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

Re: [orthodox-synod] Re: "Sviatitiel'" Sergii? - Total hogwash.

Expand Messages
  • frvboldewskul@aol.com
    Dear Vladimir, Context. My comment was in a context to Fr. Basil. Likewise, Fr. Alexander s comment of hogwash was within a context, and not related to
    Message 1 of 71 , Oct 5, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Vladimir,
      Context. My comment was in a context to Fr. Basil. Likewise, Fr. Alexander's
      comment of "hogwash" was within a context, and not related to anything I or
      Protodeacon Basil wrote.

      Priest Victor Boldewskul

      In a message dated 10/5/04 4:55:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
      vladimir.kozyreff@... writes:

      > Dear father Victor, bless.
      >
      > You write: "At least we resolved that the Moscow Patriarchate does
      > not need to repent for or condemn Metropolitan Sergius. The person
      > of Metropolitan Sergius then is off the table. We are making
      > progress".
      >
      > Do you mean that this is not "hogwash" after all?
      >
      > In God,
      >
      >



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • vkozyreff
      Dear Father Victor, bless. The MP should not repent in Met. Sergius s place, but should repent for following him and for claiming that he took the right
      Message 71 of 71 , Oct 6, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Father Victor, bless.

        The MP should not repent in Met. Sergius's place, but should repent
        for following him and for claiming that he took the right decision.
        The MP should not condemn Met. Sergius but condemn his actions and
        his false teaching.

        Some in ROCOR, in their effort to justify the rapprochement with the
        MP, maintain the confusion between condemning a person and
        condemning his actions. "Seergianism is all right because we cannot
        condemn Met Sergius. We cannot condemn him, because we all sin". The
        distinction between condemning a person and condemning actions is
        however elementary in the exercise of discernment.

        Stating that in the negotiations with the MP in Munich, it was
        resolved that the person and the actions of Met Sergius were not to
        be discussed because "he is MP's sviatitiel' " is hogwash.

        Stating that we have resolved on this forum that the person and the
        actions of Met Sergius should not be discussed is not hogwash.

        Is it hogwash to believe that the MP does not want Met Sergius's
        person and actions to be discussed (whether in Munich or in Moscow)
        and that the ROCOR agrees with this?

        I am afraid we are not progressing at all, except in deliberately
        organised confusion.

        In God,

        Vladimir Kozyreff



        --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, frvboldewskul@a... wrote:
        > Dear Vladimir,
        > Context. My comment was in a context to Fr. Basil. Likewise, Fr.
        Alexander's
        > comment of "hogwash" was within a context, and not related to
        anything I or
        > Protodeacon Basil wrote.
        >
        > Priest Victor Boldewskul
        >
        > In a message dated 10/5/04 4:55:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
        > vladimir.kozyreff@s... writes:
        >
        > > Dear father Victor, bless.
        > >
        > > You write: "At least we resolved that the Moscow Patriarchate
        does
        > > not need to repent for or condemn Metropolitan Sergius. The
        person
        > > of Metropolitan Sergius then is off the table. We are making
        > > progress".
        > >
        > > Do you mean that this is not "hogwash" after all?
        > >
        > > In God,
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.