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

Re: [rocorclergy-churchaffairs]

Expand Messages
  • vkozyreff
    Dear Father Stefan, bless. You write: Therefore Mr. Nikitin s statements This has never been the ecclesiology of the Orthodox Church. , do not ring true. We
    Message 1 of 42 , Aug 2, 2004
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Father Stefan, bless.

      You write:

      "Therefore Mr. Nikitin's statements "This has never been the
      ecclesiology of the Orthodox Church.", do not ring true."

      We not know, thank to Father A. Lebedeff, that concelebrating with
      the Serbs was an effect of personal opinions of the clergy involved,
      but not the expression of ROCOR ecclesiology.

      The words of our metropolitan may be reminded:

      "We should not be indifferent with respect to the last events within
      the Serbian Church. As we know, muscovite Patriarch Alexis has been
      in Yugoslavia and concelebrated with Serbian Patriarch Paul. Although
      this has not yet been a decision at the level of the Synod, our good
      reason should dictate us to be extremely prudent in our attitude
      towards the Serbian Church.

      For the moment we should not invite them to concelebrating in our
      divine services, we should simply limit ourselves to silence, without
      doing them any reproach, even deserved. In other words, we should
      silently keep spiritually aside. In inevitable meetings, we should
      indicate our amazement, our disagreement.

      Metropolitan Vitaly, 18/31 June 1999"(taken from "Ts.N., n°5, (87),
      year 2000, from "Situation of ROCA").


      --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Archpriest Stefan Pavlenko"
      <StefanVPavlenko@n...> wrote:
      > "This has never been the ecclesiology of the Orthodox Church!"
      Michael
      > Nikitin.
      > ___________________________________________
      >
      > During the whole time that Archbishop Antony of Los Angeles was
      alive,
      > Church Abroad bishops concelebrated with bishops of the Serbian
      > Church, Archbishop Antony chose never to serve with any Serbian
      bishops.
      > Pavlenko dixit :

      "Therefore Mr. Nikitin's statements "This has never been the
      ecclesiology of the Orthodox Church.", do not ring true."

      Il faudrait lui répondre qu'on sait, de la part de Lebedeff, que la
      concélébration avec les serbes était tout au plmus "a personal
      opinion of vl. Antony", not the ecclésiology of ROCA.

      Il faudrait lui rappeler que ceci a déjà été discuté, mais on veut
      oublier les paroles du Métropolite :

      "We should not be indifferent with respect to the last events within
      the Serbian Church. As we know, muscovite Patriarch Alexis has been
      in Yugoslavia and concelebrated with Serbian Patriarch Paul. Although
      this has not yet been a decision at the level of the Synod, our good
      reason should dictate us to be extremely prudent in our attitude
      towards the Serbian Church. For the moment we should not invite them
      to concelebrating in our divine services, we should simply limit
      ourselves to silence, without doing them any reproach, even deserved.
      In other words, we should silently keep spiritually aside. In
      inevitable meetings, we should indicate our amazement, our
      disagreement. Metropolitan Vitaly, 18/31 June 1999"(taken
      from "Ts.N., n°5, (87), year 2000, from "Situation of ROCA").

