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

Re: [orthodox-synod] Re: Sobor voting;

Expand Messages
  • michael nikitin
    Alexandra is correct. The Catacomb bishops should be included as should the OCA also. If we went out of our way to have dialogue to join the MP, why couldn t
    Message 1 of 9 , Oct 4, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Alexandra is correct. The Catacomb bishops should be included as should the OCA also.

      If we went out of our way to have dialogue to join the MP, why couldn't we at the same time have begun dialogue with the Catacomb bishops and the OCA? We didn't even make an attempt to
      have dialogue with them. There is something wrong with this picture and it's not according to
      Ukaz #362.


      This type of council with only the MP/ROCOR present is typically called a Robber Sobor.

      Michael N


      ----- Original Message ----
      From: interestedplus <asvetlov@...>
      To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Wednesday, October 4, 2006 6:51:38 AM
      Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re: Sobor voting;













      Dear Father Victor,



      You wrote:



      the Resolution states that any remaining problems to be resolved by

      the an All Russian Sobor, which, of course, can only occur after the

      reestablishment of Eucharist and Canonical union.

      In Christ,

      Priest Victor Boldewskul



      Can I ask "why?". Particularly since the other "Russian" Church

      Jurisdictions should be included in a "COUNCIL", including the

      Catacomb Church bishops. The whole current day problem is one

      of "acceptance" by other churches of churches as part of the Russian

      Church. This will never be resolved without a true conciliar council

      of all bishops who any decisions of the council will affect. The

      Arians were part of the councils. Could someone with more knowledge

      of canonical procedure please answer my question. I'd be very

      grateful.



      In Christ,

      Alexandra



      --- In orthodox-synod@ yahoogroups. com, frvictor@... wrote:

      >

      > Dear Melissa,

      > The Resolution of the 4th All Diaspora Sobor was published. See:

      >

      http://www.russiano rthodoxchurch. ws/synod/ eng2006/5ensobre solution. htm

      l

      >

      > The text speaks for itself. Also, in an interview with Bishop

      Gabriel, His Grace also noted that the Resolution was adopted nearly

      unnanimously. Note especially paragraph one which includes the

      following: "... attest that as loyal children of the Holy Church, we

      shall submit to Divine will and obey the decisions of the forthcoming

      Council of Bishops."

      >

      > Also paragraph two: "We archpastors, pastors and laymen, members of

      the IV All-Diaspora Council, unanimously express our resoluteness to

      heal the wounds of division within the Russian Church´┐Żbetween her

      parts in the Fatherland and abroad. Our Paschal joy is joined by the

      great hope that in the appropriate time, the unity of the Russian

      Church will be restored upon the foundation of the Truth of Christ,

      opening for us the possibility to serve together and to commune from

      one Chalice."

      > Note the words "submit" and "obey" and accepting that the decisions

      of the Sobor of Bishops represent God's will.

      > Note the words "resoluteness to heal the wounds of division."

      > According to the conciliar resolution of the 4th All Diapora Sobor,

      which the bishops accepted, it has been recongnized that any decision

      on the part of our bishops is concidered Divine Will. Therefore, we

      can rejoice, for our bishops have determined that now is the

      appropriate time for the unity of the Russian Church to be restored.

      My opinion does not matter, nor does yours. All that matters is God's

      will, and that we fulfill it. Your husband wrote on this list that

      those who support union need to humble themselves. Every Christian

      needs to humble themselves to God's Holy Will.

      > I wish to also add, that this resolution on accepting the decisions

      of our bishops as Divine will is what I was always taught growing up

      in Rochester, especially by the current Rector who was my teacher in

      Seminary, and who was the vice-president of the Sobor the day of the

      voting of the Resolution.

      > Finally, the Resolution states that any remaining problems to be

      resolved by the an All Russian Sobor, which, of course, can only

      occur after the reestablishment of Eucharist and Canonical union.

      > In Christ,

      > Priest Victor Boldewskul

      >

      > ------------ -- Original message ------------ --

      > From: Melissa Bushunow <cafeconlechemom@ ...>

      >

      > > Dear in Christ Fr. Stefan,

      > >

      > >

      > > On Sep 29, 2006, at 4:57 PM, Archpriest Stefan Pavlenko wrote:

      > >

      > > > Ms. Melissa Bushunow,

      > > >

      > > > Where do you get this information?

      > >

      > > I received this information from SOBOR delegate Timothy Clader.

      > > Timothy Clader was witness to Counting Committee President Fr.

      Vladimir

      > > Petrenko saying that he refused to sign off on the counting

      committee's

      > > report.

      > >

      > > > Show me please the statements

      > > > confirming what you say.

      > >

      > > Please show us the scanned document from the Sobor, with Fr.

      Vladimir

      > > Petrenko's signature on it.

      > >

      > > > The "Count" is there, every member who was

      > > > there physically present knows exactly what happened in their

      > > > presence and you are trying to make it seem like there was some

      > > > discrepancy about the actual RATIFICATION of the resolution.

      Yours

      > > > is an out right MISREPRESENTATION >>>BY YOU<<< of what took

      place at

      > > > the SOBOR, and unless you present documentation based on

      factual

      > > > proof, your statements are misguided at least, if not out right

      > > > LIES.

