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

Act of Cononical Communion

Expand Messages
  • Valeria Sajez
    (As published by Interfax) 01 November 2006, 12:45 Act of Canonical Communion We, the humble Alexy II, by God s mercy Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia,
    Message 1 of 8 , Nov 1, 2006
      (As published by Interfax)

      01 November 2006, 12:45
      Act of Canonical Communion
      We, the humble Alexy II, by God's mercy Patriarch of Moscow and All
      Russia, jointly with the Eminent Members of the Holy Synod of the
      Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, having gathered
      at a meeting of the Holy Synod (date) in the God-preserved city of
      Moscow; and the humble Laurus, Metropolitan of Eastern America and
      New York, First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of
      Russia, jointly with the Eminent Bishops, members of the Synod of
      Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, having
      gathered (time, place);

      Being guided by the effort towards reestablishing blessed peace,
      Divinely-decreed love, and brotherly unity in the common work in the
      harvest-fields of God within the Fullness of the Russian Orthodox
      Church and her faithful in the Fatherland and abroad, taking into
      consideration the ecclesiastical life of the Russian diaspora outside
      the canonical borders of the Moscow Patriarchate, as dictated by
      history;

      Taking into account that the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of
      Russia performs its service on the territories of many nations;

      By this Act declare:

      1. That the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, conducting its
      salvific service in the dioceses, parishes, monasteries,
      brotherhoods, and other ecclesiastical bodies that were formed
      through history, remains an indissoluble part of the Local Russian
      Orthodox Church.

      2. That the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia is independent
      in pastoral, educational, administrative, management, property, and
      civil matters, existing at the same time in canonical unity with the
      Fullness of the Russian Orthodox Church.

      3. The supreme ecclesiastical, legislative, administrative, judicial
      and controlling authority in the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of
      Russia is her Council of Bishops, convened by her Primate (First
      Hierarch), in accordance with the Regulations [ Polozheniye ] of the
      Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia.

      4. The First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of
      Russia is elected by her Council of Bishops. This election is
      confirmed, in accordance with the norms of Canon Law, by the
      Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and the Holy Synod of the Russian
      Orthodox Church.

      5. The name of the Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church and the
      name of the First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of
      Russia are commemorated during divine services in all churches of the
      Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia before the name of the
      ruling bishop in the prescribed order.

      6. Decisions on the establishment or liquidation of dioceses of the
      Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia are made by her Council of
      Bishops in agreement with the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and
      the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church.

      7. The bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia are
      elected by her Council of Bishops or, in cases foreseen by the
      Regulations of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, by the
      Synod of Bishops. Such elections are confirmed in accordance with
      canonical norms by the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and the
      Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church.

      8. The bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia are
      members of the Local Council [ Pomestny Sobor ] and Council of
      Bishops [ Arkhiereiskij Sobor ] of the Russian Orthodox Church and
      also participate in the meetings of the Holy Synod in the prescribed
      order. Representatives of the clergy and laity of the Russian
      Orthodox Church Outside of Russia participate in the Local Council of
      the Russian Orthodox Church in the established manner.

      9. The supreme instances of ecclesiastical authority for the Russian
      Orthodox Church Outside of Russia are the Local Council and the
      Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church.

      10. Decisions of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church extend
      to the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia with consideration
      of the particularities described by the present Act, by the
      Regulations of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia and by
      the legislation of the nations in which she performs her ministry.

      11. Appeals on decisions of the supreme ecclesiastical court of the
      Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia are directed to the
      Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia.

      12. Amendments to the Regulations of the Russian Orthodox Church
      Outside of Russia by her supreme legislative authority are subject to
      the confirmation of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and the
      Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church in such case as these
      changes bear a canonical character.

      13. The Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia receives her holy
      myrrh from the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia.

      By this Act, canonical communion within the Local Russian Orthodox
      Church is hereby restored.

      Acts issued previously which preclude the fullness of canonical
      communion are hereby deemed invalid or obsolete.

      The reestablishment of canonical communion will serve, God willing,
      towards the strengthening of the unity of the Church of Christ, of
      her witness in the contemporary world, promoting the fulfillment of
      the will of the Lord to "gather together in one the children of God
      that were scattered abroad" (John 11:52).

