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

Re: [orthodox-synod] RE:Epistle of ROAC Synod to ROCA Sobor

Expand Messages
  • byakimov@csc.com.au
    Dear Nectarious I have asked some of our Bishops to bring the 1983 Anathema and other issues at the coming SOBOR of Bishops and for the SOBOR to make a clear
    Message 1 of 18 , Oct 4, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Nectarious

      I have asked some of our Bishops to bring the 1983 Anathema and other
      issues at the coming SOBOR of Bishops and for the SOBOR to make
      a clear statement in regard to these issues - so that we can all ROCA can
      interpret
      the statement only in one way and not be confused as we seem to be
      at times.

      Unworthy Deacon Basil from Canberra



      "rjmanz" <smartcats@...> on 10/05/2000 02:06:54 PM

      Please respond to orthodox-synod@egroups.com

      To: orthodox-synod@egroups.com
      cc: (bcc: Basil Yakimov/AUST/CSC)
      Subject: Re: [orthodox-synod] RE:Epistle of ROAC Synod to ROCA Sobor



      Dear List,

      I quite agree with Joseph. It seems that whenever one comes from a
      "conservative" view and brings up issues on this List, there is typically
      an
      immediate backlash with personal criticisms against that person, making
      this
      a very unsafe place to dialogue at times.
      I also agree that in most cases, not all, the points presented are not
      discussed or rebutted with facts, but instead are replied with personal
      attacks, or labels of being a schismatic, sectarian, or fanatic.
      I am very troubled about recent things, including the epistle from the
      ROAC, as well as our clergy commemorating the Jerusalem Pat., and the Serbs
      who are very ecumenical despite the slant presented on this list.
      It would be welcomed for the clergy on this List to help us out with
      some
      of these issues and what these things mean in light of the 1983 Anathema.
      Can this be discussed without stirring up a hornets nest?

      Nectarios Manzanero
      St John Maximovitch Mission, Austin
      --
      Sincerely, An iPhone User

      Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
    • Rev. John R. Shaw
      ... And as I said on the other list--I do not recall the MP ever having entered the discussion. The issue was ROAC .
      Message 2 of 18 , Oct 5, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Michael Nikitin wrote:

        > How about the issue of the M.P.?
        >
        And as I said on the other list--I do not recall the MP ever
        having entered the discussion. The issue was "ROAC".
        >
        > Fr.John Shaw wrote:
        >
        > As I said on a parallel list--Metropolitan Vitaly, contrary to the
        > claims of M. Nikitin, in fact *presided* over the Synod as it decided to
        > depose Valentine--therefore it is I whose remarks are "in harmony" with
        > his position.
        > In Christ
        > Fr. John R. Shaw
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > _________________________________________________________________________
        > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
        >
        > Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
        > http://profiles.msn.com
        >
        >
        >
        > Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
        >
        >
        >
      • Rev. John R. Shaw
        ... They would like, for obvious reasons, to portray ROCOR as having deviated from its former positions , and to portray themselves as true bearers of the
        Message 3 of 18 , Oct 5, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Joseph Digrande wrote:

          > The real issue in this post is not Reader Constantine
          > but rather does ROAC have legitimate concerns about
          > the road that ROCA has taken in the last 5 years.

          They would like, for obvious reasons, to portray ROCOR as having
          "deviated from its former positions", and to portray themselves as true
          bearers of the tradition of the Russian Church.

          > There have been attacks
          on Vladimir
          Moss and Father > Stephen of Denver on the Indiana list but the Synod
          > through the priests who have responded have not been
          > able yet to present a valid rebuttal to essays of Moss
          > (e.g. Do the Heretics Have Grace?) I think this list
          > is an excellent place to debate the ecclesial
          > positions of Met. Cyprian of Fili in that the Synod
          > has swallowed them hook, line and sinker.