      > >

      > > Ask Fr. Vladimir Petrenko. In lieu of that, publish the minutes,

      post

      > > scanned SOBOR documents.

      > >

      > > We have been asking for documentation from the SOBOR for weeks,

      if not

      > > months, and it has not been forthcoming. Where are the minutes?

      > >

      > > Where are the transcriptions of the questions by the delegates,

      their

      > > comments, and the answers to them that were to have been entered

      into

      > > the minutes?

      > >

      > > > I was there and every member who was present is a witness to

      > > > the facts.

      > >

      > > Let all the members of ROCOR hear all the facts of SOBOR, as

      documented

      > > by the minutes. All we have heard and seen are the pro-union

      speeches.

      > >

      > > > YOU ARE A DISIMINATOR OF FALSE INFORMATION. I accuse you

      > > > personally, until you >>>Melissa Bushunow<<< show your sources,

      of

      > > > FABRICATING A LIE about the SOBOR!

      > > > Archpriest Stefan Pavlenko

      > > >

      > > The disseminators of false information are those who willfully

      stifled

      > > discussion on the MP'S sergianist, ecumenist activities at SOBOR,

      and

      > > those who continue to do so by not publishing the minutes.

      > >

      > > Melissa Bushunow

      > >

      > >

      > >

      > >

      > >

      > >

      > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---

      > > > --- In orthodox-synod@ yahoogroups. com, Melissa Bushunow

      > > > wrote:

      > > > >

      > > > >

      > > > > On Sep 29, 2006, at 2:11 PM, Archpriest Stefan Pavlenko

      wrote:

      > > > >

      > > > > > > Fr. Vladimir Petrenko, President of the Counting

      Committee,

      > > > > > refused to> sign off on the vote, but his name was posted

      > > > anyway.

      > > > > > > Sound familiar? > Melissa Bushunow

      > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --->

      > > > > >

      > > > > > This is just unfair, the whole assembly is witness to the

      fact

      > > > of

      > > > > > the vote count and the almost unanimous out come.

      > > > > >

      > > > > > Father Vladimir's personal actions aside, the vote was the

      vote.

      > > > > >

      > > > > > This is just outrageous misrepresentation!

      > > > >

      > > > > There have been numerous misrepresentations of what went on

      at

      > > > Sobor

      > > > > and elsewhere. That Fr. Vladimir Petrenko refused to sign off

      on

      > > > the

      > > > > vote count is the truth. That someone posted his name to it,

      > > > despite

      > > > > his refusal, to give the impression that its fairness was

      > > > uncontested

      > > > > -- that is the real misrepresentation.

      > > > >

      > > > > Melissa Bushunow

      > > > >

      > > > >

      > > > > > GOD HELP YOU FOR SUCH CALCULATED AND GROSSLY UNFAIR

      POSTING.

      > > > > >

      > > > > > Archpriest Stefan Pavlenko

      > > > > >

      > > > > >

      ============ ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= =====

      > > > > > -- In orthodox-synod@ yahoogroups. com, Melissa Bushunow

      > > > > > wrote:

      > > > > > >

      > > > > > > Since the discussion has returned to the voting question:

      > > > > > >

      > > > > > > On Aug 8, 2006, at 2:24 PM, Fr. Alexander Lebedeff wrote:

      > > > > > >

      > > > > > > Finally, I would like to remind people to look at the

      > > > official vote

      > > > > > > > tally on the Resolution, found at:

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > >

      > > >

      http://www.russiano rthodoxchurch. ws/synod/ eng2006/5ensobor vote.html

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > > Here we see that with 124 members voting, and each

      paragraph

      > > > > > being

      > > > > > > > voted on separately, out of a total cumulative 868

      votes,

      > > > there

      > > > > > were,

      > > > > > > > cumulatively, 843 "yes" votes, 7 "no" votes, and 18

      > > > abstentions.

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > > Note carefully also who the members of the Counting

      > > > Committee

      > > > > > were:

      > > > > > > > President--Fr. Vladimir Petrenko from the South

      American

      > > > > > > > Diocese, Protodeacon Andre Meillassoux (Western

      European

      > > > > > Diocese)

      > > > > > > > and Alexander Ivanovich Mytilin ( Odessa Diocese).

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > > It would be hard to believe that the representatives of

      the

      > > > > > South

      > > > > > > > American and Odessa Dioceses would have been biased in

      > > > favor of

      > > > > > > > rapprochement. . .

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > > Witj love in Christ,

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > > Prot. Alexander Lebedeff

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > >

      > > > > > >

      > > > > > > Fr. Vladimir Petrenko, President of the Counting

      Committee,

      > > > > > refused to

      > > > > > > sign off on the vote, but his name was posted anyway.

      > > > > > >

      > > > > > > Sound familiar?

      > > > > > >

      > > > > > > Melissa Bushunow

      > > > > > >

      > > > > > >

      > > > > > > On Sep 29, 2006, at 12:42 PM, Bushunow, Peter wrote:

      > > > > > >

      > > > > > > > Priest Victor Boldewskul writes:

      > > > > > > > >On a side note, someone tried to cast a shadow over

      the

      > > > > > procedure of

      > > > > > > > the voting. The floor that day was controlled by the V.

