Re: Acronyms and You
- Dear Aleksandr,
First, I didn't write what you ascribed to me below. You should go
back and research the original post from which that language came and
then address that person rather than manually truncate a message, put
my name with something someone else wrote, and then proceed on that
false basis. Let's not cross examine the wrong witness, Mr. Prosecutor
(You'll make a good one someday, a just one I'm sure). Please correct
that at your earliest.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Aleksandr Andreev
>No, I did not write the above.
> Mike Woodson wrote:
> >> is the document below from Patr.Alexey II deceitful and a lie?
> I think, to be logical, Mr. Woodson should be the first supportingthe current
> process of reconciliation with the Moscow Patriarchate. Why? Becausehe and
> like-minded individuals love to quote from documents of the MoscowAleks, it is a logical fallacy to argue that if someone quotes from
one source or another, that means that they must support the views and
passions of the quoted source, rather than quoting them for some other
purpose or to illustrate something observed about their communications
Another logical error we must try to avoid is the straw man fallacy.
When I leave all of your comments in context by using the reply button
and not truncating your comments, and then respond to each of your
arguments in context, I find it helps to avoid the "straw man"
fallacy, and to avoid falsely quoting you or quoting you out of
context. This helps to avoid making arguments based on the false
assumptions implied by the partial or out-of-context quotes.
As for your assertion that I "love to quote from documents of the
Moscow Patriarchate," please find examples enough to support that
argument in my posts. As I recall writing my posts, I have quoted what
the MP has said, stated and released (and has not corrected) in the
government dominated presses of Russia versus what their
representatives have stated to our clergy by clergy report, written
statement etc., the "forked tongue" phenomena of the hydra, so to speak.
>But here's something interesting: do we see them quotingsee them
> from the
> "Basic Social Concept of the Russian Church"? No. Do we see them
> the "Attitude of the Russian Church to the Heterodox"? No. Do wee
> quoting from the latest MP documents about dialog with the RomanAleks, for me to quote from these sources, there would have to be a
> Catholics? No.
reason considering what I write in the next para. Why don't you quote
from them to support the propositions that you think they support, and
we can discuss that here on the forum.
I have found it more relevant to quote sources that deal directly with
the behavior of the MP, and the RF government, during their courtship
of the ROCOR. By annexing the credibility of the Russian Orthodox
Church Abroad and Outside Russia, the MP hopes to camouflage the
reality of its desire to bury the Mystery of Repentance.
Again and again, we hear what the MP has said, written or declared.
But it is more important to watch what it does and does not do. It
does not renounce nationalism, but embraces it. Fr. Justin Popovich
wrote: "It is now high time--the twelfth hour--time for our Church
representatives to cease being nothing but the servants of nationalism
and for them to become bishops and priests of the One, Holy, Catholic,
and Apostolic Church."
What happens? Patriarch Alexei II gave as his chief reason why the
"reconciliation" must occur now: the Russians outside of Russia and
their Church were losing their "Russianness." Nothing could be more
nationalistic than that call to nationalism as the purpose for
"reconciliation." This was consistent with Vladimir Putin's purpose
when he told us that Russia could not be united as a nation until the
Church "united." "Reconciliation" or "unification" are and were false
terms of propagandistic art that presupposed that the Church had been
divided (prevailed against) and mischaracterized the communion
suspension as a division rather than a prescription for healing the
wound that the MP was and is on the One Church without its officials'
full Repentance. At least offer to resign; even Don Rumsfeld has done
From the MP perspective, "uniting" means severance of the Mystery of
Repentance from the Holy Mysteries (Communion) and the attempted
joining of Russian nationalism to the Holy Mysteries of Communion in
And Russian nationalism demands that genuine and unmitigated humility,
the hallmark of Repentance and Queen of Virtues, be glossed over so
that national unity may contain its strongest glue: National Pride.
So what we have is Pride telling the Church what to do. The Mystery of
Repentance belongs to Christ, and Vladimir Putin, nor any Churchman on
his behalf has no right under God to persuade or order the ROCOR to
turn it over to the MP and to the RF itself for the economy of
nationalism. Would you join God with mammon? No. So why this?
> Surely they know about the existence of these documents, since theyare so
> versed in MP (and KGB!) archival data. Then why are they not willing toDocuments do nothing if honesty is lacking. You see, a law doesn't
> *them*, as opposed to Cold-War Era documents, which, both sides have
> agreed, are
> *no longer in force*.
keep a government from arranging the death of a journalist, or from
coercing journalists into failing to report grave crimes in Russia
that might humble Russian nationalism as it is now using Western sins
to justify it's commandeering the One Russian Orthodox Church, and
killing journalists who point out Russian nationalist sins.
> They also like to quote Metropolitan Sergius. But why not quote from his
> dissertation "The Orthodox Teaching on Salvation" or from his paper
> Christ have a vicar on the Earth?" or other documents as opposed topounding
> into the ground the "Declaration", which, once again, is *no longerin force*?
> The "Declaration" may be interesting for historians, but this is nota list
> about Russian Church History.Aleksandr, be advised: Metropolitan Sergius spoke for the Soviet
spirit at one time, and I certainly do not say that he always did
speak for that spirit. What I do say is that once that spirit had the
dagger point to his carotid-artery, he could make them look good with
all manner of spiritualized writings, which would also cause him to
feel a sense of personal relief that he could write those things,
because of the successive druggings and guilt-counter-guilt that was
imposed by his handlers and interrogators.
The regime wanted to be able to claim that here was the Metropolitan,
producing writings that did his USSR proud, not lacking in the "social
consciousness" of the Soviet "Socialist" Republic, and making it seem
tolerant of religions at once. Well, it had already subjugated the
religious life of all who labored under the USSR's iron yoke, and it
sculpted the modern MP from the bone and blood of the martyrs, so that
when the angel of light spoke over the peaceful subjugation, all
appeared calm, tranquil and resolved for a long time in the USSR
before its collapse. I don't see that as a holy calm, but one caused
by killing that many Russians did not know the extent or impact thereof.
Today, former USSR officials pretend to lead the One Russian Church in
a spiritual renewal to save their own official skins and re-acquire
power, their two chief concerns. Chief among the tasks the MP is
charged with is eliminating the ROCOR for the legitimacy of the
Russian Federation government of Vladimir Putin at home, and of his
powerbase's selected successors.
If the ROCOR were allowed to remain separate, it might again become a
voice of Holy Spiritual conscience against the regime's actions and
plans for Russia in the world. If it is defeated by this regime and
MP, it will cease to be a threat to the world, the flesh and the devil.
> Perhaps they would care to engage in a discussion of current MP
> unless, of course, they have not read them, in which case I defer to theDocuments-schmokuments. It doesn't matter what amendatory things are
> opinion of those who have, like our bishops.
said or written; it matters what is done and not done in concert with
Holy scriptures and examples and teachings of the saints and holy
fathers that counts in the repentant stories that are published in the
Book of Life, or else the Church is now an institution of legalism; or
worse, magic, in which what is said or invoked justifies. God forbid.
What pleases God according to the prayer book we read? Faithful
actions consistent with the honoring of the Commandments and the Body
and Bride of the Lord Jesus Christ on which every spiritual Mystery
benefits people instead of harming them. What is the cornerstone of
our prayers? Repentance. What is that which the MP wishes to bury?
It doesn't matter what you say, or how many times you partake of the
Holy Mysteries: if you partake of them unto non-repentance and the
attempt to justify sinful passions such as nationalism, then what will
happen to you and that nation by the Fire of the Holy Mysteries? Are
high-flying nationalist emotions worth that?
> Aleksandr A Andreev
> Duke University