          In fact, Met. Cyprian of Fili is not the object of much attention
          in ROCOR circles, aside from a few clergy that are friends with his
          followers. His views are not talked about--except by a few that disagree
          with them. Consequently it seems strange to me that we should hear all
          this talk about "Cyprian of Fili having converted ROCOR to his teachings".
          99% of our laity have never even heard of him or his Synod.

          However, it is a clear enough fact that the Church Abroad has
          traditionally *not* denied that the other Orthodox Churches have grace.
          This has been amply documented by Fr. Alexander Lebedeff.

          The beauty of > Orthodoxy is that one can question policies and
          > ecclesial positions without being silenced, threatened
          > or excommunicated. Reader Constantine has every right
          > to question these policies and remain in the Synod. He
          > has a right to question them publically and privately.
          > In a sense it is more than a right, it is a
          > responsibility that no one should shirk.

          It is interesting that we should hear so much about C's "right and
          obligation to speak out", yet he makes a habit of treating the ROCOR
          clergy who disagree with him in a disrespectful and rude manner. I do not
          recall seeing anyone--clergy or laity--reply to Rd. Constantine in the
          kind of tone that he himself seems to favor.

          Be that as it may, the rest of us also have a right to speak out
          about these matters that concern us; and if we see that misinformation
          (let alone *dis*information!) is being propounded, day after day, on the
          internet, and that outsiders are starting to believe and repeat it,--then
          we too have a duty to speak up for our Church.

          Ecumenism and
          > Sergism need to be seen like Arians were and discussed
          > in the marketplace (as St. Gregory Nyssa said the
          > Byzantine Romans used to do). The marketplace is the
          > Internet and Reader Constantine has the responsibility
          > to throw his two cents in and not be hammered for it.
          > Ad hominen attacks have been made by priests on this
          > list too and they have been given a lot of room to
          > make those attacks.

          "Ad hominem" means that instead of saying that Joseph DiGrande is
          the victim of disinformation, I say that "Joseph Digrande is
          such-and-such, therefore he is discredited adn disqualified; therefore his
          words should be ignored and his testimony rejected".
          Whom do you know that talks in this manner?

          But what I agree with in Mr. DiGrande's posting is that we should
          discuss the issues frankly--and courteously.
          Unfortunately there are several issues (such as church schisms)
          that have become inseparable from their central personalities; just as
          there are some personalities (e.g. Rd. Constantine) that are hard to view
          apart from their "positions".

          In Christ
          Fr. John R. Shaw
        • Rd. Constantine Wright
          Glory to Jesus Christ! Glory Forever! ... That document, and the thoughts contained in it, *are* blasphemy, and I will always continue to proclaim that. But I
          Message 4 of 18 , Oct 5, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Glory to Jesus Christ! Glory Forever!

            >Poster: Ascension Monastery <mga@...>
            >Subject: Rdr Constantine's views of HOCNA and ROCOR
            >
            >He accused our Archbishop Mark of blasphemy. ... He accuses the >ROCOR of
            >moving recklessly toward Moscow.

            That document, and the thoughts contained in it, *are* blasphemy, and I will
            always continue to proclaim that. But I am not the only one who sees this.
            Here are the words of Vladyka Kyrill of Seattle:

            "It was with great sadness that I read the "statement" of the participants
            in the ninth meeting between clergy of the ROCOR and
            the MP on the territory of Germany. This statement, I am deeply convinced,
            is an irresponsible collection of demagogic phrases, containing not even one
            healthy thought that could lead to the resolution of the myriad
            ecclesiastical problems of the Russian Orthodox Church at the end of the
            20th century.

            Recently, more than ever before, the question of the unification of the MP
            and the ROCOR is being trumpeted. Very sadly, these statements most often
            issue from the mouths of people for whom yearning for ecclesiastical truth
            is foreign, and who sow discord into the minds of their spiritual children.
            ....

