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

Re: [orthodox-synod] Commissions in Soviet culture

Expand Messages
  • frvboldewskul@aol.com
    In a message dated 8/3/04 5:50:51 AM Pacific Daylight Time, ... What about all the nonpublic commissions (including scores of ecclesiastical ones) in the 19th
    Message 1 of 17 , Aug 3, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 8/3/04 5:50:51 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
      vladimir.kozyreff@... writes:

      > When looking backwards at the way the persecution of the Church was
      > organised right from the start of the Soviet regime, one is struck by
      > the use of committees and secrecy, which was a key feature of the
      > methods used. In fact, it became an element of Soviet culture.
      >
      >

      What about all the nonpublic commissions (including scores of ecclesiastical
      ones) in the 19th century? I hope we are not going to accuse Emperor Nicholas
      I of communist tactics.

      Priest Victor Boldewskul


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • vkozyreff
      Dear Father Victor, bless. I suggest there is a fallacy in your proposal. The question is not what HM Nicholas I or Colonel Protasov did. Neither the first nor
      Message 2 of 17 , Aug 3, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Father Victor, bless.

        I suggest there is a fallacy in your proposal.

        The question is not what HM Nicholas I or Colonel Protasov did.
        Neither the first nor the second is a saint. The question is: do we,
        orthodox, consider that one can defend orthodoxy by secrecy, in other
        words by violating sobornost, which is the essence of the Church?

        If you refer to the tradition, then protest, as hierarchs of those
        days. Be on the side of the Church. Count Protasov's designs aroused
        strong opposition among Church hierarchs. When Protasov transmitted
        proposals to incorporate medicine and agronomy into the curriculum,
        the Synod brusquely rejected those ideas unsuitable on practical and
        pedagogical grounds.

        Secrecy is excluding the faithful from the decision-making process
        and allow it to be taken by in some kind of "highest level" (strange
        canonical term), supposed to make decison and then notify the people.
        Is this orthodox?

        Do you support this process?

        Would saints?

        Would St Mark of Ephese?

        Would Christ?

        In God,

        Vladimir Kozyreff

        Two wrongs make a right (logical fallacy)

        Two wrongs make a right is a logical fallacy that occurs when it is
        assumed that if one wrong is committed, another second wrong will
        cancel it out. Like many fallacies, it typically appears as the
        hidden major premise in an enthymeme.

        Often it can be a fallacy of distraction or an attempt to change the
        issue.

        For example:

        Speaker A: President Williams lied in his testimony to Congress. He
        should not do that.
        Speaker B: But you're ignoring the fact that President Johnson lied
        in his Congressional testimony!
        If President Johnson lied in his Congressional testimony, that does
        not make it acceptable or OK for President Williams to do so as well.
        In this usage it may also be similar to the bandwagon fallacy (as
        an "appeal to popularity"); both are red herring fallacies.

        http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Two_wrongs_make_a_right_%
        28logical_fallacy%29


        --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, frvboldewskul@a... wrote:
        > In a message dated 8/3/04 5:50:51 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
        > vladimir.kozyreff@s... writes:
        >
        > > When looking backwards at the way the persecution of the Church
        was
        > > organised right from the start of the Soviet regime, one is
        struck by
        > > the use of committees and secrecy, which was a key feature of the
        > > methods used. In fact, it became an element of Soviet culture.
        > >
        > >
        >
        > What about all the nonpublic commissions (including scores of
        ecclesiastical
        > ones) in the 19th century? I hope we are not going to accuse
        Emperor Nicholas
        > I of communist tactics.
        >
        > Priest Victor Boldewskul
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • VJB
        Vladimir! Is use of committees and secrecy an exclusive feature of the Soviet regime? Is that what you are saying? viatcheslav ... From: vkozyreff To:
        Message 3 of 17 , Aug 3, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Vladimir!

          Is "use of committees and secrecy" an exclusive feature of the Soviet regime? Is that what you are saying?

          viatcheslav
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: vkozyreff
          To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 3:33 AM
          Subject: [orthodox-synod] Commissions in Soviet culture


          Dear List,

          When looking backwards at the way the persecution of the Church was
          organised right from the start of the Soviet regime, one is struck by
          the use of committees and secrecy, which was a key feature of the
          methods used. In fact, it became an element of Soviet culture.

          A good example is the letter from Lenin to Molotov dated 19 March
          1922, about the 'Black Hundreds' Anti-Clerical Campaign.

