from the government in the
> form of social aid. And our priests truly live poorly.
> But in Russia, these problems apparently don't exist
> today.
>
> In Russia there is a great deal of talk about the
> administrative question of the unification of the two
> branches of the church. In part, about how the
> property of the ROC and the Russian Orthodox Church
> Outside of Russia would be administered?
>
> His Holiness the Patriarch more than once stated that
> we must proceed from the situation as it has
> developed. If there is one church, then naturally, a
> church in a given city must be subjected to the local
> bishop who lives in communion with all Orthodox
> Christians.
>
> That is, the complete unification of the churches is
> still possible?
>
> I think that this is only a matter of time.
>
> Tatyana Vitebskaya, Nizhny Novgorod
>
>
http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/01newstucture/pagesen/news04/mizvestia.h
tml
>
>
> =====
> *****************************************************************
> Fr. John Whiteford
> St. Jonah Orthodox Church
> Parish Home Page:           http://www.saintjonah.org/
> Parish Discussion Group:   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saintjonah/
> ROCOR Discussion Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox-rocor/
>
>
>
> Posts to this list need to be signed with your full (and real) name.
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

> Archbishop Mark of Berlin says: "If there is one church, then
naturally, a
> church in a given city must be subjected to the local bishop who
lives in
> communion with all Orthodox Christian."

JRS: Yes, but in practice this is no longer so. There are often many
Orthodox bishops in the same city, even though they are in communion
with one another.

Also, "in communion" is broader than "concelebrating with", at least
for ROCOR. We are, and always have been, "in communion" with all
Orthodox Churches: it would not be possible otherwise, if we are all
parts of the mystical Body of Christ. But ROCOR has not concelebrated
with certain other Orthodox hierarchies -- without pronouncing them
heretical or outside the Church.

There is no plan to turn over ROCOR churches to the MP. However, where
there had been competing ROCOR and MP communities in Russia, some
solution to the situation, presumably, will have to be found.

In Christ
Fr. John R. Shaw

In a perfect world, that's how it's supposed to be..  "One bishop per city,
who governs all Orthodox Christians in that said city, no matter what there
ethnic background may be."  This is a canonical jurisdiction, not the mess
we have in America and Western Europe.

If that's the case, then the ROCOR bishops in America are going to gain a
whole lota Patriarchal churches, since there is only one MP bishop in
America.

Rdr. Nectarios in Hawaii

----- Original Message -----
From: "Felipe Ortiz" <felipeortiz@...>
To: <orthodox-rocor@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: [orthodox-rocor] Archbishop Mark of Berlin and Germany:
"Unification of the Churches is a Matter of Time"


> Dear brethren,
>
>
> I am just a catechumen, new to the church, and I would like to understand
> properly one of the last phrases of this interview.
>
> Archbishop Mark of Berlin says: "If there is one church, then naturally, a
> church in a given city must be subjected to the local bishop who lives in
> communion with all Orthodox Christian."
>
> I am trying to discover who is "the local bishop who lives in communion
with
> all (sic) Orthodox Christian". I presume that he is always the MP bishop,
as
> he is in communion with all churches of "World Orthodoxy", while our
bishops
> are in communion with Jerusalem, Serbia and three Old Calendar churches
> only.
>
> Am I misunderstanding his words, or does Archbishop Mark really mean that
> all ROCOR parishes should be given to the "respective" MP bishops?
>
> If this is true, so is Archbishop Mark eager to give the parishes under
his
> own rule in Germany and Great Britain to the MP Bishop Theofan of Berlin,
> the MP Archbishop Longin of Düsseldorf, the MP Archbishop Anatoliy of
London
> and the MP Bishop Vasiliy of Oxford? And does he think that all ROCOR
> bishops should do the same?
>
> Is this absurd opinion (if this is really Archbishop Mark's opinion -- I
> wish it is not) representative of our bishops' consensus?
>
>
> In Christ,
> Felipe Ortiz
>
>
>