            And if "unification" with the MP, which Archbishop Mark is trying to
            accomplish, has become so timely, then why are there so many pastors within
            Russia who are struggling to find a way out of the spiritual dead-end that
            the post-Soviet church administration is ardently trying to lead them into?
            (We know well that the price of searching for the truth is very high -
            sometimes it even costs lives - for example, take the threats that were
            received by the recently murdered Archpriest Alexander Zharkoff in St.
            Petersburg just before his transfer under the omophorion of the Russian
            Church Abroad)."


            >From: "Michael Nikitin" <mikeniki@...>
            >Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re:Epistle of ROAC Synod to ROCA Sobor
            >
            >How about the issue of the M.P.?

            The position of our ROCOR, as expressed by our First Hierarchs, is clear:

            From the founding First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad,
            Metropolitan Antony of Kiev (quoted by Vladyka Philaret):

            "A quotation from a Paschal encyclical of Vladyka Anthony's (1934): 'The
            present age is rich not in ascetical feats of piety and
            confession of faith, but in cheating, lies, and deceits. It is noteworthy
            that several hierarchs and their flocks, for the most part
            Russians, have already fallen away from Ecumenical unity, and to the
            question: 'What dost thou believe?', reply with references to
            self-proclaimed heads of all sorts of schisms in Moscow, America, and
            Western Europe. It is clear that they have ceased to believe in the unity of
            the Church throughout the whole world and do not wish to admit it,
            attempting to bear calmly the refusal of the true Church to have relations
            with them, and imagining that one can supposedly save ones soul even without
            communion with Her. . . Those who have cut themselves off from Her deprive
            themselves of the hope of salvation, as the Fathers of the Sixth Ecumenical
            Council teach concerning this, having recognized the renegades as being
            totally devoid of grace,
            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ according
            to the word of Christ: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto
            thee as an heathen man and a publican."

            From the sainted Metropolitan Philaret:

            The so-called Moscow Patriarchate is "*outside of the true Church*.

            What then is the "Soviet church"? Archimandrite Constantine has often and
            insistently stated that the most horrible thing that the God-hating regime
            has done in Russia is the creation of the "Soviet church," which the
            Bolsheviks presented to the people as the true Church, having driven the
            genuine Orthodox Church into the catacombs or into the concentration camps.

            This pseudo-church has been twice anathematized. His Holiness Patriarch
            Tikhon and the All-Russian Church Sobor anathematized the Communists and
            *all their collaborators.* This dread anathema has not been lifted till this
            day and remains in force, since it can be lifted only by a similar
            All-Russian Church Sobor, as the canonical supreme ecclesiastical authority.
            And a terrifying thing happened in 1927, when the head of the Church,
            Metropolitan Sergius, by his infamous and apostate Declaration, subjected
            the Russian Church to the Bolsheviks and proclaimed collaboration with them.
            And thus in a most exact sense was fulfilled the expression in the prayer at
            the beginning of Confession: "having fallen under their own anathema"! For
            in 1918 the Church anathematized all the confederates of Communism, while in
            1927 she herself joined the camp of these collaborators and began to laud
            the red, God-hating regime - to laud the red beast spoken of in the
            Apocalypse.

            As if that is not enough. When Metropolitan Sergius promulgated his criminal
            Declaration, then the faithful children of the Church immediately separated
            themselves from the Soviet church, and thus the Catacomb Church was formed.
            And she, in her turn, has anathematized the official church for its betrayal
            of Christ."

            And from our current First Hierarch Metropolitan Vitaly:

            "The last four patriarchs of the Moscow Patriarchate have been chosen by the
            communist state * , which has suddenly declared itself to be a democracy.
            This senior administration of the Moscow Patriarchate is simply a government
            institution, devoid of Divine grace, and those who comprise it are no more
            than government officials in cassocks. There are "clever" people who will
            tell you that this entire letter is just the Metropolitan's own personal
            opinion. But here I will reply that I have been compelled to write this
            letter by endless protests from throughout our great Russian diaspora."

