Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

15483Re: Official Historical Position of the Russian Church Abroad

Expand Messages
  • vkozyreff
    Nov 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Father Alexander, bless.

      You quote Metropolitan Anastassy (whom ROCOR clerics on this forum
      accuse of sergianism vis à vis Hilter, now) as saying: "The false
      policy belongs to the church authority and the responsibility for it
      falls on its leaders. Only heresy adopted by the whole Church
      tarnishes the whole Church. In this case, the people are not
      responsible for the behavior of the leaders, and the Church, as
      such, remains unblemished."

      Indeed, Vl Anastassy distinguished between the leaders and the
      believers. He accused the first ones and supports the second ones. He
      says that the mistakes of the leadres are separate from the Church
      herself. That is why the leaders (the MP with which you "negotiate")
      do not represent the true Church.

      Your quote of St John has been discussed previously on this forum. It
      appears that he never supported the MP leadership. He said: "One's
      attitude to this hierarchy can be the same as to the other
      representatives of this regime." Archbishop John, manuscript, Russkiy
      Pastyr Archive.

      In God,

      Vladimir Kozyreff

      --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Fr. Alexander Lebedeff"
      <lebedeff@w...> wrote:
      >



      > Vladimir Kozyreff wrote:
      >
      > >Should we bow before a false Church, and thus clearly show to the
      > >world that they may consider a false Church as a true one, we would
      > >betray God and serve the devil.
      >
      > One would certainly think that in the 78 years since the time of
      the
      > "Declaration" of Metropolitan Sergius, or 62 years since Stalin
      > allowed the election of a Patriarch of Russia, the Russian Orthodox
      > Church Outside of Russia would have issued at least **one**
      official
      > statement explicitly declaring the Moscow Patriarchate to be
      a "false Church."
      >
      > That was certainly **not** the view of Metropolitan Anastassy, who
      > stated (in 1953, at the Sobor of Bishops):
      >
      > "They say that Patriarch Alexy sinned more than his predecessor.
      > Whether he sinned more or less, we cannot deny his ordination. Much
      > is said of their apostasy. But we must be cautious. We can hardly
      > make an outright accusation of apostasy. In no place do they affirm
      > atheism. In their published sermons they attempt to hold to the
      > Orthodox line. They took and continue to take very strict measures
      > with regard to the obnovlentsy, and did not tear their ties with
      > Patriarch Tikhon. The false policy belongs to the church authority
      > and the responsibility for it falls on its leaders. Only heresy
      > adopted by the whole Church tarnishes the whole Church. In this
      case,
      > the people are not responsible for the behavior of the leaders, and
      > the Church, as such, remains unblemished."
      >
      > Vladimir--listen to Metropolitan Anastassy's words again: "the
      > Church, as such," [he is talking about the Moscow Patriarchate
      > here--saying that it, notwithstanding the "false policy" of its
      > leaders] -- "remains unblemished."
      >
      > And this was all said long after the reestablishment of the
      > Patriarchy in 1943, and after a large number of hyperbolic paeans
      by
      > Patriarch Alexei I addressed to Stalin and well known to
      Metropolitan
      > Anastassy.
      >
      > How can a Church which "remains unblemished" be a false Church?
      >
      > Also, Saint John of Shanghai wrote, in his Ukaz No. 650, to the
      > Shanghai clergy, dated August 24, 1945, wrote:
      >
      > "Now, in view of the unquestionable (besspornogo) lawful
      (zakonnogo)
      > heading (vozglavlenia) of the Russian Church by His Holiness
      > Patriarch Alexei, elected by the All-Russian Church Council to
      > succeed the reposed Patriarch Sergius, and recognized, as was his
      > predecessor, by all of the autocephalous Churches, it is required,
      as
      > in the past, to commemorate the name of the Head of the Russian
      > Church, replacing the temporarily used expression: "the orthodox
      episcopate."
      >
      > "Therefore 1) at litanies, the Great Entrance and after the
      > consecration of the Gifts TO COMMMEMORATE "OUR MASTER AND FATHER
      HIS
      > HOLINESS ALEXEI, PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW AND ALL RUSSIA; 2) at the many
      > years at the end of the service after "the holy orthodox
      patriarchs"
      > to say the same; 3) after His Holiness the Patriarch to commemorate
      > the other hierarchs, commemorated in the local churches." [Emphasis
      > in the original Ukaz].
      >
      > Do you believe that St. John, who was clairvoyant, could not tell
      the
      > difference between a "false Church" and a true one?
      >
      > Why do you, Vladimir, presume to have more discernment regarding
      the
      > Moscow Patriarchate than did Metropolitan Anastassy or St. John of
      > Shanghai and San Francisco?
      >
      > With love in Christ,
      >
      > Prot. Alexander Lebedeff
      >
    • Show all 6 messages in this topic