          The full text is below, I give here two excerpts that are
          particularly eloquent:

          "Please make no copies for any reason. Each member of the Politburo
          (incl. Comrade Kalinin) should comment directly on the document...

          the participation of Comrade Trotsky and Comrade Kalinin being
          required, without giving any publicity to this commission, with the
          purpose that the subordination to it of all operations would be
          provided for and carried out not in the name of the commission but as
          an all-soviet and all-party order".

          In God,

          Vladimir Kozyreff

          Complete text:

          Copy To Comrade Molotov

          Top Secret For members of the Politburo

          Please make no copies for any reason. Each member of the Politburo
          (incl. Comrade Kalinin) should comment directly on the document.
          Lenin.

          In regard to the occurrence at Shuia, which is already slated for
          discussion by the Polituro, it is necessary right now to make a firm
          decision about a general plan of action in the present course.
          Because I doubt that I will be able to attend the Politburo meeting
          on March 20th in person, I will set down my thoughts in writing.

          The event at Shuia should be connected with the announcement that the
          Russian News Agency [ROST] recently sent to the newspapers but that
          was not for publication, namely, the announcement that the Black
          Hundreds in Petrograd [Piter] were preparing to defy the decree on
          the removal of property of value from the churches.

          If this fact is compared with what the papers report about the
          attitude of the clergy to the decree on the removal of church
          property in addition to what we know about th e illegal proclamation
          of Patriarch Tikhon, then it becomes perfectly clear that the Black
          Hundreds clergy, headed by its leader, with full deliberation is
          carrying out a plan at this very moment to destroy us decisively.

          It is obvious that the most influential group of the Black Hundreds
          clergy conceived this plan in secret meetings and that it was
          accepted with sufficient resolution. The events in Shuia is only one
          manifestation and actualization of this general plan.

          I think that here our opponent is making a huge strategic error by
          attempting to draw us into a decisive struggle now when it is
          especially hopeless and especially disadvantageous to him. For us, on
          the other hand, precisely at the present moment we are presented with
          an exceptionally favorable, even unique, opportunity when we can in
          99 out of 100 chances utterly defeat our enemy with complete success
          and guarantee for ourselves the position we require for decades.

          Now and only now, when people are bei ng eaten in famine-stricken
          areas, and hundreds, if not thousands, of corpses lie on the roads,
          we can (and therefore must) pursue the removal of church property
          with the most frenzied and ruthless energy and not hesitate to put
          down the least opposition. N ow and only now, the vast majority of
          peasants will either be on our side, or at least will not be in a
          position to support to any decisive degree this handful of Black
          Hundreds clergy and reactionary urban petty bourgeoisie, who are
          willing and able to attempt to oppose this Soviet decree with a
          policy of force.

          We must pursue the removal of church property by any means necessary
          in order to secure for ourselves a fund of several hundred million
          gold rubles (do not forget the immense wealth of some monasteries and
          lauras).

          Without this fund any government work in general, any economic build-
          up in particular, and any upholding of soviet principles in Genoa
          especially is completely unthinkable. In order to get our hands on
          this fund of several hundred million gold rubles (and perhaps even
          several hundred billion), we must do whatever is necessary. But to do
          this successfully is possible only now.

          All considerations indicate that later on we will fail to do this,
          for no other time, besides that of desperate famine, will give us
          such a mood among the general mass of peasants that would ensure us
          the sympathy of this group, or, at least, would ensure us the
          neutralization of this group in the sense that victory in the
          struggle for the removal of chur ch property unquestionably and
          completely will be on our side.

          One clever writer on statecraft correctly said that if it is
          necessary for the realization of a well-known political goal to
          perform a series of brutal actions then it is necessary to do them in
          the most energetic manner and in the shortest time, because masses of
          people will not tolerate the protracted use of brutality.

          This observation in particular is further strengthened because harsh
          measures against a reactionary clergy will be politically
          impractical, possibly even extremely dangerous as a result of the
          international situation in which we in Russia, in all probability,
          will find ourselves, or may find ourselves, after Genoa. Now victory
          over the reactionary clergy is assured us completely.

          In addition, it will be more difficult for the major part of our
          foreign adversaries among the Russian emigres abroad, i.e., the
          Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Milyukovites [Left Wing Cadet
          Party], to fight against us if we, precisely at this time, precisely
          in connection with the famine, suppress the reactionary clergy with
          utmost haste and ruthlessness.

          Therefore, I come to the indisputable conclusion that we must
          precisely now smash the Black Hundreds clergy most decisively and
          ruthlessly and put down all resistance with such brutality that they
          will not forget it for several decades.