            And from His Eminence's most recent pre-conciliar epistle:

            "We must ourselves understand, and also declare for all to hear, that since
            1927, when Metropolitan Sergius signed his lamentable "declaration," and up
            to the present day, our Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia has not had
            and does not have any communion in prayer with the Moscow Patriachate, which
            is nothing other than the uncanonical creation of the former Soviet regime."

            I think this amply shows the true position of ROCOR on the Sergianist
            organization. I could close with words of my own... but I think it far
            better to end with the admonition of our First Hierarch:

            "And so I, as First Hierarch, am calling upon all of you to remain forever
            faithful to our Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia and not to be
            confused by those appeals which we are all hearing more and more
            often that we should unite and concelebrate with others in the name of a
            loudly proclaimed "brotherly love." Where is our "brotherly love" when we
            are living, in that which is most important to us - our Divine Services -
            according to different calendars, and living a different spiritual life? Let
            us ponder the meaning of that most important phrase "Divine Service," which
            is to say, "serving God" and then we will understand that in fact we are
            serving God Himself in different ways."

            With Christ's love,
            Rd. Constantine

            #############################################################
            # Reader Constantine Wright PO Box 774, Athens, GA 30603 #
            # constantinew@... constans@... #
            # Personal Page- http://members.tripod.com/~constans_wright #
            #-----------------------------------------------------------#
            # Joy of All Who Sorrow Eastern Orthodox Church (ROCOR) #
            # Church Web Site - http://www.churchabroad.org/parish/htm #
            #############################################################

            _________________________________________________________________________
            Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

            Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
            http://profiles.msn.com
          • Joseph Digrande
            This seems crystal clear to me. So what happenned in our Church between the Decolaration of 1927 when the Met. of Moscow became uncanonical and Alexi I who was
            Message 5 of 18 , Oct 5, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              This seems crystal clear to me. So what happenned in
              our Church between the Decolaration of 1927 when the
              Met. of Moscow became uncanonical and Alexi I who was
              termed a rightful Patriarch according to Father
              Alexander (I assume that all these quotes I read are
              accurate). It seems that Archbishop Mark held talks
              with the MP under the assumption that he was dealing
              with a canonical institution with a legitimate
              hierarchy. If ROCA thinks that their hierarchy and
              orders are valid (of the Synod and its Patriarch),
              then ROCA disagrees with the position of Met. Joseph
              and Peter at the time of the emergence of the catacomb
              church. That is what is so confusing about our Church.
              I hope the Sobor will address this as well as the 1983
              anathema.
              Joseph Digrande
              --- "Rd. Constantine Wright"
              <constantinew@...> wrote:
              > Glory to Jesus Christ! Glory Forever!
              >
              > >Poster: Ascension Monastery
              > <mga@...>
              > >Subject: Rdr Constantine's views of HOCNA and
              > ROCOR
              > >
              > >He accused our Archbishop Mark of blasphemy. ...
              > He accuses the >ROCOR of
              > >moving recklessly toward Moscow.
              >
              > That document, and the thoughts contained in it,
              > *are* blasphemy, and I will
              > always continue to proclaim that. But I am not the
              > only one who sees this.
              > Here are the words of Vladyka Kyrill of Seattle:
              >
              > "It was with great sadness that I read the
              > "statement" of the participants
              > in the ninth meeting between clergy of the ROCOR and
              > the MP on the territory of Germany. This statement,
              > I am deeply convinced,
              > is an irresponsible collection of demagogic phrases,
              > containing not even one
              > healthy thought that could lead to the resolution of
              > the myriad
              > ecclesiastical problems of the Russian Orthodox
              > Church at the end of the
              > 20th century.
              >
              > Recently, more than ever before, the question of the
              > unification of the MP
              > and the ROCOR is being trumpeted. Very sadly, these
              > statements most often
              > issue from the mouths of people for whom yearning
              > for ecclesiastical truth
              > is foreign, and who sow discord into the minds of
              > their spiritual children.
              > ....
              >
              > And if "unification" with the MP, which Archbishop
              > Mark is trying to
              > accomplish, has become so timely, then why are there
              > so many pastors within
              > Russia who are struggling to find a way out of the
              > spiritual dead-end that
              > the post-Soviet church administration is ardently
              > trying to lead them into?
              > (We know well that the price of searching for the
              > truth is very high -
              > sometimes it even costs lives - for example, take
              > the threats that were
              > received by the recently murdered Archpriest
              > Alexander Zharkoff in St.
              > Petersburg just before his transfer under the
              > omophorion of the Russian
              > Church Abroad)."
              >
              >
              > >From: "Michael Nikitin" <mikeniki@...>
              > >Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re:Epistle of ROAC Synod
              > to ROCA Sobor
              > >
              > >How about the issue of the M.P.?
              >
              > The position of our ROCOR, as expressed by our First
              > Hierarchs, is clear:
              >
              > From the founding First Hierarch of the Russian
              > Orthodox Church Abroad,
              > Metropolitan Antony of Kiev (quoted by Vladyka
              > Philaret):
              >
              > "A quotation from a Paschal encyclical of Vladyka
              > Anthony's (1934): 'The
              > present age is rich not in ascetical feats of piety
              > and
              > confession of faith, but in cheating, lies, and
              > deceits. It is noteworthy
              > that several hierarchs and their flocks, for the
              > most part
              > Russians, have already fallen away from Ecumenical
              > unity, and to the
              > question: 'What dost thou believe?', reply with
              > references to
              > self-proclaimed heads of all sorts of schisms in
              > Moscow, America, and
              > Western Europe. It is clear that they have ceased to
              > believe in the unity of
              > the Church throughout the whole world and do not
              > wish to admit it,
              > attempting to bear calmly the refusal of the true
              > Church to have relations
              > with them, and imagining that one can supposedly
              > save ones soul even without
              > communion with Her. . . Those who have cut
              > themselves off from Her deprive
              > themselves of the hope of salvation, as the Fathers
              > of the Sixth Ecumenical
              > Council teach concerning this, having recognized the
              > renegades as being
              > totally devoid of grace,
              >
              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
              > according
              > to the word of Christ: but if he neglect to hear the
              > church, let him be unto
              > thee as an heathen man and a publican."
              >
              > From the sainted Metropolitan Philaret:
              >
              > The so-called Moscow Patriarchate is "*outside of
              > the true Church*.
              >
              > What then is the "Soviet church"? Archimandrite
              > Constantine has often and
              > insistently stated that the most horrible thing that
              > the God-hating regime
              > has done in Russia is the creation of the "Soviet
              > church," which the
              > Bolsheviks presented to the people as the true
              > Church, having driven the
              > genuine Orthodox Church into the catacombs or into
              > the concentration camps.
              >
              > This pseudo-church has been twice anathematized. His
              > Holiness Patriarch
              > Tikhon and the All-Russian Church Sobor
              > anathematized the Communists and
              > *all their collaborators.* This dread anathema has
              > not been lifted till this
              > day and remains in force, since it can be lifted
              > only by a similar
              > All-Russian Church Sobor, as the canonical supreme
              > ecclesiastical authority.
              > And a terrifying thing happened in 1927, when the
              > head of the Church,
              > Metropolitan Sergius, by his infamous and apostate
              > Declaration, subjected
              > the Russian Church to the Bolsheviks and proclaimed
              > collaboration with them.
              > And thus in a most exact sense was fulfilled the
              > expression in the prayer at
              > the beginning of Confession: "having fallen under
              > their own anathema"! For
              > in 1918 the Church anathematized all the
              > confederates of Communism, while in
              > 1927 she herself joined the camp of these
              > collaborators and began to laud
              > the red, God-hating regime - to laud the red beast
              > spoken of in the
              > Apocalypse.
              >
              > As if that is not enough. When Metropolitan Sergius
              > promulgated his criminal
              > Declaration, then the faithful children of the
              > Church immediately separated
              > themselves from the Soviet church, and thus the
              > Catacomb Church was formed.
              > And she, in her turn, has anathematized the official
              > church for its betrayal
              > of Christ."
              >
              > And from our current First Hierarch Metropolitan
              > Vitaly:
              >
              > "The last four patriarchs of the Moscow Patriarchate
              > have been chosen by the
              > communist state * , which has suddenly declared
              > itself to be a democracy.
              > This senior administration of the Moscow
              > Patriarchate is simply a government
              > institution, devoid of Divine grace, and those who
              > comprise it are no more
              > than government officials in cassocks. There are
              > "clever" people who will
              > tell you that this entire letter is just the
              > Metropolitan's own personal
              > opinion. But here I will reply that I have been
              > compelled to write this
              > letter by endless protests from throughout our great
              > Russian diaspora."
              >
              > And from His Eminence's most recent pre-conciliar
              > epistle:
              >
              > "We must ourselves understand, and also declare for
              > all to hear, that since
              > 1927, when Metropolitan Sergius signed his
              > lamentable "declaration," and up
              > to the present day, our Russian Orthodox Church
              > Outside Russia has not had
              > and does not have any communion in prayer with the
              > Moscow Patriachate, which
              > is nothing other than the uncanonical creation of
              > the former Soviet regime."
              >
              > I think this amply shows the true position of ROCOR
              > on the Sergianist
              > organization. I could close with words of my own...
              > but I think it far
              > better to end with the admonition of our First
              > Hierarch:
              >
              === message truncated ===