      Rev.

      > > > > > > > >Gregory Naumenko, who is the rector of Holy Protection

      > > > Parish

      > > > > > in

      > > > > > > > Rochester NY. Those who know Fr.. Gregory personally

      know

      > > > that

      > > > > > > is

      > > > > > > > very much concerned about the welfare of his flock,

      some of

      > > > > > whom are

      > > > > > > > openly against the process of reconciliation, and have

      not

      > > > > > > > >issued statements of support for our bishops in this

      > > > regard.

      > > > > > No one

      > > > > > > > would accused Fr. Gregory of being part of any plot to

      push

      > > > > > > > >anything through one way or the other. Likewise, the

      > > > > > Resolution

      > > > > > > > itself

      > > > > > > > was presented by His Eminence Archbishop Hilarion.

      Again,

      > > > > > > > >Vladyka has an impecible reputation of fairness.

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > > Yes, Fr. Victor, the voting was done incorrectly.

      > > > > > > > The delegates heard speeches for three days, then

      Vladika

      > > > > > Agaphangel

      > > > > > > > asked that the actual Act be read. Father Alexander

      gave a

      > > > > > > > presentation. The actual Act, a "draft" of which is now

      > > > > > available on

      > > > > > > > the internet, as not presented to the delegates. The

      > > > delegates

      > > > > > voted

      > > > > > > > paragraph by paragraph on a resolution that was very

      > > > carefully

      > > > > > written

      > > > > > > > to express well-meaning sentiment but no firm

      substance. The

      > > > > > voting

      > > > > > > > was

      > > > > > > > by affirmation -- not a closed, written vote. The

      > > > resolution as

      > > > > > a

      > > > > > > > whole

      > > > > > > > was not brought up for a vote.

      > > > > > > > Father Alexander has indicated in an email, in contrast

      to

      > > > what

      > > > > > was

      > > > > > > > announced at the Council, that records of the

      proceedings

      > > > are

      > > > > > not

      > > > > > > > going

      > > > > > > > to be made available for us to read. A shame.

      > > > > > > > Peter

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > >

      > > >

      ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ***

      > > > > > *

      > > > > > > > This email and any files transmitted with it are

      > > > confidential

      > > > > > and

      > > > > > > > intended solely for the use of the individual or entity

      to

      > > > whom

      > > > > > they

      > > > > > > > are addressed. If you have received this email in error

      > > > please

      > > > > > delete

      > > > > > > > it from your system.

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > > This footnote also confirms that this email message has

      been

      > > > > > swept for

      > > > > > > > the presence of computer viruses.

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > > Thank You,

      > > > > > > > Viahealth

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > >

      > > >

      ************ ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ***

      > > > > > *

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > > >

      > > > > > >

      > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      > > > > > >

      > > > > >

      > > > > >

      > > > > >

      > > > >

      > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      > > > >

      > > >

      > > >

      > >

      > >

      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      > >

      > >

      > >

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

      > >

      > >

      > > Yahoo! Groups Links

      > >

      > >

      > >

      > >

      > >

      > >

      > >

      > >

      > >

      > >

      >

      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      >














      <!--

      #ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif;}
      #ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
      #ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif;}
      #ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}
      #ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}
      #ygrp-text{
      font-family:Georgia;
      }
      #ygrp-text p{
      margin:0 0 1em 0;
      }
      #ygrp-tpmsgs{
      font-family:Arial;
      clear:both;
      }
      #ygrp-vitnav{
      padding-top:10px;
      font-family:Verdana;
      font-size:77%;
      margin:0;
      }
      #ygrp-vitnav a{
      padding:0 1px;
      }
      #ygrp-actbar{
      clear:both;
      margin:25px 0;
      white-space:nowrap;
      color:#666;
      text-align:right;
      }
      #ygrp-actbar .left{
      float:left;
      white-space:nowrap;
      }
      .bld{font-weight:bold;}
      #ygrp-grft{
      font-family:Verdana;
      font-size:77%;
      padding:15px 0;
      }
      #ygrp-ft{
      font-family:verdana;
      font-size:77%;
      border-top:1px solid #666;
      padding:5px 0;
      }
      #ygrp-mlmsg #logo{
      padding-bottom:10px;
      }

      #ygrp-vital{
      background-color:#e0ecee;
      margin-bottom:20px;
      padding:2px 0 8px 8px;
      }
      #ygrp-vital #vithd{
      font-size:77%;
      font-family:Verdana;
      font-weight:bold;
      color:#333;
      text-transform:uppercase;
      }
      #ygrp-vital ul{
      padding:0;
      margin:2px 0;
      }
      #ygrp-vital ul li{
      list-style-type:none;
      clear:both;
      border:1px solid #e0ecee;
      }
      #ygrp-vital ul li .ct{
      font-weight:bold;
      color:#ff7900;
      float:right;
      width:2em;
      text-align:right;
      padding-right:.5em;
      }
      #ygrp-vital ul li .cat{
      font-weight:bold;
      }
      #ygrp-vital a {
      text-decoration:none;
      }