          The campaign itself for carrying out this plan I envision in the
          following manner:

          Only Comrade Kalinin should appear officially in regard to any
          measures taken--never and under no circumstance must Comrade Trotsky
          write anything for the press or in any other way appear before the
          public.

          The telegram already issued in the name of the Politburo about the
          temporary suspension of removals must not be rescinded. It is useful
          for us because it gives our adversary the impression that we are
          vacillating, that he has succeeded in confus ing us (our adversary,
          of course, will quickly find out about this secret telegram precisely
          because it is secret).

          Send to Shuia one of the most energetic, clear-headed, and capable
          members of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee [VTsIK] or
          some other representative of the central government (one is better
          than several), giving him verbal instruc tions through one of the
          members of the Politburo. The instructions must come down to this,
          that in Shuia he must arrest more if possible but not less than
          several dozen representatives of the local clergy, the local petty
          bourgeoisie, and the local bourgeoisie on sus picion of direct or
          indirect participation in the forcible resistance to the decree of
          the VTsIK on the removal of property of value from churches.

          Immediately upon completion of this task, he must return to Moscow
          and personally deliver a report to the full session of t he Politburo
          or to two specially authorized members of the Politburo. On the basis
          of this report, the Politburo will give a detailed directive to the
          judicial authorities, also verbal, that the trial of the
          insurrectionists from Shuia, for opposing aid to the starving, should
          be carried out in utmost haste and should end not other than with the
          shooting of the very largest number of the most influential and
          dangerous of the Black Hundreds in Shuia, and, if possible, not only
          in this city but even in Moscow and several other ecclesiastical
          centers.

          I think that it is advisable for us not to touch Patriarch Tikhon
          himself, even though he undoubtedly headed this whole revolt of slave-
          holders. Concerning him, the State Political Administration [GPU]
          must be given a secret directive that precisely at this time all
          communications of this personage must be monitored and their contents
          disclosed in all possible accuracy and detail. Require Dzerzhinsky
          and Unshlikht personally to report to the Politburo about this
          weekly.

          At the party congress arrange a secret meeting of all or almost all
          delegates to discuss this matter jointly with the chief workers of
          the GPU, the People's Commissariat of Justice [NKIu], and the
          Revolutionary Tribunal. At this meeting pa ss a secret resolution of
          the congress that the removal of property of value, especially from
          the very richest lauras, monasteries, and churches, must be carried
          out with ruthless resolution, leaving nothing in doubt, and in the
          very shortest time.

          The greater the n umber of representatives of the reactionary clergy
          and the reactionary bourgeoisie that we succeed in shooting on this
          occasion, the better because this 'audience' must precisely now be
          taught a lesson in such a way that they will not dare to think about
          any resis tance whatsoever for several decades.

          To attend to the quickest and most successful carrying out of these
          measures, there at the congress, i.e., at the secret meeting, appoint
          a special commission, the participation of Comrade Trotsky and
          Comrade Kalinin being required, without giving any publicity to this
          commission, with the purpose that the subordination to it of all
          operations would be provided for and carried out not in the name of
          the commission but as an all-soviet and all-party order. Appoint
          those who are especially responsible from among the best workers to
          carry out these measures in the wealthiest lauras, monasteries, and
          churches.

          Lenin.

          March 19, 1922.

          I request that Comrade Molotov attempt to circulate this letter to
          the members of the Politburo by evening today (not making copies) and
          ask them to return it to the secretary immediately after reading it,
          with a succinct note regarding whether each member of the Politburo
          agrees in principle or if the letter arouses any differences of
          opinion.

          Lenin.

          A note in the hand of Comrade Molotov:

          'Agreed. However, I propose to extend the campaign not to all
          gubernias and cities, but to those where indeed there are
          considerable possessions of value, accordingly concentrating the
          forces and attention of the party.'

          March 19. Molotov.'

          True copy: [illegible]

          The original has been transferred to the Lenin Institute.

          Etext from http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/1918p/lenimolo.html.






          Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod




          Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
          ADVERTISEMENT





          ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Yahoo! Groups Links

          a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox-synod/

          b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          orthodox-synod-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Fr. John R. Shaw
          ... ecclesiastical ... Emperor Nicholas ... JRS: For that matter, the meetings of the Holy Synod were also private. In the Church Abroad, there was one period
          Message 4 of 17 , Aug 3, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, frvboldewskul@a... wrote:

            > What about all the nonpublic commissions (including scores of
            ecclesiastical
            > ones) in the 19th century? I hope we are not going to accuse
            Emperor
            Nicholas
            > I of communist tactics.