      Let us bring thanks to All-Merciful God, Who through His omnipotent
      hand directed us to the path of healing the wounds of division and
      led us to the desired unity of the Russian Church in the homeland and
      abroad, to the glory of His Holy Name and to the good of His Holy
      Church and Her faithful flock. Through the prayers of the Holy New
      Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, may the Lord grant His blessing to
      the One Russian Church and Her flock both in the fatherland and in
      the diaspora.
      C
    • Mike Woodson
      ... If God has preserved the city of Moscow as this document says, who has preserved the body of Lenin in the Kremlin beneath the onion domes? Is he a Moscow
      Message 2 of 8 , Nov 3, 2006
        --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, Valeria Sajez <sajezv@...> wrote:
        > (As published by Interfax)
        > 01 November 2006, 12:45
        > Act of Canonical Communion
        > We, the humble Alexy II, by God's mercy Patriarch of Moscow and
        > All
        > Russia, jointly with the Eminent Members of the Holy Synod of the
        > Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, having gathered
        > at a meeting of the Holy Synod (date) in the God-preserved city of
        > Moscow; and the humble Laurus, Metropolitan of Eastern America and
        > New York, First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of
        > Russia, jointly with the Eminent Bishops, members of the Synod of
        > Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, having
        > gathered (time, place);


        If God has preserved the city of Moscow as this document says, who has
        preserved the body of Lenin in the Kremlin beneath the onion domes? Is
        he a Moscow Patriarchate Saint that his body should be preserved in
        public as a mockery of the relics of the saints of the Lord Jesus
        Christ? How could this be allowed in an Orthodox country beneath the
        very domes of the Kremlin, a building which was to be centered around
        Christ in Holy Russia?


        > Being guided by the effort towards reestablishing blessed peace,
        > Divinely-decreed love, and brotherly unity in the common work in the
        > harvest-fields of God within the Fullness of the Russian Orthodox
        > Church and her faithful in the Fatherland and abroad, taking into
        > consideration the ecclesiastical life of the Russian diaspora
        > outside the canonical borders of the Moscow Patriarchate, as
        > dictated by history;

        Was blessed peace, Divinely-decreed love, and brotherly unity in the
        common work within the harvest-fields of God within the Fullness of
        the Russian Orthodox Church and her faithful in the Fatherland and
        abroad EVER in question any more than it ever was?

        No. The main point of the medicinal suspension of the Holy Communion
        commemorating the MP was always the spiritual illegitimacy of the MP
        as it imposed itself on, and dominated magisterium-like, the Orthodox
        Christian Church in Russia, making her to suffer for worshipping
        Christ and not the Soviet state and its atheist personality cults.
        Lenin is still worshipped at the center of God-preserved Moscow.
        Amazing, this Anchluss.

        The Patriarch and his clones originated and have not repented of their
        illegitimate Soviet roots by offering to step down, and if allowed to
        stay after repenting, getting re-ordained by the ROCOR who rightfully
        carries the banner.

        That Sovietized status quo remains at the top of the MP, but what is
        failing is the resolve of the ROCOR at the onslaught of the RF/MP and
        the government's partners, armed as they are with the leveraging tool
        of ethnic guilt to use in control of the Russian people. The bogus
        argument of the MP is always some variation of this:
        "If you're not with us, you're not with fellow Russians, because we
        say we're for all Russians. And if you're not with us, you're not with
        the Church."


        > Taking into account that the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of
        > Russia performs its service on the territories of many nations;

        Admission: therefore it is the legitimate Church by identification
        before the document is signed. So why sign it?

        > By this Act declare:
        >
        > 1. That the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, conducting
        > its salvific service in the dioceses, parishes, monasteries,
        > brotherhoods, and other ecclesiastical bodies that were formed
        > through history, remains an indissoluble part of the Local Russian
        > Orthodox Church.

        If ROCOR "remains an indissoluble part of the Local Russian Orthodox
        Church," then it never was divided as presumed in the preamble above.
        If never divided, then there is no reason for reconciliation. If never
        divided, then there is only one reason for this Act of Canonical
        Communion: to bring the ROCOR under the MP's authority now, pronto,
        ASAP, before the power-brokers that be lose their power, to help them
        preserve their power using the legitimacy conferred by the signing of
        this document by the free ROCOR. Once signed, the freedom is gone
        until there is liberation of the MP/RF from Sovietism.