Dear Felipe,
   You're right that this is an absurd opinion. But I would say it's so absurd
that it's clearly not Archbishop Mark's opinion. For one thing, such an
incredible solution to the problem would surely not have been given in such an
obscure and passing statement. But also, Fr John's right that he wouldn't be
claiming that we aren't 'in communion' with the other Orthodox churches and
therefore our bishops shouldn't have canonical control over their dioceses. Why
would
he even be a bishop if he thought that? I can't say for sure what he means by
this statement, which I think is definitely unclear, but I'm as sure as I can
be that he doesn't mean what you think he means.

forgive me,
aaron


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Father John, the bless!


Thank you, Fr. John, Rdr. Nectarios and Aaron, for your answers. It is good
to know that I misunderstood Archbishop Mark's words. I really hope so.

And I did not know the difference between "communion" and "concelebration".
Thank you, Fr. John, for your explanation.


Please remember me in your prayers.


Felipe Ortiz
an unworthy catechumen
São Paulo, Brazil


----- Original Message -----
From: <aaronandbrighid@...>
To: <orthodox-rocor@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 9:48 AM
Subject: Re: [orthodox-rocor] Archbishop Mark of Berlin and Germany:


> Dear Felipe,
>   You're right that this is an absurd opinion. But I would say it's so
absurd
> that it's clearly not Archbishop Mark's opinion. For one thing, such an
> incredible solution to the problem would surely not have been given in
such an
> obscure and passing statement. But also, Fr John's right that he wouldn't
be
> claiming that we aren't 'in communion' with the other Orthodox churches
and
> therefore our bishops shouldn't have canonical control over their
dioceses. Why would
> he even be a bishop if he thought that? I can't say for sure what he means
by
> this statement, which I think is definitely unclear, but I'm as sure as I
can
> be that he doesn't mean what you think he means.
>
> forgive me,
> aaron
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> Posts to this list need to be signed with your full (and real) name.
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

Regarding:

> "One bishop per city,
> who governs all Orthodox Christians in that said city, no matter what
there
> ethnic background may be."  This is a canonical jurisdiction, not the
mess
> we have in America and Western Europe.
>
> If that's the case, then the ROCOR bishops in America are going to
gain a
> whole lota Patriarchal churches, since there is only one MP bishop in
> America.

JRS: But in that case, remember that there may be not only ROCOR and
MP, but also OCA, Serbian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Greek, Syrian, Carpatho-
Russian and other bishops for ethnic dioceses in the same places.

The Greeks, in particular, were unhappy being under a Russian diocese
in America a century ago.

The Carpatho-Russian Diocese was formed specifically under
Constantinople, because the Carpatho-Russians were afraid of being
Russified.

There is the "Macedonian question", and the Ukrainian national feeling
that has led to churches separate from the Russian.

Nor can we forget the Belorussians with their separate churches.

There are two rival Albanian dioceses: one under the EP, the other in
the OCA.

All these have their own bishops.

And all that is before one even goes into the question of the Greek Old
Calendar movement, which went from one, to two, to six, to 23 splits,
and is said recently to have *30* rival jurisdictions [there could
already be more than that!] -- with who knows how many "Archbishops of
Athens".

Why can they not get together?

It was said long ago, and still holds true, that we are probably
more "together" with the existing parallel hierarchies, than if all
were forced to be under one hierarchy.

In Christ
Fr. John R. Shaw

In case anyone hasn't heard yet:  I've received this msg about Father Averky
from Jordanville:

"Dear All,
I have just learnt that Fr Averky reposed at 5:30 this morning (ET).
"Grant rest O Lord to the soul of Thy newly-departed servant hieromonk
Averky."
Love in Christ- Fr Raphael "

and also:

(Friday, 11 June, 2004 - 3:54 pm:)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
......... the funeral is at 10 tomorrow, with a vigil tonight where the
Psalter will be read. Anyone can attend the vigil.





---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.701 / Virus Database: 458 - Release Date: 6/06/04