      > Again I remind all about the 19th Century (the time before new
      > calendar problems and "Sergianism"), the time when the Church of
      > Russia concelebrated with BOTH the Bulgarian Church and the Greek
      > Church respectively at the very time when the Greeks accused the
      > Bulgarians of schismatic, even heretical practices of Phyletism and
      > they did not concelebrate with each other .
      >
      > The practice of the Orthodox Church shows that Michael Nikitin's
      > conclusions, as described by him below are unfounded and at best his
      > own personal misconception.
      >
      > Archpriest Stefan Pavlenko
      >
      > --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, michael nikitin
      > <nikitinmike@y...> wrote:
      > > Fr. John had written:
      > > "The only outward difference would be that clergy could
      concelebrate
      > (if they wanted to!)".
      > >
      > > Chaos! Every bishop or clergy on his own!
      > >
      > > This has never been the ecclesiology of the Orthodox Church. Is it
      > truth that we seek or numbers in people?
      > >
      > > Those not serving with MP will cry out , that bishop serves with
      MP,
      > but I don't serve with them or I just serve with that bishop from MP
      > because he is against ecumenism. If bishops in a heretical
      > jurisdiction have different views it does not make a difference. We
      > cannot concelebrate with any of them. Their choice is that
      institute.
      > >
      > > We are all in ROCOR(L), whether we serve with them or not. We
      > partake of the same blood and body of Christ.
      > > I shudder to think if it will truly be the body and blood of
      Christ
      > to our salvation or to our condemnation.
      > >
      > > Michael N
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > "Fr. John R. Shaw" <vrevjrs@e...> wrote:
      > > Fr. Alexis Duncan wrote:
      > >
      > > > I was recently told by a clergyman of these lists that the
      > > > goal of the current talks with the MP is not unification
      > > > "vossoedenenie", but simply intercommunion (concelebration).
      > > > Here are two statements which show this notion not to be the
      > > > case. The first is from Archbishop Mark (ROCOR) and the
      > > > other from Met. Kyrill (MP).
      > >
      > > JRS: Both of these statements are entirely in agreement with what
      I
      > > said.
      > >
      > > The point was that some are depicting reconciliation as meaning
      that
      > > ROCOR will be "swallowed", administratively, by the Moscow
      > > Patriarchate.
      > >
      > > In particular, this view seems to trouble those who do not
      understand
      > > the present situation. Many, perhaps most, lay people go back and
      forth
      > > between jurisdictions and pay no attention to the fact that a
      division
      > > exists between the clergy.
      > >
      > > Then, when they are told about efforts at reconciliation, they
      > > misunderstand (or are deliberately misled). To them, it seems as
      if
      > > this is a "merger", or simply a subordination -- in which ROCOR
      would
      > > cease to exist, and the present ROCOR parishes would be
      administered
      > > directly from Moscow.
      > >
      > > In fact, no one is contemplating any such thing. ROCOR would
      continue
      > > to be administred as it is now. The only outward difference would
      be
      > > that clergy could concelebrate (if they wanted to!).
      > >
      > > But yes, there would be unity again in the Russian Church.
      > >
      > > In Christ
      > > Fr. John R. Shaw
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > __________________________________________________
      > > Do You Yahoo!?
      > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
      > > http://mail.yahoo.com
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • vkozyreff
      Dear Father Stefan, bless. You write: Therefore Mr. Nikitin s statements This has never been the ecclesiology of the Orthodox Church. , do not ring true. We
      Message 42 of 42 , Aug 2, 2004
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Father Stefan, bless.

        You write:

        "Therefore Mr. Nikitin's statements "This has never been the
        ecclesiology of the Orthodox Church.", do not ring true."

        We not know, thank to Father A. Lebedeff, that concelebrating with
        the Serbs was an effect of personal opinions of the clergy involved,
        but not the expression of ROCOR ecclesiology.

        The words of our metropolitan may be reminded:

        "We should not be indifferent with respect to the last events within
        the Serbian Church. As we know, muscovite Patriarch Alexis has been
        in Yugoslavia and concelebrated with Serbian Patriarch Paul. Although
        this has not yet been a decision at the level of the Synod, our good
        reason should dictate us to be extremely prudent in our attitude
        towards the Serbian Church.

        For the moment we should not invite them to concelebrating in our
        divine services, we should simply limit ourselves to silence, without
        doing them any reproach, even deserved. In other words, we should
        silently keep spiritually aside. In inevitable meetings, we should
        indicate our amazement, our disagreement.

        Metropolitan Vitaly, 18/31 June 1999"(taken from "Ts.N., n°5, (87),
        year 2000, from "Situation of ROCA").


        --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Archpriest Stefan Pavlenko"
        <StefanVPavlenko@n...> wrote:
        > "This has never been the ecclesiology of the Orthodox Church!"
        Michael
        > Nikitin.
        > ___________________________________________
        >
        > During the whole time that Archbishop Antony of Los Angeles was
        alive,
        > Church Abroad bishops concelebrated with bishops of the Serbian
        > Church, Archbishop Antony chose never to serve with any Serbian
        bishops.
        > Pavlenko dixit :

        "Therefore Mr. Nikitin's statements "This has never been the
        ecclesiology of the Orthodox Church.", do not ring true."