      #ygrp-vital a:hover{
      text-decoration:underline;
      }

      #ygrp-sponsor #hd{
      color:#999;
      font-size:77%;
      }
      #ygrp-sponsor #ov{
      padding:6px 13px;
      background-color:#e0ecee;
      margin-bottom:20px;
      }
      #ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{
      padding:0 0 0 8px;
      margin:0;
      }
      #ygrp-sponsor #ov li{
      list-style-type:square;
      padding:6px 0;
      font-size:77%;
      }
      #ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{
      text-decoration:none;
      font-size:130%;
      }
      #ygrp-sponsor #nc {
      background-color:#eee;
      margin-bottom:20px;
      padding:0 8px;
      }
      #ygrp-sponsor .ad{
      padding:8px 0;
      }
      #ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{
      font-family:Arial;
      font-weight:bold;
      color:#628c2a;
      font-size:100%;
      line-height:122%;
      }
      #ygrp-sponsor .ad a{
      text-decoration:none;
      }
      #ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{
      text-decoration:underline;
      }
      #ygrp-sponsor .ad p{
      margin:0;
      }
      o {font-size:0;}
      .MsoNormal {
      margin:0 0 0 0;
      }
      #ygrp-text tt{
      font-size:120%;
      }
      blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;}
      .replbq {margin:4;}
      -->









      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • michael nikitin
      Fr.John had said before there was no Catacomb Church. Now he admits there is. We didn t recognize nor were in communion with the MP, but still had dialogue
      Message 2 of 9 , Oct 4, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Fr.John had said before there was no Catacomb Church. Now he admits there is.

        We didn't recognize nor were in communion with the MP, but still had dialogue even
        though they didn't leave the WCC, ecumenism and Sergianism. Why couldn't we make
        overtures to the Catacomb bishops and the OCA for dialogue at the same time?

        If only we had dialogue with the Catacomb Church and the OCA also, we could then say
        we followed Ukaz #362 and had a true "COUNCIL".

        With only the MP/ROCOR involved it is an aberration of a True "Council"...a False
        or Robber "Council".

        Michael N

        ----- Original Message ----
        From: Fr. John R. Shaw <vrevjrs@...>
        To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Wednesday, October 4, 2006 5:38:18 PM
        Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re: Sobor voting













        --- In orthodox-synod@ yahoogroups. com, "interestedplus" <asvetlov@.. .> wrote:



        > Can I ask "why?" [an All Russian Sobor... can only occur after the

        > reestablishment of Eucharist and Canonical union]. Particularly since the other "Russian"

        > Church

        > Jurisdictions should be included in a "COUNCIL", including the

        > Catacomb Church bishops.



        JRS: There cannot be a church council unless the participants are already in communion

        with, and recognize, one another.



        The "catacomb church bishops" are split into countless groups (who could even say exactly

        how many there are, name them all, or contact them?), and they do not recognize one

        another, or ROCOR, or the MP.



        If they were somehow all brought together, in all likelihood they would only argue

        endlessly and refuse to come to any agreement.



        In Christ

        Fr. John R. Shaw














        <!--

        #ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif;}
        #ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
        #ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif;}
        #ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}
        #ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}
        #ygrp-text{
        font-family:Georgia;
        }
        #ygrp-text p{
        margin:0 0 1em 0;
        }
        #ygrp-tpmsgs{
        font-family:Arial;
        clear:both;
        }
        #ygrp-vitnav{
        padding-top:10px;
        font-family:Verdana;
        font-size:77%;
        margin:0;
        }
        #ygrp-vitnav a{
        padding:0 1px;
        }
        #ygrp-actbar{
        clear:both;
        margin:25px 0;
        white-space:nowrap;
        color:#666;
        text-align:right;
        }
        #ygrp-actbar .left{
        float:left;
        white-space:nowrap;
        }
        .bld{font-weight:bold;}
        #ygrp-grft{
        font-family:Verdana;
        font-size:77%;
        padding:15px 0;
        }
        #ygrp-ft{
        font-family:verdana;
        font-size:77%;
        border-top:1px solid #666;
        padding:5px 0;
        }
        #ygrp-mlmsg #logo{
        padding-bottom:10px;
        }

        #ygrp-vital{
        background-color:#e0ecee;
        margin-bottom:20px;
        padding:2px 0 8px 8px;
        }
        #ygrp-vital #vithd{
        font-size:77%;
        font-family:Verdana;
        font-weight:bold;
        color:#333;
        text-transform:uppercase;
        }
        #ygrp-vital ul{
        padding:0;
        margin:2px 0;
        }
        #ygrp-vital ul li{
        list-style-type:none;
        clear:both;
        border:1px solid #e0ecee;
        }
        #ygrp-vital ul li .ct{
        font-weight:bold;
        color:#ff7900;
        float:right;
        width:2em;
        text-align:right;
        padding-right:.5em;
        }
        #ygrp-vital ul li .cat{
        font-weight:bold;
        }
        #ygrp-vital a {
        text-decoration:none;
        }

