Re: canonical obstacles
- XPICTOC BOCKPECE!!!!
Ahh Mr.Nikitin replied. (My apology for think he would not.)
Mr. Nikitin: "Hope the letter below helps:"
Vova: Yes it did. Especially the following portion of the letter.
"The answer to this is simple. The Church has the authority in
certain cases to employ the principle of economia condescension. The
hierarch Saint Basil the Great said that, in order not to drive many
away from the Church, it is necessary sometimes to permit
condescension and not apply the church canons in all their severity."
Vova: Mr. Nikitin, please remember that a Metropolitan is like the
Chairman of the Board. He is of course free to express and write his
opinions. However, when it comes time to vote he gets ONE vote.
Decisions of the Council of Bishops are voted on and majority rules.
In addition, if I am not mistaken the letter you offered
as "evidence" was written to a priest within the Diocese of the
writer. That is also important as far as the Church is structured.
--- In email@example.com, michael nikitin
>previous first hierarch, Holy Metr.Philaret, to make what some may
> So I wouldn't be understood, I am including a letter from our
not understand clearer.
>for ROCOR to join the uncanonical, schismatic creation of Stalin as
> I also stated joining ROCOR, who has stayed on the true path, not
the Western Dioscese called the MP.
> Hope the letter below helps:
> Michael N
> A LETTER FROM METROPOLITAN PHILARET (VOZNESENSKY) TO A PRIEST OF
> THE CHURCH ABROAD CONCERNING FATHER DIMITRY DUDKO AND THE
> MOSCOW PATRIARCHATE
> Exerpts from St.Metr.Philaret's letter:
> Now a few words on the tragedy of poor Father Dimitry Dudko.
> From the very beginning of his activities, when his name was being
> more and more often as a pillar of Orthodoxy, and moreover, themembers of
> the Synod, the hierarchs, were joiningimmediately
> their voices to this; I, however, the author of these lines,
> kept out of it and forewarned my fellow hierarchs that a disastermight
> happen here. How so? Because in the USSR, accordingocracy.
> to the premise of Archimandrite Constantine, there is now a satan-
> There rules he whom the Saviour called a liar and the father oflies. This
> lie reigns there. Therefore one cannot trustfact may
> anything that occurs there. Any seemingly spiritually encouraging
> turn out to be a falsification, a forgery, a deception, or aprovocation...
> Why did this calamity befall Father Dimitry Dudko? Let's assume the
> not suspecting him of conscious collaboration with the KGB andbetrayal of
> his convictions, but simply noting the sadthe
> fact that he did not endure, but was broken; he capitulated before
> enemies of the Church. Why? It would seem that he did displaycourage and
> daring; and then suddenly, such an inglorious end. Why?! Becausehis
> activity took place outside of the true Church...and
> What then is the Soviet church? Archimandrite Constantine has often
> insistently stated that the most horrible thing that the God-hatingregime
> has done in Russia is the creation of the SovietChurch,
> Church, which the Bolsheviks presented to the people as the true
> having driven the genuine Orthodox Church into the catacombs orinto the
> concentration camps.Patriarch
> This pseudo-church has been twice anathematized. His Holiness
> Tikhon and the All-Russian Church Sobor anathematized theCommunists and all
> their collaborators. This dread anathema has not been lifted tillthis day
> and remains in force, since it can be lifted only by a similar All-Russian
> Church Sobor, as the canonical supreme ecclesiastical authority.And a
> terrifying thing happened in 1927, when the head of the Church,Metropolitan
> Sergius, by his infamous andBolsheviks and
> apostate Declaration, subjected the Russian Church to the
> proclaimed collaboration with them. And thus in a most exact sensewas
> fulfilled the expression in the prayer at the beginning ofConfession:
> having fallen under their own anathema! For inwhile in
> 1918 the Church anathematized all the confederates of Communism,
> 1927 she herself joined the camp of these collaborators and beganto laud
> the red, God-having regime to laud the red beast spoken ofcriminal
> in the Apocalypse.
> As if that is not enough. When Metropolitan Sergius promulgated his
> Declaration, then the faithful children of the Church immediatelyseparated
> themselves from the Soviet church, and thusanathematized the
> the Catacomb Church was formed. And she, in her turn, has
> official church for its betrayal of Christ.activities of
> And it was within this very church of evil-doers that the
> Father Dimitry Dudko occurred, who has frankly declared in thepress that he
> is not going to break with the Soviet church but will remain inher. Has his
> spiritual eyes been open, and had he seen the true nature of theofficial
> church, he might have found within himself the courage to say: Ihave hated
> the congregation of evil-doers, and with the ungodly will I not sitI am
> breaking off with the companyWhy,
> of the enemies of God, and I am withdrawing from the Soviet church.
> then for us he would have become one of our own his courage wouldhave
> destroyed the barrier which irrevocably stands between us by virtueof the
> fact that the Sobor adopted as its guiding principle the Testamentof
> Metropolitan Anastasy. For in this Testament it is ordered that wemust not
> have any communion whatsoever with the Soviets, not only nocommunion in
> prayer, but not even ordinaryrefused to
> contact in daily life. But as long as Father Dimitry would have
> remain in the Soviet pseudo-church, and would have withdrawn frommembership
> in her the barrier would no longerterrible time
> have applied to him..........