        Il faudrait lui répondre qu'on sait, de la part de Lebedeff, que la
        concélébration avec les serbes était tout au plmus "a personal
        opinion of vl. Antony", not the ecclésiology of ROCA.

        Il faudrait lui rappeler que ceci a déjà été discuté, mais on veut
        oublier les paroles du Métropolite :

        "We should not be indifferent with respect to the last events within
        the Serbian Church. As we know, muscovite Patriarch Alexis has been
        in Yugoslavia and concelebrated with Serbian Patriarch Paul. Although
        this has not yet been a decision at the level of the Synod, our good
        reason should dictate us to be extremely prudent in our attitude
        towards the Serbian Church. For the moment we should not invite them
        to concelebrating in our divine services, we should simply limit
        ourselves to silence, without doing them any reproach, even deserved.
        In other words, we should silently keep spiritually aside. In
        inevitable meetings, we should indicate our amazement, our
        disagreement. Metropolitan Vitaly, 18/31 June 1999"(taken
        from "Ts.N., n°5, (87), year 2000, from "Situation of ROCA").

        > Again I remind all about the 19th Century (the time before new
        > calendar problems and "Sergianism"), the time when the Church of
        > Russia concelebrated with BOTH the Bulgarian Church and the Greek
        > Church respectively at the very time when the Greeks accused the
        > Bulgarians of schismatic, even heretical practices of Phyletism and
        > they did not concelebrate with each other .
        >
        > The practice of the Orthodox Church shows that Michael Nikitin's
        > conclusions, as described by him below are unfounded and at best his
        > own personal misconception.
        >
        > Archpriest Stefan Pavlenko
        >
        > --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, michael nikitin
        > <nikitinmike@y...> wrote:
        > > Fr. John had written:
        > > "The only outward difference would be that clergy could
        concelebrate
        > (if they wanted to!)".
        > >
        > > Chaos! Every bishop or clergy on his own!
        > >
        > > This has never been the ecclesiology of the Orthodox Church. Is it
        > truth that we seek or numbers in people?
        > >
        > > Those not serving with MP will cry out , that bishop serves with
        MP,
        > but I don't serve with them or I just serve with that bishop from MP
        > because he is against ecumenism. If bishops in a heretical
        > jurisdiction have different views it does not make a difference. We
        > cannot concelebrate with any of them. Their choice is that
        institute.
        > >
        > > We are all in ROCOR(L), whether we serve with them or not. We
        > partake of the same blood and body of Christ.
        > > I shudder to think if it will truly be the body and blood of
        Christ
        > to our salvation or to our condemnation.
        > >
        > > Michael N
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > "Fr. John R. Shaw" <vrevjrs@e...> wrote:
        > > Fr. Alexis Duncan wrote:
        > >
        > > > I was recently told by a clergyman of these lists that the
        > > > goal of the current talks with the MP is not unification
        > > > "vossoedenenie", but simply intercommunion (concelebration).
        > > > Here are two statements which show this notion not to be the
        > > > case. The first is from Archbishop Mark (ROCOR) and the
        > > > other from Met. Kyrill (MP).
        > >
        > > JRS: Both of these statements are entirely in agreement with what
        I
        > > said.
        > >
        > > The point was that some are depicting reconciliation as meaning
        that
        > > ROCOR will be "swallowed", administratively, by the Moscow
        > > Patriarchate.
        > >
        > > In particular, this view seems to trouble those who do not
        understand
        > > the present situation. Many, perhaps most, lay people go back and
        forth
        > > between jurisdictions and pay no attention to the fact that a
        division
        > > exists between the clergy.
        > >
        > > Then, when they are told about efforts at reconciliation, they
        > > misunderstand (or are deliberately misled). To them, it seems as
        if
        > > this is a "merger", or simply a subordination -- in which ROCOR
        would
        > > cease to exist, and the present ROCOR parishes would be
        administered
        > > directly from Moscow.
        > >
        > > In fact, no one is contemplating any such thing. ROCOR would
        continue
        > > to be administred as it is now. The only outward difference would
        be
        > > that clergy could concelebrate (if they wanted to!).
        > >
        > > But yes, there would be unity again in the Russian Church.
        > >
        > > In Christ
        > > Fr. John R. Shaw
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > __________________________________________________
        > > Do You Yahoo!?
        > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
        > > http://mail.yahoo.com
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.