        #ygrp-vital a:hover{
        text-decoration:underline;
        }

        #ygrp-sponsor #hd{
        color:#999;
        font-size:77%;
        }
        #ygrp-sponsor #ov{
        padding:6px 13px;
        background-color:#e0ecee;
        margin-bottom:20px;
        }
        #ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{
        padding:0 0 0 8px;
        margin:0;
        }
        #ygrp-sponsor #ov li{
        list-style-type:square;
        padding:6px 0;
        font-size:77%;
        }
        #ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{
        text-decoration:none;
        font-size:130%;
        }
        #ygrp-sponsor #nc {
        background-color:#eee;
        margin-bottom:20px;
        padding:0 8px;
        }
        #ygrp-sponsor .ad{
        padding:8px 0;
        }
        #ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{
        font-family:Arial;
        font-weight:bold;
        color:#628c2a;
        font-size:100%;
        line-height:122%;
        }
        #ygrp-sponsor .ad a{
        text-decoration:none;
        }
        #ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{
        text-decoration:underline;
        }
        #ygrp-sponsor .ad p{
        margin:0;
        }
        o {font-size:0;}
        .MsoNormal {
        margin:0 0 0 0;
        }
        #ygrp-text tt{
        font-size:120%;
        }
        blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;}
        .replbq {margin:4;}
        -->









        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • interestedplus
        Dear Father John, Thank you for your reply. You state that: There cannot be a church council unless the participants are already in communion ... My
        Message 3 of 9 , Oct 5, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Father John,

          Thank you for your reply. You state that:

          "There cannot be a church council unless the participants are already
          in communion
          > with, and recognize, one another"

          My understanding (and I could be wrong) is that during the battle
          with previous heresies at Sobors, some bishops did not "recognise"
          other bishops as parts of the Church. It was then the decision of the
          true Sobor, which allowed all a voice and then made a concensual
          decision. The present situation appears similar.

          You also state: "The "catacomb church bishops" are split into
          countless groups (who could even say exactly
          > how many there are, name them all, or contact them?), and they do
          not recognize one
          > another, or ROCOR, or the MP."

          There may be several groups, but there are also synods (and I'm aware
          of at least one that is well organised, who ROCA helped with their
          episcopacy earlier). The fact that the catacomb Church is not "well
          organised" in the wordly sense is no excuse to exclude them. The view
          that you seem to be voicing is straight from the mouths of the MP -
          "there is no other Church, if it does not accept us". Regarding
          contacting "them", surely in the age of email, TV etc this could be
          done if the will was there.

          The big hurdle that I do know exists, is that some in the Catacomb
          Church still DO NOT TRUST THAT THEY WILL NOT BE PERSECUTED if they
          surface. For anyone with knowledge of what happenned to parents and
          grandparents, and understand the POST TRAUMATIC STRESS that some of
          our brothers and sisters in Christ are suffering from, their fear and
          the fear of our Diaspora elderly is quite logical. This fear is that
          the powers that be, once they can identify them as ideological
          dissidents, may "deal" with them as in the past. After all we do
          learn (or some do) from our experiece. And to paraphrase Christ,
          there is the parable about a wise person avoiding the road on which
          he was previously beaten up....(I'm more than open to anyone who can
          quote same).

          Your statement that: "> If they were somehow all brought together, in
          all likelihood they would only argue
          > endlessly and refuse to come to any agreement." is just a huge
          denegrating assumption or personal first hand knowledge of these
          Bishops. If its the first, it reminds me of the American view of the
          Germans in "Hogans Heroes". These bishops are not the enemy, and if
          we don't know them except for what we have been told by the MP (who
          do see the Catacombnics as the enemy), should not we find out????
          And of course bishops NEVER argued during previous Councils........

          One of our clergy, and elderly and well respected presbyter, has had
          ongoing contact with some of the Catacomb Church. His appraisal of
          these people is that they are trully faithful to Our Saviour, and
          still suffer some persecution by authorities. I trust his judgement.
          I've also had some dealings with Catacombnics in Russia and the
          Ukraine. Their families have been greatly traumatised by persecution
          by authorities in the past. I can understand why they are circumspect.
          The opinion of ROCA travellers who have met and befriended these
          people is very positive.

          If we are really concerned about the "healing" of the Russian Church
          after its worst period in history, lets not play schoolyard clicky
          favourites, lets get serious and not just get together with
          the "strong". Otherwise it becomes a bit like the old camping joke:
          Ivan is looking for something on the floor by the evening campfire.
          Vasia asks "What are you looking for?"
          Ivan - "I lost my wallet"
          They look together all around the campfire.
          Vasia - "Are you sure you lost it here?"
          Ivan - "No. I lost it way over there by the trees"
          Vasia - "So why have we been looking by the fire?"
          Ivan with a smirk - "Its too dark out there to find anything.."

          CANONICALLY is there anything preventing us from having a true Sobor
          of all Russian Church jurisdictions to decide where to from this
          point in time???

          In Christ,

          Alexandra

          PS God does send the Dawn.