            JRS: For that matter, the meetings of the Holy Synod were also
            private.

            In the Church Abroad, there was one period when the Synod meetings
            were
            held openly in the Synodal cathedral, under Metropolitan Anastassy.
            Laity were permitted to attend, though of course they had to be
            respectful and silent.

            Later, at least from the time of Metropolitan Philaret, the Synod
            meetings were no longer public, and no one except the actual Synod
            members were admitted.

            The accounts of the proceedings were always skimpy and minimal, and
            from what Vl. Nikon and Vl. Seraphim told me, much was discussed by
            the
            bishops that was never indicated, in any way, in the record.

            It seems odd that only now, when it suits certain people, we are
            beginning to hear these accusations of "secrecy"!

            In Christ
            Fr. John R. Shaw
          • Gene T
            5 years ago meetings of the Holy Synod were truly nobody s business, besides the proceedings were later printed in in Orthodox Life anyway. Things like
            Message 5 of 17 , Aug 3, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              5 years ago meetings of the Holy Synod were truly nobody's business, besides the proceedings were later printed in in Orthodox Life anyway. Things like personnel, financial issues and many others are not meant to be discussed by every lay member of the church, that's what Bishops are for. No one would argue with that.

              The "Secrecy" issue concerns one thing only. Process of ROCOR reconciliation with MP. Many Russian emigrants, especially these of 1917-23 and 1945 vintage know very well what ROCOR is all about and are perplexed to see such sudden 180% change. Many suspect foul play. Every major player on both sides has been accused of KGB membership and worse. Many remember that most Bishops were saying completely different things five years ago. Now they all look like some kind of Manchurian Candidates from the outside.

              In this horrendously poisoned atmosphere a little dose of glasnost would surely help alleviate a lot of suspicions. What could be so secret about these negotiations ? Profit sharing and money laundering on cigarettes and alcohol import quotas that ROCOR now will participate in together with MP ? Russian abortions fetal tissue cosmetics distribution deal in North America ? Multi-million Real Estate development projects in Holy Land ? Homosexual videos ? What are the "other vital, burning questions" Arch. Luka cryptically refers to in his report beside sergianism and ecumenism ?

              We, the ROCOR laity are not some 19 century illiterate Russian serfs. We are 21 century Americans, Wester Europeans, Latin Americans. We can read and write for goodness sake. I personally would like to be treated with respect accorded to your average American Catholic or Episcopalian layman by their Bishops. Namely being fully informed of all deliberation concerning my faith. We all read papers, you know what I am talking about.

              Last but not least ask yourself - What would Jesus do ?
              Have a blessed day Y'all

              Gene T




              "Fr. John R. Shaw" <vrevjrs@...> wrote:
              --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, frvboldewskul@a... wrote:

              > What about all the nonpublic commissions (including scores of
              ecclesiastical
              > ones) in the 19th century? I hope we are not going to accuse
              Emperor
              Nicholas
              > I of communist tactics.

              JRS: For that matter, the meetings of the Holy Synod were also
              private.

              In the Church Abroad, there was one period when the Synod meetings
              were
              held openly in the Synodal cathedral, under Metropolitan Anastassy.
              Laity were permitted to attend, though of course they had to be
              respectful and silent.

              Later, at least from the time of Metropolitan Philaret, the Synod
              meetings were no longer public, and no one except the actual Synod
              members were admitted.

              The accounts of the proceedings were always skimpy and minimal, and
              from what Vl. Nikon and Vl. Seraphim told me, much was discussed by
              the
              bishops that was never indicated, in any way, in the record.

              It seems odd that only now, when it suits certain people, we are
              beginning to hear these accusations of "secrecy"!

              In Christ
              Fr. John R. Shaw








              Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod




              Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


              ---------------------------------
              Yahoo! Groups Links

              To visit your group on the web, go to:
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox-synod/

              To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              orthodox-synod-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




              ---------------------------------
              Do you Yahoo!?
              Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • vkozyreff
              Dear father John, bless. You write: It seems odd that only now, when it suits certain people, we are beginning to hear these accusations of secrecy ! It is
              Message 6 of 17 , Aug 3, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear father John, bless.

                You write: "It seems odd that only now, when it suits certain
                people, we are beginning to hear these accusations of "secrecy"!

                It is not odd. These are not accusations but observations about a
                deliberate and proclaimed policy of secrecy, which suits certain
                people. We are told in an authoritarian way, that there is an
                agreement between the ROCOR hierarchy and the MP to act in secrecy.
                Reporting that fact is not yet an accusation, but you are right, the
                temptation is there.