> The hierarch Theophan the Recluse in his own day warned that a
> was approaching when people would behold before their eyes all thesuch while
> appearance of church grandeur solemn services, church order, and
> on the inside there would be total betrayal of the Spirit ofsame
> Christ. Is this not what we see in the Soviet church? Patriarchs,
> Metropolitans, all the priestly and monastic orders and at the very
> time, an alliance with the God-haters, that is, a manifestsincere
> betrayal of Christ.
> To this company belongs also Father Dimitry Dudko. Of course, his
> religious feelings compelled him to preach concerning God and notto condone
> many of the disgraceful happenings in the lives of Russian people.But for
> him, Pimen was, and likely still is,it is
> his spiritual head, the head of the Soviet hierarchy; while for us,
> not at all so. For our Sobor in 1971 passed a resolution:Pimen as
> on the basis of such and such canons to consider the election of
> unlawful and invalid, and to consider all his acts and decrees ashaving no
> force or significance.do?
> How difficult is Father Dimitry Dudko's position now! What is he to
> Continue his pastoral work? And what can he say to the faithful?Say the
> same thing that he said before his repentance? But then, he hasalready
> renounced this! Say the opposite? Why, they believed him beforewhen he
> preached that which won for him the trust and respect of thefaithful and
> now, how will he look them in the face? One girl correctly saidthat there
> is one way out for him: make a genuine repentance in atonement forthe one
> he just now made. But in order to doChurch,
> that he must depart from the church of the evil-doers for the true
> and there make his repentance. However, in return, the red churchwill
> undoubtedly deal with him with particular malicewill pass
> and cruelty. Of course, by crossing over to the true Church, he
> over into the realm of Divine grace and strength, which can fortifyhim just
> as it fortified those catacomb nuns. God grantRussia
> that he find the true and saving path.
> I should also like to note the following. The Catacomb Church in
> relates to the Church Abroad with love and total confidence.However, one
> thing is incomprehensible to the Catacomb Christians: they can'tunderstand
> why our Church, which realizes beyond a doubt that the Soviethierarchy has
> betrayed Christ and is no longer a bearer of grace, neverthelessreceives
> clergy of the Soviet church in their existing orders, not re-ordaining them,
> as ones already having grace. For the clergy and flock receivegrace from
> the hierarchy, and if it [the hierarchy] has betrayed the Truth anddeprived
> itself of grace, from where then does the clergy have grace? It isalong
> thesecertain cases
> lines that the Catacomb Christians pose the question.
> The answer to this is simple. The Church has the authority in
> to employ the principle of economia condescension. The hierarchSaint Basil
> the Great said that, in order not to drive many away from theChurch, it is
> necessary sometimes to permit condescension and not apply thechurch canons
> in all their severity. When our Church accepted Roman Catholicclergy in
> their orders, without ordaining them, she acted according to thisprinciple.
> And Metropolitan Anthonyoutward form
> [Khrapovitsky], elucidating this issue, pointed out that the
> successive ordination from Apostolic times that the Roman Catholicsdo have;
> whereas the grace, which the Roman Catholic church has lost, isreceived by
> those uniting [themselves to theat the
> Church] from the plenitude of grace present in the Orthodox Church,
> very moment of their joining. The form is filled with content, saidVladyka
> Anthony.apply the
> In precisely the same manner, in receiving the Soviet clergy, we
> principle of economia. And we receive the clergymen from Moscow notas ones
> possessing grace, but as ones receiving it by the very act ofunion. But to
> recognize the church of the evil-doers as the bearer andOrthodoxy
> repository of grace, that we cannot do, of course. For outside of
> there is no grace; and the Soviet church has deprived itself ofgrace.
> In concluding my lengthy letter, I should like to point several
> to you, Father. The Bishops' Sobor resolved to be guided by and tofulfill
> the Testament of Metropolitan Anastasy, in which the late FirstHierarch
> bade us not to have any communion with the Soviet churchcontact.
> whatsoever, not only no prayerful communion, but not even ordinary
> On what basis then have you and other clergymen had directrelations with
> Father Dudko? And have written him letters, etc.? No matter howsincere a
> man you may have considered him to be, nevertheless, can yourprivate
> opinion annul a ruling adopted by the Church? Now, had Father Dudkosaid: I
> am breaking with the official church and leaving her then you couldhave
> entered into lively contactviolation of
> with him. But in the absence of that, your actions constitute a
> ecclesiastical discipline. Dudko wrote to me personally, but I didnot
> answer him although I could have said much. By theEntrance?
> way, on what basis did you, even before this, take into your head to
> commemorate an archbishop of the Soviet church during the Great
> Who gave you the right to do that, which hierarchah, too
> who, how, where, when?.. Be more careful, my dear, zealous, but,
> impetuous fellow minister!they
> vlutchenkov <vlutchenkov@
> If all they had to do was repent to be accepted in to ROCOR, and
> did not have to be re- baptized (or would that be baptized for thejust 2¢/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
> first time), they did not have to go to a ROCOR seminary or pass
> a "clergy entrance exam" to start or better yet continue there
> calling, then a logical conclusion would be that they did not come
> from a heretical sect.
> Love cheap thrills? Enjoy PC-to-Phone calls to 30+ countries for
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]