          --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Fr. John R. Shaw"
          <vrevjrs@...> wrote:
          >
          > --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "interestedplus" <asvetlov@>
          wrote:
          >
          > > Can I ask "why?" [an All Russian Sobor... can only occur after
          the
          > > reestablishment of Eucharist and Canonical union]. Particularly
          since the other "Russian"
          > > Church
          > > Jurisdictions should be included in a "COUNCIL", including the
          > > Catacomb Church bishops.
          >
          > JRS: There cannot be a church council unless the participants are
          already in communion
          > with, and recognize, one another.
          >
          > The "catacomb church bishops" are split into countless groups (who
          could even say exactly
          > how many there are, name them all, or contact them?), and they do
          not recognize one
          > another, or ROCOR, or the MP.
          >
          > If they were somehow all brought together, in all likelihood they
          would only argue
          > endlessly and refuse to come to any agreement.
          >
          > In Christ
          > Fr. John R. Shaw
          >
        • Fr. John R. Shaw
          ... JRS: There were different parties in the Church, but there were no Sobors involving bishops who did not belong to the same Church. ... JRS: There is no one
          Message 4 of 9 , Oct 5, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "interestedplus" <asvetlov@...> wrote:

            > My understanding (and I could be wrong) is that during the battle
            > with previous heresies at Sobors, some bishops did not "recognise"
            > other bishops as parts of the Church. It was then the decision of the
            > true Sobor, which allowed all a voice and then made a concensual
            > decision. The present situation appears similar.

            JRS: There were different parties in the Church, but there were no Sobors involving bishops
            who did not belong to the same Church.

            > The fact that the catacomb Church is not "well
            > organised" in the wordly sense is no excuse to exclude them. The view
            > that you seem to be voicing is straight from the mouths of the MP -
            > "there is no other Church, if it does not accept us". Regarding
            > contacting "them", surely in the age of email, TV etc this could be
            > done if the will was there.

            JRS: There is no one "Catacomb Church", and there never was. There are various "catacomb
            churches", and ROCOR has long ago determined that those who continue to call
            themselves such are without any canonical basis.

            The "Lazarites" are not a catacomb church, at least not anymore: they are a group that was
            part of ROCOR and first joined ROCiE, then broke away and are now on their own.

            > The big hurdle that I do know exists, is that some in the Catacomb
            > Church still DO NOT TRUST THAT THEY WILL NOT BE PERSECUTED if they
            > surface.

            JRS: You first wrote that they could easily be contacted, and here you say that they "have
            not yet surfaced".

            It can't be both ways: if they can be contacted, that means they have indeed "surfaced",
            and merely call themselves catacomb churches.

            > CANONICALLY is there anything preventing us from having a true Sobor
            > of all Russian Church jurisdictions to decide where to from this
            > point in time???

            JRS: Canonically, a "true Sobor" would not put uncanonical groups on the same level as
            those that have a canonical basis.

            Besides, that, the Old Believers are many times more numerous than the various
            "catacomb churches", and have up to two million members today. Most of them belong to
            the Bielokrinitsa Synod, headed by Metropolitan Cornelius.

            The Old Believers have been separate for over 300 years, but still consider themselves
            "part of the Russian Church" (in the words of their late Metropolitan Andrian who reposed
            last year).

            Metropolitan Andrian also called for "reconciliation in the Russian Church".

            As for the so-called "catacomb churches", most of them are not even interested in
            "reconciliation".

            The reason is often that they are minuscule, and want to remain independant.

            In Christ
            Fr. John R. Shaw
          • Basil Yakimov
            Dear fr. Victor where does it say that after the Eucharist that the All Russia Sobor will occur - it is not logical - sadly for the delegates in SF that
            Message 5 of 9 , Oct 6, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear fr. Victor where does it say that after the Eucharist that the All Russia Sobor will occur - it is not logical - sadly for the delegates in SF that if business or ortherwise must be pressured this is not true - I know the names ... I have returned to the public service in Australia... KGB agents whether in post soviet union or otherwise... remember this please that.. many millions of our brothers & sisters in our Lord Jesus Christ were butchered by izvergi such as Lenin, Stalin & indirectly sadly.... by those who supported the Soviet state such as metr Sergious & others...

              Unworthy as I am I ask the Lord to fogive them but the TRUTH cannot be white washed by any SOBOR in SF or otherwise....

              Basil from Canberra

              interestedplus <asvetlov@...> wrote: Dear Father Victor,

              You wrote:

              the Resolution states that any remaining problems to be resolved by
              the an All Russian Sobor, which, of course, can only occur after the
              reestablishment of Eucharist and Canonical union.
              In Christ,
              Priest Victor Boldewskul

              Can I ask "why?". Particularly since the other "Russian" Church
              Jurisdictions should be included in a "COUNCIL", including the
              Catacomb Church bishops. The whole current day problem is one
              of "acceptance" by other churches of churches as part of the Russian
              Church. This will never be resolved without a true conciliar council
              of all bishops who any decisions of the council will affect. The
              Arians were part of the councils. Could someone with more knowledge
              of canonical procedure please answer my question. I'd be very
              grateful.