                The fact that laity wants to be associated with capital decisions of
                the Church is orthodox, traditional, legitimate and desirable.

                The fact that the tradition has been interrupted after being revived
                for short periods is no argument to say that it should be abandoned
                for ever. Sobornost is part of orthodoxy.

                The fact that the will of the people to participate is now being
                expressed cannot be criticised under the false pretext that it was
                not expressed a while ago. The more the faithful participate in the
                life of the Church, the better.

                The Church is not made exclusively of those who share your views
                about the union with the MP. The Church is made of all the orthodox
                faithful, with the clergy and the hierarchy. One cannot deliberately
                exclude an essential part of the Church from capital decisions on
                the basis of their opposition to the union with the MP before it has
                repented.

                If the orthodox people are getting involved, maybe this is the will
                of God, and maybe we should accept this by humility.

                You wonder why the people want to take part now, while they did not
                before. This is a sign of a reality that you once eloquently
                mentioned: times have changed.

                Times have changed because a sizeable part of hierarchs and priests
                have "changed their minds", and still claim that they are in
                agreement with the Church, in spite of the Church not changing hers.

                Times have changed because the Church is at a crossroad and must
                exert her discernment about the formidable deceit of the MP
                allegedly being the Church without repenting.

                Times have changed because much of the fervour that characterised
                our hierarchy of the first years seems to have faded away.

                Times have changed because the ROCOR is now looking for a legitimacy
                from the MP, and her hierarchs have lost faith in their Church.

                Times have changed because clergy in good standing do not know any
                longer what sergianism and ecumenism are about.

                If times have changed, why being surprised at the fact that people
                change as a consequence?

                May God unite us all in his truth. I beg your prayers.

                In God,

                Vladimir Kozyreff



                --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Fr. John R. Shaw"
                <vrevjrs@e...> wrote:
                > --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, frvboldewskul@a... wrote:
                >
                > > What about all the nonpublic commissions (including scores of
                > ecclesiastical
                > > ones) in the 19th century? I hope we are not going to accuse
                > Emperor
                > Nicholas
                > > I of communist tactics.
                >
                > JRS: For that matter, the meetings of the Holy Synod were also
                > private.
                >
                > In the Church Abroad, there was one period when the Synod meetings
                > were
                > held openly in the Synodal cathedral, under Metropolitan
                Anastassy.
                > Laity were permitted to attend, though of course they had to be
                > respectful and silent.
                >
                > Later, at least from the time of Metropolitan Philaret, the Synod
                > meetings were no longer public, and no one except the actual Synod
                > members were admitted.
                >
                > The accounts of the proceedings were always skimpy and minimal,
                and
                > from what Vl. Nikon and Vl. Seraphim told me, much was discussed
                by
                > the
                > bishops that was never indicated, in any way, in the record.
                >
                > It seems odd that only now, when it suits certain people, we are
                > beginning to hear these accusations of "secrecy"!
                >
                > In Christ
                > Fr. John R. Shaw
              • michael nikitin
                This isn t *just* any old Synod meeting. In ROCOR Synod meetings it is with our ROCOR bishops. These meetings are with the MP who we don t trust because of
                Message 7 of 17 , Aug 3, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  This isn't *just* any old Synod meeting. In ROCOR Synod meetings it is with our
                  ROCOR bishops. These meetings are with the MP who we don't
                  trust because of their actions. The meetings will have repurcussions that will
                  change ROCOR, administratively and spiritually.

                  Let the meetings be secret. This will speed up the process of union. It's
                  going to happen one way or another. Let's face the facts. Then we can
                  concelebrate in those big beautiful Cathedrals with golden domes that many
                  of us who want union dreamed of.

                  Michael N

                  "Fr. John R. Shaw" <vrevjrs@...> wrote:
                  --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, frvboldewskul@a... wrote:

                  > What about all the nonpublic commissions (including scores of
                  ecclesiastical
                  > ones) in the 19th century? I hope we are not going to accuse
                  Emperor
                  Nicholas
                  > I of communist tactics.

                  JRS: For that matter, the meetings of the Holy Synod were also
                  private.

                  In the Church Abroad, there was one period when the Synod meetings
                  were
                  held openly in the Synodal cathedral, under Metropolitan Anastassy.
                  Laity were permitted to attend, though of course they had to be
                  respectful and silent.

