Re: Still looking for answers
- On 5/2/06, vlutchenkov <vlutchenkov@...> wrote:
> XPICTOC BOCKPECE!!!In response to the recent posting regarding re: Soviet Active Measures in
> The article is titled: Russian Federation Hypocrisy & Aggressive
> Clandestine Activity
> It can be viewed at; http://www.tpmcafe.com/node/28551
> Here is one paragraph from the article.
> "The Moscow Patriarchate organization, not the plurality of the laity
> and parish priests in Russia, is itself an instrument of the Russian
> state as evidenced by its many comments in line with Russian state
> expectations about the ROCOR's resistance to reunification, while
> saying kinder, gentler things to the ROCOR. The ROCOR, having found
> safe haven all of these years in the US, Europe and other lands,
> would do well to block any re-unification of the Moscow Patriarch
> with the ROCOR until the former KGB and current FSB running the
> Patriarchate repent of it, die, or resign, and until the Russian
> Federation has halted its new authoritarian experiment and become an
> open society. Those authoritarian experiments of Russia's past have
> not worked out so very well, have they?"
the "Post-Cold War" Era 1988-199 and after the WMD debacle, forgive me for
scepticism for reports from various security agencies... and despite the
fact that they have the imprimatur of having appeared on the Net. No matter
where you stand on the issue, no one can deny that the ROC has enemies all
over the world who would stop at nothing to prevent unity of the ROC.
I found the TPM blogsite to be of some interest. The poster of the article,
a Michael Woodson, has only been posting for 2 months and mostly about the
war in Iraq. Lo and behold is an article on Russia. The posting is called
"RF Hypocrisy & Aggressive Clandestine Activity," though after 2 paragraphs,
Mr Woodson goes off on this tangent about the ROC and ROCOR.
If I had to guess, I would assume that he is not Orthodox, since he doesn't
capitalize the word Church as most Orthodox would. Continuing on the
assumption that he is not Orthodox, he seems to know a lot about ROCOR and
even writes: "Of some concern also, is that some members of the ROCOR are
also employees of the US government." Exactly what does he mean here? Is he
pesonally concerned? Are old and new Russian emigres concerned?
Ask 10 heterodox colleagues, friends, relatives who may or may not know that
you go to some Russian parish but that is about it. Ask them if they know
what ROCOR/ROCA is. I would be stunned if even one person knew what ROCA is
(and wouldn't say "Oh, you mean that clothing label for teens?")
I also don't see how ROCOR fits into the picture of the RF's so-called
"nostalgia for the USSR" that Mr Woodson writes of. ROCOR is 180 degrees
opposite from the USSR, so that is certainly a non starter.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- XPICTOC BOCKPECE!!!
A combination of two threads (or even three of your responses).
Father John: (#16490) Again, "vintage Vova"!
Vova: And a fine vintage if I do say so myself.
Father John: (#16497) I have engaged in some rather lengthy e-mail
exchanges with Mr. Bushunow and members of his family.
Vova: Okay, but my last name is Lutchenkov, so I guess we can go on.
Father John: (#16498) Since some people see my replies as "non-
answers", let me give you the answers that I think they *really* are
waiting to hear:
Vova: There were some good and funny lines in that message. We all
need a bit of stress relief. (Thank you)
(WARNING OFF TOPIC) Father John: (#16498) "The Soviet Union did not
break up. Instead, a pretense of a breakup was passed off, in order
to get more seats in the U.N.
Vova: Actually they already had three votes representing the Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics. (USSR, BSSR, and UkSSR) Please note that
the "Russians" were once again not represented.
(OFF OFF TOPIC)
Father John: (#16490) The obvious answer to that would be that, if
you truly repented, and if that was the only issue at that, given
confession: then, Yes.
Vova: That was the quick and short answer. Thank you. Now without
further beating around the bush time is short, you have to start
packing. I would have expected that you would have at least inquired
if I had any direct participation in any of the terrible activities
perpetrated by the Anti Rabbit League against colonies, warrens,
nests, herds, litters, downs, or husks of those scary little
rabbits. So be it.