              In Christ,
              Alexandra

              --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, frvictor@... wrote:
              >
              > Dear Melissa,
              > The Resolution of the 4th All Diaspora Sobor was published. See:
              >
              http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/eng2006/5ensobresolution.htm
              l
              >
              > The text speaks for itself. Also, in an interview with Bishop
              Gabriel, His Grace also noted that the Resolution was adopted nearly
              unnanimously. Note especially paragraph one which includes the
              following: "... attest that as loyal children of the Holy Church, we
              shall submit to Divine will and obey the decisions of the forthcoming
              Council of Bishops."
              >
              > Also paragraph two: "We archpastors, pastors and laymen, members of
              the IV All-Diaspora Council, unanimously express our resoluteness to
              heal the wounds of division within the Russian Church┬Śbetween her
              parts in the Fatherland and abroad. Our Paschal joy is joined by the
              great hope that in the appropriate time, the unity of the Russian
              Church will be restored upon the foundation of the Truth of Christ,
              opening for us the possibility to serve together and to commune from
              one Chalice."
              > Note the words "submit" and "obey" and accepting that the decisions
              of the Sobor of Bishops represent God's will.
              > Note the words "resoluteness to heal the wounds of division."
              > According to the conciliar resolution of the 4th All Diapora Sobor,
              which the bishops accepted, it has been recongnized that any decision
              on the part of our bishops is concidered Divine Will. Therefore, we
              can rejoice, for our bishops have determined that now is the
              appropriate time for the unity of the Russian Church to be restored.
              My opinion does not matter, nor does yours. All that matters is God's
              will, and that we fulfill it. Your husband wrote on this list that
              those who support union need to humble themselves. Every Christian
              needs to humble themselves to God's Holy Will.
              > I wish to also add, that this resolution on accepting the decisions
              of our bishops as Divine will is what I was always taught growing up
              in Rochester, especially by the current Rector who was my teacher in
              Seminary, and who was the vice-president of the Sobor the day of the
              voting of the Resolution.
              > Finally, the Resolution states that any remaining problems to be
              resolved by the an All Russian Sobor, which, of course, can only
              occur after the reestablishment of Eucharist and Canonical union.
              > In Christ,
              > Priest Victor Boldewskul
              >
              > -------------- Original message --------------
              > From: Melissa Bushunow <cafeconlechemom@...>
              >
              > > Dear in Christ Fr. Stefan,
              > >
              > >
              > > On Sep 29, 2006, at 4:57 PM, Archpriest Stefan Pavlenko wrote:
              > >
              > > > Ms. Melissa Bushunow,
              > > >
              > > > Where do you get this information?
              > >
              > > I received this information from SOBOR delegate Timothy Clader.
              > > Timothy Clader was witness to Counting Committee President Fr.
              Vladimir
              > > Petrenko saying that he refused to sign off on the counting
              committee's
              > > report.
              > >
              > > > Show me please the statements
              > > > confirming what you say.
              > >
              > > Please show us the scanned document from the Sobor, with Fr.
              Vladimir
              > > Petrenko's signature on it.
              > >
              > > > The "Count" is there, every member who was
              > > > there physically present knows exactly what happened in their
              > > > presence and you are trying to make it seem like there was some
              > > > discrepancy about the actual RATIFICATION of the resolution.
              Yours
              > > > is an out right MISREPRESENTATION >>>BY YOU<<< of what took
              place at
              > > > the SOBOR, and unless you present documentation based on
              factual
              > > > proof, your statements are misguided at least, if not out right
              > > > LIES.
              > >
              > > Ask Fr. Vladimir Petrenko. In lieu of that, publish the minutes,
              post
              > > scanned SOBOR documents.
              > >
              > > We have been asking for documentation from the SOBOR for weeks,
              if not
              > > months, and it has not been forthcoming. Where are the minutes?
              > >
              > > Where are the transcriptions of the questions by the delegates,
              their
              > > comments, and the answers to them that were to have been entered
              into
              > > the minutes?
              > >
              > > > I was there and every member who was present is a witness to
              > > > the facts.
              > >
              > > Let all the members of ROCOR hear all the facts of SOBOR, as
              documented
              > > by the minutes. All we have heard and seen are the pro-union
              speeches.
              > >
              > > > YOU ARE A DISIMINATOR OF FALSE INFORMATION. I accuse you
              > > > personally, until you >>>Melissa Bushunow<<< show your sources,
              of
              > > > FABRICATING A LIE about the SOBOR!
              > > > Archpriest Stefan Pavlenko
              > > >
              > > The disseminators of false information are those who willfully
              stifled
              > > discussion on the MP'S sergianist, ecumenist activities at SOBOR,
              and
              > > those who continue to do so by not publishing the minutes.
              > >
              > > Melissa Bushunow
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > > ---------------------------------------------------
              > > > --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, Melissa Bushunow
              > > > wrote:
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > On Sep 29, 2006, at 2:11 PM, Archpriest Stefan Pavlenko
              wrote:
              > > > >
              > > > > > > Fr. Vladimir Petrenko, President of the Counting
              Committee,
              > > > > > refused to> sign off on the vote, but his name was posted
              > > > anyway.
              > > > > > > Sound familiar? > Melissa Bushunow
              > > > > > --------------------------------------------------->
              > > > > >
              > > > > > This is just unfair, the whole assembly is witness to the
              fact
              > > > of
              > > > > > the vote count and the almost unanimous out come.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Father Vladimir's personal actions aside, the vote was the
              vote.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > This is just outrageous misrepresentation!
              > > > >
              > > > > There have been numerous misrepresentations of what went on
              at
              > > > Sobor
              > > > > and elsewhere. That Fr. Vladimir Petrenko refused to sign off
              on
              > > > the
              > > > > vote count is the truth. That someone posted his name to it,
              > > > despite