                  Later, at least from the time of Metropolitan Philaret, the Synod
                  meetings were no longer public, and no one except the actual Synod
                  members were admitted.

                  The accounts of the proceedings were always skimpy and minimal, and
                  from what Vl. Nikon and Vl. Seraphim told me, much was discussed by
                  the
                  bishops that was never indicated, in any way, in the record.

                  It seems odd that only now, when it suits certain people, we are
                  beginning to hear these accusations of "secrecy"!

                  In Christ
                  Fr. John R. Shaw



                  ---------------------------------
                  Do you Yahoo!?
                  Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • frvboldewskul@aol.com
                  In a message dated 8/3/04 1:10:36 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ... Bog Blagoslovit, I made no proposal. I did, however, take exception to your post suggesting or
                  Message 8 of 17 , Aug 3, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    In a message dated 8/3/04 1:10:36 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
                    vladimir.kozyreff@... writes:

                    > Dear Father Victor, bless.
                    >
                    > I suggest there is a fallacy in your proposal.
                    >
                    >

                    Bog Blagoslovit,
                    I made no proposal. I did, however, take exception to your post suggesting or
                    implying that our Synod is acting like the communists. Note that I find this
                    to be an extremely insulting comparison to make to a Church whose members and
                    families suffered immensely at the hands of the Soviets. Please be more
                    careful in what you write as a "friend of the Russian Church Abroad."
                    In Christ,
                    Priest Victor Boldewskul


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • frvboldewskul@aol.com
                    In a message dated 8/3/04 1:10:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time, gene703@yahoo.com ... And once the Commissions work is completed, and if approved by both
                    Message 9 of 17 , Aug 3, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      In a message dated 8/3/04 1:10:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time, gene703@...
                      writes:

                      > 5 years ago meetings of the Holy Synod were truly nobody's business,
                      > besides the proceedings were later printed in in Orthodox Life anyway.

                      And once the Commissions' work is completed, and if approved by both
                      Churches, they will later be printed in Orthodox Life, I am sure.

                      In Christ,
                      Priest Victor Boldewskul

                      p.s. The current question of reconciliation of the two parts of the Russian
                      Church has been, in my view, the most open and public process in the history of
                      the Russian Church. Never has so much official information been put out so
                      fast in the history of the Russian Church. In large part, this is due to modern
                      technology, in part, the open and free nature of our Church.


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Paul O. BARTLETT
                      ... Looking at the matter as a (now) outsider, it seems to me that, yes, some kind of union (call it reconciliation, if you prefer) with MP is going to take
                      Message 10 of 17 , Aug 3, 2004
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Tue, 3 Aug 2004, michael nikitin wrote:

                        > [...] This will speed up the process of union. It's
                        > going to happen one way or another. Let's face the facts. Then we can
                        > concelebrate in those big beautiful Cathedrals with golden domes that many
                        > of us who want union dreamed of.

                        Looking at the matter as a (now) outsider, it seems to me that,
                        yes, some kind of union (call it reconciliation, if you prefer) with
                        MP is going to take place, sooner or later. (I would be hard pressed
                        to come up with a time, but I suspect within five years.) The main
                        question, as I see it, is, What is going to happen? To be honest, I
                        doubt that there will be 100% acceptance. Some in ROCOR, both clergy
                        and laity alike, will not go along.

                        What, then, will they do? Form their own jurisdiction in the
                        manner of HOCNA (although of different initial motivation)? I would
                        not be surprised if at least a few would try to do so. If so, those in
                        the reconciled MP/ROCOR would very probably consider them schismatic.
                        (But are there not already some within the MP who consider ROCOR to be
                        schismatic as it is?) Some might go to already existing jurisdictions
                        if they (i.e., those who might make the move) do not have too big a
                        hangup on Russianness, as if Orthodox Christianity is to be equated
                        with Russianness. The Greek Old Calendarists come to mind.

                        In any case, I seem some rough sledding ahead for at least some
                        people who are going to have to make some decisions they find painful.

                        --
                        Paul Bartlett
                        bartlett "at" smart "dot" net
                        PGP key info in message headers
                      • vkozyreff
                        Dear Father Victor, bless. You write: I made no proposal . This must be a misunderstanding. I think you did make a proposal, according to the definition of
                        Message 11 of 17 , Aug 4, 2004
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Dear Father Victor, bless.

                          You write: "I made no proposal".

                          This must be a misunderstanding. I think you did make a proposal,
                          according to the definition of this word. A proposal is something
                          that is put forward for consideration: proposition, submission,
                          suggestion. You put forward for consideration the suggestion that
                          present secrecy in the negotiations with the MP was all right because
                          it had been practiced under Nicholas I. I suggest that this is a
                          fallacy.