Now back to a real question. Yes I have read Patriarch
Alexy's "repentance statement," but the wording was that of a
true "wordsmith" (note: I did not call him any other names). It
completely avoided his association and activities as a known and
identified agent of the KGB. I find his response insincere and a
very poor example for his flock. I also think it may be an indicator
that with him holding the position "Patriarch, the Churches should
continue to talk and may be allow concelebrating of priests but not
of/or with Bishops at this time. I am also of the opinion that until
such time that the current Patriarch (or any future one that was
directly associated with the country's security and intelligence
services) sets an example by confessing to his/their direct
association we should not consider commemorating him. If he/they do
that they will have set a true example of confession. (For the folks
that would argue that we can not trust such a confession. All I can
say is Then that is between him and the final ultimate Judge.)
These are my opinions and as I stated earlier I hope that you will
provide me with your thoughts/guidance as part of our ongoing
Father John: (#16491)
<<Vova: (#16489) Sorry but it seems that based on some of what I have
seen, heard and what has been reported there were attempts to remove
people as delegates that were perceived as not following the party
line. Ooops sorry, I meant were not "team players".
Father John: That has not been the case in this Diocese.
Vova: I am glad to hear you say that. I am also glad to see that you
restricted it to only the Diocese you serve in. However, it appears
that at least one such attempt was made at the highest levels of our
Church. That attempt was based on what appears to have been the
advice and prodding of both Father Alexander Lebedeff and Archbishop
Mark. They attempted (and for awhile succeeded) to deny
participation in the Sobor of a duly elected member of the laity from
a Ukrainian-based Diocese. As a matter of fact if I am not mistaken
the action even at that time was wrong simply in the fact that it was
interference in on the territory/diocese of another Bishop. The
reasoning that I have read for this attempt was absolutely baseless,
uninformed and even smacked of hypocrisy. While on one hand
justification for the denial was to avoid being accused of Sergianism
in relation to the U.S. Government (yes definition du Jour and how
ridiculous!), but then two paragraphs later there was a comment akin
to "What would the Russian Government say about such an individual's
participation in our Sobor?" Now that would be closer to what we
have been taught Sergianism was (or is it still?). My answer to that
absurd question/comment was and is, "Who cares!!!???" The worst part
of this whole initial episode was that while it was briefly mentioned
on this list, very few people reacted to it and the message or
statement our Synod of Bishops made by going forth with the action at
that time. As I have said before words are important and those said a
lot. Recently I noticed that wiser heads prevailed, and the
attempted denial has been rescinded. I am left wondering if the
persons that made false accusations will ask for forgiveness from the
victims of those false insinuations and accusations?
Father John please except my apology for placing so many
questions/issues before your trip. I do hope that you may be able to
answer them before you go. As far as the last issue, regarding
Bishop Agafangel's diocese, since you did not participate in that I
understand if you choose not to speak on behalf of or to defend
someone else. But if you have thoughts about it fine.
Boba or to some Vova
- Dear Father -- He is Truly Risen!
You forgot a few key ones:
"The clergy of the Synod Cathedral have been personally profiting
from huge donations from the Russian government."
"Met. Laurus, Abp. Mark and Father (Insert Name here...e.g. Victor,
Alexander, John...) are working for the KGB, and have been for at
least 15 years."
Praying for peace and asking your blessing,
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Fr. John R. Shaw"
> XPICTOC BOCKPECE!
> --- In email@example.com, "vlutchenkov"
>give you the answers that I
> > We look to our clergy for guidance and explanations yet we
> > have gotten nothing except for some non-answers.
> JRS: Since some people see my replies as "non-answers", let me
> think they *really* are waiting to hear:fall. The communist party still
> "It's all a sham.
> "Communism did not really fall in Russia at all; it never can
> rules absolutely, but a pretense of a change is part of the Sovietstrategy to fool the West.
>breakup was passed off, in
> "The Soviet Union did not break up. Instead, a pretense of a
> order to get more seats in the U.N.for the secretive and
> "There are no churches in Russia, and no religion at all; except
> elusive Catacomb Church which anathematizes the godless MP.the "services" those
> "The public churches that tourists see, are Potemkin villages; and
> tourists are shown, are carried out by actors posing as believers.The same actors go from
> place to place and put on their "show", wherever the gullibletourists are taken by KGB
> Intourist guides.but Soviet human beings.