        > 2. That the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia is independent
        > in pastoral, educational, administrative, management, property, and
        > civil matters, existing at the same time in canonical unity with the
        > Fullness of the Russian Orthodox Church.


        What paragraph 2 and 3 giveth, paragraphs 4-7 and 9-12 taketh away.


        > 3. The supreme ecclesiastical, legislative, administrative, judicial
        > and controlling authority in the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of
        > Russia is her Council of Bishops, convened by her Primate (First
        > Hierarch), in accordance with the Regulations [ Polozheniye ] of the
        > Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia.


        What paragraph 2 and 3 giveth, paragraphs 4-7 and 9-12 taketh away.


        > 4. The First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of
        > Russia is elected by her Council of Bishops. This election is
        > confirmed, in accordance with the norms of Canon Law, by the
        > Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and the Holy Synod of the Russian
        > Orthodox Church.


        Confirmation power "in accordance with the norms of Canon Law" is
        language that, if ROCOR signs to it, grandfathers the Soviet roots of
        Patriarch Alexei II's ordination, offices and Patriarchy into
        Canonicity. That's the real turning point in this entire affair, and
        the only real change in the relationship between the Local Russian
        Orthodox Church and the ROCOR accomplished. Also, it gives the MP
        power to NOT confirm an elected First Hierarch until their man is the
        man who gets elected. If that is disputed, paragraph 12 below would
        then control.


        > 5. The name of the Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church and the
        > name of the First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of
        >Russia are commemorated during divine services in all churches of the
        > Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia before the name of the
        > ruling bishop in the prescribed order.


        But the First Hierarch of the ROCOR is not commemorated in that same
        order during divine services in all churches of the Local Russian
        Orthodox Church?

        This proves that this is not about ALL of spiritual Russia, but about
        the earth and ethnic power centralization and identity in Russia.
        Christ is not bigger than Russia, but Russia is bigger than Christ in
        this language, otherwise, Russia would, in servantlike fashion
        reciprocate as in the washing of the feet by the greater of the
        lesser, and vice versa, all parties holding themselves to be lesser,
        to serve the others as greater. This is not mutual or polymutual, it
        is one way. It also presumes that the Church outside of Russia is not
        just as Russian as the one within, otherwise, all Russians in Russia
        would recognize Russians outside of that land as part of Holy Russia.
        But we're not talking about Holy Russia, but the Moscow Patriarchate
        dominated Russian Orthodox Church, about to be dragged into a long and
        difficult new spiritual struggle if there is not a pullback.


        > 6. Decisions on the establishment or liquidation of dioceses of the
        > Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia are made by her Council of
        > Bishops in agreement with the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and
        > the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church.

        And if the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, or the
        Patriarchate doesn't agree, then the ROCOR in its independent
        administrativeness, cannot expand.

        However, this doesn't foreclose the Local Church's Synod and the
        Patriarch from initiating the expansion of the ROCOR outside of Russia
        and calling it the ROCOR, if in any way the expansion can be justified
        by the MP's canonical power or legitimacy.


        > 7. The bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia are
        > elected by her Council of Bishops or, in cases foreseen by the
        > Regulations of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, by the
        > Synod of Bishops. Such elections are confirmed in accordance with
        > canonical norms by the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and the
        > Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church.

        Translation: if the Council is with us, they get to elect the ROCOR
        Bishops. If not, then if the Council is not with us, but the Synod of
        Bishops is, they get to do it. But if neither one is with us, (the MP
        drafters) then the Patriarch has the final confirmation power and may
        choose NOT to confirm until its man is put up for "election."


        > 8. The bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia are
        > members of the Local Council [ Pomestny Sobor ] and Council of
        > Bishops [ Arkhiereiskij Sobor ] of the Russian Orthodox Church and
        > also participate in the meetings of the Holy Synod in the prescribed
        > order. Representatives of the clergy and laity of the Russian
        > Orthodox Church Outside of Russia participate in the Local Council
        > of the Russian Orthodox Church in the established manner.

        "Prescribed order" being two words, but definitely setting forth the
        authority flow that makes independence of administration an inducement
        only, but probably not a lasting reality, in this annexation.


        > 9. The supreme instances of ecclesiastical authority for the Russian
        > Orthodox Church Outside of Russia are the Local Council and the
        > Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church.


        There you go, the bottom line translation: if things get contested,
        bypass the ROCOR ecclesiastical structure.