                          Then you write that you "take exception to your post suggesting or
                          implying that our Synod is acting like the communists".

                          If the communists act in secrecy and present the resolution of a
                          secret committee as coming from a much wider instance, anybody who
                          does a similar thing acts like the communists from this angle. If
                          anything suggests that the Synod is acting like the communists, it is
                          the facts that make this suggestion, not the reporter of those facts.

                          Moreover, in certain leading ROCOR circles, Soviet culture is now
                          viewed as something that you can live or unite with. Some priest on
                          this forum wrote that the sin should not be pushed out of the Church,
                          implying that the Church could live with sergianism in her bosom, and
                          that opposing views generate schism.

                          You write: "Note that I find this to be an extremely insulting
                          comparison to make to a Church whose members and families suffered
                          immensely at the hands of the Soviets".

                          I am part of that Church; my family gave fighters and officers to the
                          White Army and was massacred by the Reds. My father escaped in tragic
                          circumstances with God's help, when he was a 14 years old orphan. I
                          was born in exile, deprived of the land of my ancestors. In the
                          exercise of my profession, I have seen for 15 years the appalling
                          devastation caused by communism in Russia. My only consolation has
                          been the ROCOR and her stand for the Truth. You may understand what I
                          suffer when I see my Church having secret agreements with a Soviet
                          structure and ignoring warnings coming from her most loving clergy
                          and faithful.

                          You write: "Please be more careful in what you write as a "friend of
                          the Russian Church Abroad."

                          What could be friendlier to the ROCOR than saying: "Let us keep faith
                          in ROCOR, she does not need any legitimisation from the MP, because
                          she is legitimate, let us be faithful to her traditional path"?

                          Please pardon me if I have offended anyone.


                          In God,

                          Vladimir Kozyreff



                          --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, frvboldewskul@a... wrote:
                          > In a message dated 8/3/04 1:10:36 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
                          > vladimir.kozyreff@s... writes:
                          >
                          > > Dear Father Victor, bless.
                          > >
                          > > I suggest there is a fallacy in your proposal.
                          > >
                          > >
                          >
                          > Bog Blagoslovit,
                          > I made no proposal. I did, however, take exception to your post
                          suggesting or
                          > implying that our Synod is acting like the communists. Note that I
                          find this
                          > to be an extremely insulting comparison to make to a Church whose
                          members and
                          > families suffered immensely at the hands of the Soviets. Please be
                          more
                          > careful in what you write as a "friend of the Russian Church
                          Abroad."
                          > In Christ,
                          > Priest Victor Boldewskul
                          >
                          >
                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • frvboldewskul@aol.com
                          In a message dated 8/4/04 5:22:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time, ... This is the problem. I made no comment about current talks with the MP in that post. I was
                          Message 12 of 17 , Aug 4, 2004
                          • 0 Attachment
                            In a message dated 8/4/04 5:22:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
                            vladimir.kozyreff@... writes:

                            > You put forward for consideration the suggestion that
                            > present secrecy in the negotiations with the MP was all right because
                            > it had been practiced under Nicholas I. I suggest that this is a
                            > fallacy.
                            >
                            >

                            This is the problem. I made no comment about current talks with the MP in
                            that post. I was pointing out an error in your post suggesting that our current
                            commission are rooted in communism. I simply pointed that from a historical
                            point of view, this is problematic. Commissions are rooted in the Synodal period.
                            I made no comment about whether this is good or bad. I have my own view on
                            commissions, and I have not shared them in public. Coming to understand the
                            past does not necessarily mean justification or rejection of an event in the
                            present.

                            In the Synodal period (for better or for worse), commissions were set up to
                            investigate incorrupt relics, education/seminary reforrm/ soslovia reform,
                            liturgical reform, financial crisis etc...and often few knew what was going on or
                            that such commissions exist. Now, one does not have to accept this a a
                            favorable model, especially as some noted the advancement of education and
                            technology, but it does show that commissions in Church life are rooted in the Synodal
                            period (that's 1700 until 1918). Whether the Soviets used them as you note is
                            irrelevant for a Church historian.

                            In Christ,
                            Priest Victor Boldewskul


                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • michael nikitin
                            This official information is always put out by the MP first on their site. That is where the real information is to be found on what transpired. Maybe they re
                            Message 13 of 17 , Aug 4, 2004
                            • 0 Attachment
                              This official information is always put out by the MP first on their
                              site. That is where the real information is to be found on what transpired.

