17689Re: [orthodox-synod] Re: The MP, the ROCOR and ecumenism
- Aug 16, 2006Dear in Christ Michael,
You make a good point and it is indeed a point that should not go unconsidered. To be honest, I agree with the sentiment that St John (and yourself) express. But that does not mean that without the penitential act of resignation I will oppose the MP and refuse to call them brothers and share with them the One Cup and One Loaf. It is not for me and even, unfortunately perhaps, not for St John to mete out penances. Such things will be decided by the All Russian Synod when that is possible.
Lastly, I do not believe that our hierarchs are so evil or blind as to merely pay lip service to St John while they knowingly or unknowingly act contrary to his written opinions. It pains me to say it, because St John holds a dear place in my heart, but even the opinions of saints can be wrong or to some degree unfitting for the circumstances. Our current leaders might see there to be a big enough difference between the MP St John wrote of and the MP we are seeking to reconcile with as to warrant action other than recommended by our saintly Vladyka.
Be well and God keep you,
Mike Woodson <singingmountains@...> wrote:
Thanks for your response, and those are fair and reasonable questions.
It really isn't my call for repentance alone, it was St. John
(Maximovitch) of Shanghai and San Francisco.
Here is the sort of repentance St. John expected of the hierarchy of the
Moscow Patriarchate, and a passage to the proceedings in the 8th Century
to which he refers as an example:
Remember what St. John Maximovitch envisioned as the repentance of those
in the Moscow Patriarchate who collaborated with pain and reservations
with the Soviet monstrosity. He wrote:
"The Lord God, Who preserved seven thousand men who did not bend the
knee to Baal in the days of Elias, today also has a multitude of His
servants who secretly serve and pray to Him throughout the whole expanse
of the Russian Land. Even among the hieararchs outwardly subject to the
Soviet Regime, many are inwardly tormented by this; when the opportunity
comes, they will act according to the example of those at the Council of
Chalcedon who declared with tears that they had given their signatures
at the Robber Council under coercion, following the example of the Most
Holy Patriarch Paul, who was tortured by his conscience and took the
Schema in recognition of his weakness under the Iconoclasts."
--from The Russian Orthodox Church Abroad: A Short History, p. 37.
And when the wondrous St. John said St. Paul took on the Schema, what is
the story behind that? Read here:
"For, when the most holy Patriarch Paul, by the divine will, was about
to be liberated from the bands of mortality and to exchange his earthly
pilgrimage for a heavenly home with his Master Christ, he abdicated the
Patriarchate and took upon him the monastic life, and when we asked him,
Why hast thou done this? he answered, Because I fear that, if death
should surprise me still in the episcopate of this royal and
heaven-defended city, I should have to carry with me the anathema of the
whole Catholic Church, which consigns me to that outer darkness which is
prepared for the devil and his angels; for they say that a certain synod
hath been held here in order to the subversion of pictures and images
which the Catholic Church holds, embraces, and receives, in memory of
the persons whom they represent. This is that which distracts my soul --
this is that which makes me anxiously to enquire how I may escape the
judgment of God -- since among such men I have been brought up and with
such am I numbered. No sooner had he thus spoken in the presence of some
of our most illustrious nobles than he expired."
--from The Imperial Sacra. Read at the First Session. (Found in Labbe
and Cossart, Concilia, Tom. VII., col. 49.) page 531, with permission
from Medieval Sourcebook: The Second Council of Nicea, 787 AD:
It seems to me that if praying at St. John's place of repose during the
All Diaspora Conference was an important act of consultation, how
important was it to follow his counsel as written? The Holy Gospels in
which the Lord asks his disciples, "Why do you call me Lord, Lord, but
do not what I say?" applies, except that I could wonder whether St. John
of Shanghai and SF is wondering, why do you call on me for consultation
but not listen to what I have already counseled on this matter of the
repentance of the Moscow Patriarchate hierarchs?
Why no one responds to what St. John said on this, because it cannot be
avoided that they are disregarding the actual saint when seeking his
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Bratislav Peplinski
>hierarchs resign in penance". Such a demand seems out of character for
> Dear in Christ Mr Woodson,
> You write below that you will oppse the MP untill "its political
you, who so highly values the privacy of ones spiritual status. You
realize that you have no authority or right to decide who needs
penances, let alone what the penances should be. What any particular
Bishop of Christ repents of (excepting, perhaps, heresy) is between him,
his spiritual Father and God. And it is also between these three that
any penance will be decided upon, whether or not you happen to think it
a just enough penance to "fit the crime".
>to the Mp. But do you think it even possible that while you are "waiting
> Also, I've read your views about "waiting on the Lord" when it comes
for the Lord" to start His work, He is already in the midst of it,
waiting for you to join Him?
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Your brother,
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>