        > 10. Decisions of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church
        > extend to the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia with
        > consideration of the particularities described by the present Act,
        > by the Regulations of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia
        > and by the legislation of the nations in which she performs her
        > ministry.


        ". . with consideration of" is not mandatory language, hence, if after
        consideration, the MP doesn't want to act on that consideration, it
        need not. In other words, there is no requirement for ROCOR
        independence of administration here, and it is abrogated by this
        loophole in the "consideration" clause.


        > 11. Appeals on decisions of the supreme ecclesiastical court of the
        > Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia are directed to the
        > Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia.


        The Supreme Court, the Law of the Land, the Final Arbiter of all that
        is disputed in the ROCOR. And so, every disagreement on every matter
        in the ROCOR, if it is appealed to Moscow, will go Moscow's way. So
        there goes the neighborhood.


        > 12. Amendments to the Regulations of the Russian Orthodox Church
        > Outside of Russia by her supreme legislative authority are subject
        > to the confirmation of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and
        > the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church in such case as these
        > changes bear a canonical character.


        ". . a canonical character" is not defined, therefore, it is whatever
        the Supreme authority says it is later on, thereby giving no one any
        notice whatsoever as to what the rules are. Nicely done, and perhaps
        one of the staple instruments of arbitrary and authoritarian
        governments everwhere. Who wrote this thing?

        > 13. The Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia receives her holy
        > myrrh from the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia.

        If I were you, I'd add this clause: "The Patriarch's chancellor for
        external church relations shall cause the said myrrh originating under
        the authority of the 1950s-ish Soviet-ordained power of the Patriarch,
        to be tested for radiation contamination in conformance with all Cold
        War expectations inherent in the relationship with said Patriarch."

        > By this Act, canonical communion within the Local Russian Orthodox
        > Church is hereby restored.

        No. No. No. What this presumes is that on one side or the other of the
        Atlantic or Pacific, or both, one of the communions was NOT canonical,
        OR the Local Russian Church was communing of the Lord Jesus Christ
        separately from the ROCOR, and therefore contradicting the very
        foundational meaning of the word Communion! It presumes two Christs
        because it presumes two communions.

        The reality: it was always unified between the Local and Diasporal
        Churches. The party that was the odd-man out was the Soviet planted
        authorities in the Church who demanded admission, and even still
        today, 15 years later, are still demanding it, and almost have got it.

        This is no different than if Caesar had demanded that Christians give
        him communion even if he was not Christian.

        What have I been writing here? That Russia's people are dying twice
        as fast as they're being born. That there are more sicknesses there
        than every before in history. What does this suggest in view of the
        following:

        (1 Cor. 11:27-30) Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup
        of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of
        the Lord. A person would examine himself, and so eat the bread and
        drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the
        body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. that is why many among you
        are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying.)

        > Acts issued previously which preclude the fullness of canonical
        > communion are hereby deemed invalid or obsolete.

        Fullness of canonical communion equals, that which includes and
        legitimizes the Moscow Patriarchate AS IS. It cannot mean anything
        else, or else it means that either the Church in Russia or Outside of
        Russia or both, were somehow not partaking of the FULL version of
        Communion all of these years, in other words, presuming that the
        Eucharist was reduced to something other than the fullness of the body
        and blood of Christ, or, in the alternative, that the Body and Blood
        of the Lord Jesus Christ, partaken of for these years was not fully
        canonical, merely because the sin of the Soviets forced history for it
        to be so. That means the atheist state was successful in reducing the
        Holy Eucharist, or, the canonicity of it, doesn't it? Well I
        wholeheartedly disagree, and rather think that the Soviet-couched
        institution called the Moscow Patriarchate has been malnourishing the
        people of Russia with its leadership and forcing them to do what hurts
        them.

        And this heretical teaching is required of both churches for signature
        all because the Soviet spirit in the Moscow Patriarchate's top
        officialdom and the government will not be scorned or slighted -- it
        will have its admission to the Church, and by demanding it, will claim
        lordship in it. It has paid the devil to have it. Added to the sifting
        that is taking place within and under the anciently traditional Roman
        See of Peter, we will likely see more sifting to the East now, because
        of this ill-advised document.

        > The reestablishment of canonical communion will serve, God willing,
        > towards the strengthening of the unity of the Church of Christ, of
        > her witness in the contemporary world, promoting the fulfillment of
        > the will of the Lord to "gather together in one the children of God
        > that were scattered abroad" (John 11:52).