                              Maybe they're on the new calendar?

                              Michael N

                              frvboldewskul@... wrote:
                              In a message dated 8/3/04 1:10:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time, gene703@...
                              writes:

                              > 5 years ago meetings of the Holy Synod were truly nobody's business,
                              > besides the proceedings were later printed in in Orthodox Life anyway.

                              And once the Commissions' work is completed, and if approved by both
                              Churches, they will later be printed in Orthodox Life, I am sure.

                              In Christ,
                              Priest Victor Boldewskul

                              p.s. The current question of reconciliation of the two parts of the Russian
                              Church has been, in my view, the most open and public process in the history of
                              the Russian Church. Never has so much official information been put out so
                              fast in the history of the Russian Church. In large part, this is due to modern
                              technology, in part, the open and free nature of our Church.


                              ---------------------------------
                              Do you Yahoo!?
                              New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!

                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Fr. John R. Shaw
                              ... transpired. ... JRS: If by they you refer to the MP, you can easily see that the Moscow Patriarchate is on the old calendar, by noting the dates given
                              Message 14 of 17 , Aug 4, 2004
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Michael Nikitin wrote:

                                > This official information is always put out by the MP first on their
                                > site. That is where the real information is to be found on what
                                transpired.
                                >
                                > Maybe they're on the new calendar?

                                JRS: If by "they" you refer to the MP, you can easily see that the
                                Moscow Patriarchate is on the old calendar, by noting the dates given
                                for various church holidays.

                                Also note that the Russian word "glasnost'" has no "T" in the middle:
                                it comes from "glas" or "golos", meaning "voice".

                                In Christ
                                Fr. John R. Shaw
                              • vkozyreff
                                Dear Father John, bless. I believe that intolerance to misspelling of words is a noble thing and should be encouraged, particularly with regards to the
                                Message 15 of 17 , Aug 5, 2004
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Dear Father John, bless.

                                  I believe that intolerance to misspelling of words is a noble thing
                                  and should be encouraged, particularly with regards to the beautiful
                                  Russian language.

                                  This however should not divert us from maintaining our vigilance
                                  against unorthodox concepts in particular those by which conciliarity
                                  is absent when capital decisions about the Church are being taken.
                                  The MP does not enjoy universal regognition, among clergy and
                                  faithful, as being even part of the Church. This may not be ignored,
                                  even at the "highest level".

                                  This, after all, was the subject of this discussion.

                                  Orthography relates to the times, orthodoxy relates to eternity. The
                                  MP calendar may be officially the old one, but its agenda might be
                                  worse than the new calendar. When Michael jokingly mentions the new
                                  calendar, he may be closer to the truth than those who check the
                                  dates.

                                  In God,

                                  Vladimir Kozyreff

                                  --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Fr. John R. Shaw"
                                  <vrevjrs@e...> wrote:
                                  > Michael Nikitin wrote:
                                  >
                                  > > This official information is always put out by the MP first on
                                  their
                                  > > site. That is where the real information is to be found on what
                                  > transpired.
                                  > >
                                  > > Maybe they're on the new calendar?
                                  >
                                  > JRS: If by "they" you refer to the MP, you can easily see that the
                                  > Moscow Patriarchate is on the old calendar, by noting the dates
                                  given
                                  > for various church holidays.
                                  >
                                  > Also note that the Russian word "glasnost'" has no "T" in the
                                  middle:
                                  > it comes from "glas" or "golos", meaning "voice".
                                  >
                                  > In Christ
                                  > Fr. John R. Shaw
                                • michael nikitin
                                  Fr.John is quick to deflect from the main point. One can read the MP s website and get current information on what transpired in those meetings that our
                                  Message 16 of 17 , Aug 6, 2004
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Fr.John is quick to deflect from the main point.

                                    One can read the MP's website and get current information on what
                                    transpired in those meetings that our ROCOR(L) is afraid to tell us
                                    on their website.

                                    Michael N


                                    Michael Nikitin wrote:

                                    > This official information is always put out by the MP first on their
                                    > site. That is where the real information is to be found on what
                                    transpired.
                                    >
                                    > Maybe they're on the new calendar?

                                    JRS: If by "they" you refer to the MP, you can easily see that the
                                    Moscow Patriarchate is on the old calendar, by noting the dates given
                                    for various church holidays.

                                    Also note that the Russian word "glasnost'" has no "T" in the middle:
                                    it comes from "glas" or "golos", meaning "voice".

                                    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.