> "The inhabitants of Russia are mostly not real Russians anymore,
> They are marching in lock-step with the KGB, and are ready to takeover the world.
> "There are many times more of them, than all the rest of the world
> together. The menace of Islam can be ignored, because the Sovietsare the real threat to
> humanity, but most of all to the surviving anti-communist Russianemigres.
>rest of the free world.
> "They will use the sham-church to invade this country and all the
>will be seized and
> "They will come and get us. We all face the midnight knock, and we
> carried off right out of our homes, with no possibility of hidinganywhere.
>nail us into coffins and bury
> "We will be imprisoned in Siberia, at hard labor. Then they will
> us alive in the hard Siberian permafrost.people who believe it all, or
> "And nobody, nobody will be there to save us".
> Now every statement above is obvious nonsense. But there are
> something very close to it.
> In Christ
> Fr. John R. Shaw
- XPICTOC BOCKPECE!!!
> Vova: Actually they [the USSR] already had three votes representing the Union ofJRS: There was also no "Russian communist party": but only parties for all the other republics and ethnic groups. They seemed to be afraid of Russian nationalism...
> Soviet Socialist Republics. (USSR, BSSR, and UkSSR) Please note that
> the "Russians" were once again not represented.
> Now back to a real question. Yes I have read PatriarchJRS: That in itself is a significant point. As you may have noticed, Peter Bushunow does not believe that such a statement ever existed. You are thus a witness to it, and have said so twice.
> Alexy's "repentance statement," but the wording was that of a
> true "wordsmith" (note: I did not call him any other names).
Thank you for supporting my point on that.
> I also think it may be an indicatorJRS: Either we are in communion, or we are not. If we are, then in theory any clergy of ROCOR and the MP could concelebrate, if they so chose.
> that with him holding the position "Patriarch, the Churches should
> continue to talk and may be allow concelebrating of priests but not
> of/or with Bishops at this time.
After the ordination of a deacon for ROCOR by an MP bishop, in practice there has already been a concelebration with a bishop of the MP.
> I am also of the opinion that untilJRS: For what it's worth, I have commemorated the Patriarch of Moscow (as did St. John Maximovitch) at the Proskomedia, ever since I have been a priest (30 years and more now, starting back in NJ).
> such time that the current Patriarch (or any future one that was
> directly associated with the country's security and intelligence
> services) sets an example by confessing to his/their direct
> association we should not consider commemorating him.
When, in 1990, Patriarch Pimen died, I intoned "Vechmaya pamyat" for him at the end of a Sunday Liturgy in our Chicago cathedral. The choir sang "Vechnaya pamyat", and there were no complaints that I ever heard of, then or afterward.
> These are my opinions and as I stated earlier I hope that you willJRS: I didn't really restrict it, but I have no direct knowledge of anything else.
> provide me with your thoughts/guidance as part of our ongoing
> Father John: That [removing delegates for their views] has not been the case in this Diocese.
> Vova: I am glad to hear you say that. I am also glad to see that you
> restricted it to only the Diocese you serve in.
> However, it appearsJRS: As I understood it, the idea was that an American ambassador would have a conflict of interests. But in the end, they decided to let it go.
> that at least one such attempt was made at the highest levels of our
> My answer to thatJRS: There are a slew of questions that I would prefer to answer in the same words. However, we have had complaints about "non-answers", so I refrain from saying that.
> absurd question/comment was and is, "Who cares!!!???"
> I am left wondering if theJRS: There have been a lot of false accusations going around, including false accusations of making false accusations, on several sides. My advice: don't hold your breath waiting...
> persons that made false accusations will ask for forgiveness from the
> victims of those false insinuations and accusations?
> Father John please except my apology for placing so manyJRS: There will be plenty of questions/issues on the trip, too. They never end, at least in this life.
> questions/issues before your trip.
Fr. John R. Shaw
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]