        What if God disagreed with the assumption that His communion was
        non-canonical and needed to be restored. What if God is not willing to
        back this document because He disagrees with its premises. What are
        some ways God has shown his disagreement with decisions made by the
        people of Israel, their leaders, and then, the new Israel of the
        Church and its leaders in the past? Does God always defeat the sinful
        decisions up front, or does he let the people suffer the consequences
        for a while to learn?

        If communion was not canonical, what would that mean? Does this say
        that communion was not canonical either in the ROCOR and / or in
        Russia for nearly 90 years?

        > Let us bring thanks to All-Merciful God, Who through His omnipotent
        > hand directed us to the path of healing the wounds of division and
        > led us to the desired unity of the Russian Church in the homeland
        > and abroad, to the glory of His Holy Name and to the good of His
        > Holy Church and Her faithful flock. Through the prayers of the Holy
        > New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, may the Lord grant His
        > blessing to the One Russian Church and Her flock both in the
        > fatherland and in the diaspora.

        The calling to the prayer of thanks in the paragraph above, assumes
        that the "God willing" qualification in the preceding paragraph is
        added for a show of openness to God's will. Since the thanks above
        presumes that the document is the fruit of the "omnipotent hand that
        directed us to the desired unity of the Russian Church," etc. The two
        paragraphs' first sentences seem to contradict each other in their
        assumed postures toward God.

        Final thoughts:

        I'll bet you're glad of that. I don't write these things enjoying it
        at all. I am tired. I am tired of the whiplash we have experienced in
        teaching from the representations made at our catechism through the
        opposite represenations being made today about the same MP. The change
        has been artificial in its consistency. Had the MP's official and
        unofficial behavior been consistently Christlike, I may have believed
        in the change. Had the Russian Federation President's conduct and
        words been consistent with what his spiritual father so earnestly
        testified to our clergy about him, I might have believed. But instead,
        what I see over and over again are repeated statements of half or no
        truth at all about how things are, how they'll be, and why. This
        convinces me that what we are dealing with here cannot be the will of God.
      • Fr. John R. Shaw
        ... JRS: I guess, the same One who preserved King Tut in his tomb for 3,000 years, or several frozen bodies for tens of thousands of years. The same One Who
        Message 3 of 8 , Nov 4, 2006
          --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Woodson" <singingmountains@...>
          wrote:

          > If God has preserved the city of Moscow as this document says, who has
          > preserved the body of Lenin in the Kremlin beneath the onion domes?

          JRS: I guess, the same One who preserved King Tut in his tomb for 3,000 years, or several
          frozen bodies for tens of thousands of years.

          The same One Who preserves California redwoods for millennia, shipwrecks at the bottom
          of the sea, and the roof over our heads.

          In case you did not know: it is usual to call a location "God-preserved" in any Orthodox
          church document issued from there.

          In Christ
          Fr. John R. Shaw
        • Mike Woodson
          So you are saying that God has preserved Lenin in the Kremlin. As I understand it, the Soviets pumped his body full of embalming chemicals and put him on
          Message 4 of 8 , Nov 4, 2006
            So you are saying that God has preserved Lenin in the Kremlin.

            As I understand it, the Soviets pumped his body full of embalming
            chemicals and put him on display so that he would remain a living
            deception for the post-Soviet Russians about what is worshipful.

            Thanks for that confirmation of where you stand Fr. John.

            Michael



            --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Fr. John R. Shaw"
            <vrevjrs@...> wrote:
            >
            > --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Woodson"
            <singingmountains@>
            > wrote:
            >
            > > If God has preserved the city of Moscow as this document says, who has
            > > preserved the body of Lenin in the Kremlin beneath the onion domes?
            >
            > JRS: I guess, the same One who preserved King Tut in his tomb for
            3,000 years, or several
            > frozen bodies for tens of thousands of years.
            >
            > The same One Who preserves California redwoods for millennia,
            shipwrecks at the bottom
            > of the sea, and the roof over our heads.
            >
            > In case you did not know: it is usual to call a location
            "God-preserved" in any Orthodox
            > church document issued from there.
            >
            > In Christ
            > Fr. John R. Shaw
            >
          • Ekaterina Andreev
            Mike: What body of Lenin? It s long gone, what is left is the wax replicate the Soviets put in it s place. I would hardly call it relics. Katya ... If God has
            Message 5 of 8 , Nov 4, 2006
              Mike:
              What body of Lenin? It's long gone, what is left is the wax replicate the Soviets put in it's place. I would hardly call it relics.