              > > > > his refusal, to give the impression that its fairness was
              > > > uncontested
              > > > > -- that is the real misrepresentation.
              > > > >
              > > > > Melissa Bushunow
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > > GOD HELP YOU FOR SUCH CALCULATED AND GROSSLY UNFAIR
              POSTING.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Archpriest Stefan Pavlenko
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              ==============================================================
              > > > > > -- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, Melissa Bushunow
              > > > > > wrote:
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > Since the discussion has returned to the voting question:
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > On Aug 8, 2006, at 2:24 PM, Fr. Alexander Lebedeff wrote:
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > Finally, I would like to remind people to look at the
              > > > official vote
              > > > > > > > tally on the Resolution, found at:
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > >
              http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/synod/eng2006/5ensoborvote.html
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > Here we see that with 124 members voting, and each
              paragraph
              > > > > > being
              > > > > > > > voted on separately, out of a total cumulative 868
              votes,
              > > > there
              > > > > > were,
              > > > > > > > cumulatively, 843 "yes" votes, 7 "no" votes, and 18
              > > > abstentions.
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > Note carefully also who the members of the Counting
              > > > Committee
              > > > > > were:
              > > > > > > > President--Fr. Vladimir Petrenko from the South
              American
              > > > > > > > Diocese, Protodeacon Andre Meillassoux (Western
              European
              > > > > > Diocese)
              > > > > > > > and Alexander Ivanovich Mytilin ( Odessa Diocese).
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > It would be hard to believe that the representatives of
              the
              > > > > > South
              > > > > > > > American and Odessa Dioceses would have been biased in
              > > > favor of
              > > > > > > > rapprochement. . .
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > Witj love in Christ,
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > Prot. Alexander Lebedeff
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > Fr. Vladimir Petrenko, President of the Counting
              Committee,
              > > > > > refused to
              > > > > > > sign off on the vote, but his name was posted anyway.
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > Sound familiar?
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > Melissa Bushunow
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > On Sep 29, 2006, at 12:42 PM, Bushunow, Peter wrote:
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > Priest Victor Boldewskul writes:
              > > > > > > > >On a side note, someone tried to cast a shadow over
              the
              > > > > > procedure of
              > > > > > > > the voting. The floor that day was controlled by the V.
              Rev.
              > > > > > > > >Gregory Naumenko, who is the rector of Holy Protection
              > > > Parish
              > > > > > in
              > > > > > > > Rochester NY. Those who know Fr.. Gregory personally
              know
              > > > that
              > > > > > > is
              > > > > > > > very much concerned about the welfare of his flock,
              some of
              > > > > > whom are
              > > > > > > > openly against the process of reconciliation, and have
              not
              > > > > > > > >issued statements of support for our bishops in this
              > > > regard.
              > > > > > No one
              > > > > > > > would accused Fr. Gregory of being part of any plot to
              push
              > > > > > > > >anything through one way or the other. Likewise, the
              > > > > > Resolution
              > > > > > > > itself
              > > > > > > > was presented by His Eminence Archbishop Hilarion.
              Again,
              > > > > > > > >Vladyka has an impecible reputation of fairness.
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > Yes, Fr. Victor, the voting was done incorrectly.
              > > > > > > > The delegates heard speeches for three days, then
              Vladika
              > > > > > Agaphangel
              > > > > > > > asked that the actual Act be read. Father Alexander
              gave a
              > > > > > > > presentation. The actual Act, a "draft" of which is now
              > > > > > available on
              > > > > > > > the internet, as not presented to the delegates. The
              > > > delegates
              > > > > > voted
              > > > > > > > paragraph by paragraph on a resolution that was very
              > > > carefully
              > > > > > written
              > > > > > > > to express well-meaning sentiment but no firm
              substance. The
              > > > > > voting
              > > > > > > > was
              > > > > > > > by affirmation -- not a closed, written vote. The
              > > > resolution as
              > > > > > a
              > > > > > > > whole
              > > > > > > > was not brought up for a vote.
              > > > > > > > Father Alexander has indicated in an email, in contrast
              to
              > > > what
              > > > > > was
              > > > > > > > announced at the Council, that records of the
              proceedings
              > > > are
              > > > > > not
              > > > > > > > going
              > > > > > > > to be made available for us to read. A shame.
              > > > > > > > Peter
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > >
              *********************************************************************
              > > > > > *
              > > > > > > > This email and any files transmitted with it are
              > > > confidential
              > > > > > and
              > > > > > > > intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
              to
              > > > whom
              > > > > > they
              > > > > > > > are addressed. If you have received this email in error
              > > > please
              > > > > > delete
              > > > > > > > it from your system.
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > This footnote also confirms that this email message has
              been
              > > > > > swept for
              > > > > > > > the presence of computer viruses.
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > Thank You,
              > > > > > > > Viahealth
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > >
              *********************************************************************
              > > > > > *
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > > >
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              > > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              > > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > >
              > >
              > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
              > >
              > >
              > > Yahoo! Groups Links
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              >






              ---------------------------------
              Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small Business.

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.