              Katya

              Mike Woodson <singingmountains@...> wrote:
              ---
              If God has preserved the city of Moscow as this document says, who has
              preserved the body of Lenin in the Kremlin beneath the onion domes? Is
              he a Moscow Patriarchate Saint that his body should be preserved in
              public as a mockery of the relics of the saints of the Lord Jesus
              Christ? How could this be allowed in an Orthodox country beneath the
              very domes of the Kremlin, a building which was to be centered around
              Christ in Holy Russia?








              ---------------------------------
              Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Ekaterina Andreev
              Correction replicate, should be replica.....mist be more tired than I thought. Katya Ekaterina Andreev wrote: Mike: What body of
              Message 6 of 8 , Nov 4, 2006
                Correction replicate, should be replica.....mist be more tired than I thought.
                Katya

                Ekaterina Andreev <ekaterina917@...> wrote:
                Mike:
                What body of Lenin? It's long gone, what is left is the wax replicate the Soviets put in it's place. I would hardly call it relics.

                Katya

                Mike Woodson <singingmountains@...> wrote:
                ---
                If God has preserved the city of Moscow as this document says, who has
                preserved the body of Lenin in the Kremlin beneath the onion domes? Is
                he a Moscow Patriarchate Saint that his body should be preserved in
                public as a mockery of the relics of the saints of the Lord Jesus
                Christ? How could this be allowed in an Orthodox country beneath the
                very domes of the Kremlin, a building which was to be centered around
                Christ in Holy Russia?


                ---------------------------------
                Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.

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






                ---------------------------------
                Get your email and see which of your friends are online - Right on the new Yahoo.com

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Mike Woodson
                Dear Ekaterina, So what are you saying here, a wax Lenin? That s not what the party heads are saying in Russia. Have a look -- no one s saying its wax.
                Message 7 of 8 , Nov 4, 2006
                  Dear Ekaterina,

                  So what are you saying here, a wax Lenin? That's not what the party
                  heads are saying in Russia. Have a look -- no one's saying its wax.
                  They're talking about burying his remains there.

                  http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/05/international/europe/05lenin.html?ex=1286164800&en=a5a9adc1d44475a2&ei=5088

                  If you can't link to it, just cut and paste it into your browser
                  address window.

                  Best,
                  Michael

                  --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, Ekaterina Andreev
                  <ekaterina917@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Correction replicate, should be replica.....mist be more tired than
                  I thought.
                  > Katya
                  >
                  > Ekaterina Andreev <ekaterina917@...> wrote:
                  > Mike:
                  > What body of Lenin? It's long gone, what is left is the wax
                  replicate the Soviets put in it's place. I would hardly call it relics.
                  >
                  > Katya
                  >
                  > Mike Woodson <singingmountains@...> wrote:
                  > ---
                  > If God has preserved the city of Moscow as this document says, who has
                  > preserved the body of Lenin in the Kremlin beneath the onion domes? Is
                  > he a Moscow Patriarchate Saint that his body should be preserved in
                  > public as a mockery of the relics of the saints of the Lord Jesus
                  > Christ? How could this be allowed in an Orthodox country beneath the
                  > very domes of the Kremlin, a building which was to be centered around
                  > Christ in Holy Russia?
                  >
                  >
                  > ---------------------------------
                  > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ---------------------------------
                  > Get your email and see which of your friends are online - Right on
                  the new Yahoo.com
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                • George Edward Green III
                  Do I need to post a Map? Lenin is OUTSIDE THE KREMLN WALL. You must EXIT the Kremlin to visit Lenin s tomb! Meanwhile numerous patriarchs are still entombed
                  Message 8 of 8 , Nov 5, 2006
                    Do I need to post a Map?

                    Lenin is OUTSIDE THE KREMLN WALL.

                    You must EXIT the Kremlin to visit Lenin's tomb!

                    Meanwhile numerous patriarchs are still entombed WITHIN the Kremlin!

                    George

                    On Nov 4, 2006, at 1:47 PM, Mike Woodson wrote:

                    > So you are saying that God has preserved Lenin in the Kremlin



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