              __________________________________________________
              Do You Yahoo!?
              Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!
              http://photos.yahoo.com/
            • Joseph Digrande
              This seems crystal clear to me. So what happenned in our Church between the Decolaration of 1927 when the Met. of Moscow became uncanonical and Alexi I who was
              Message 6 of 18 , Oct 5, 2000
              • 0 Attachment
                This seems crystal clear to me. So what happenned in
                our Church between the Decolaration of 1927 when the
                Met. of Moscow became uncanonical and Alexi I who was
                termed a rightful Patriarch according to Father
                Alexander (I assume that all these quotes I read are
                accurate). It seems that Archbishop Mark held talks
                with the MP under the assumption that he was dealing
                with a canonical institution with a legitimate
                hierarchy. If ROCA thinks that their hierarchy and
                orders are valid (of the Synod and its Patriarch),
                then ROCA disagrees with the position of Met. Joseph
                and Peter at the time of the emergence of the catacomb
                church. That is what is so confusing about our Church.
                I hope the Sobor will address this as well as the 1983
                anathema.
                Joseph Digrande
                --- "Rd. Constantine Wright"
                <constantinew@...> wrote:
                > Glory to Jesus Christ! Glory Forever!
                >
                > >Poster: Ascension Monastery
                > <mga@...>
                > >Subject: Rdr Constantine's views of HOCNA and
                > ROCOR
                > >
                > >He accused our Archbishop Mark of blasphemy. ...
                > He accuses the >ROCOR of
                > >moving recklessly toward Moscow.
                >
                > That document, and the thoughts contained in it,
                > *are* blasphemy, and I will
                > always continue to proclaim that. But I am not the
                > only one who sees this.
                > Here are the words of Vladyka Kyrill of Seattle:
                >
                > "It was with great sadness that I read the
                > "statement" of the participants
                > in the ninth meeting between clergy of the ROCOR and
                > the MP on the territory of Germany. This statement,
                > I am deeply convinced,
                > is an irresponsible collection of demagogic phrases,
                > containing not even one
                > healthy thought that could lead to the resolution of
                > the myriad
                > ecclesiastical problems of the Russian Orthodox
                > Church at the end of the
                > 20th century.
                >
                > Recently, more than ever before, the question of the
                > unification of the MP
                > and the ROCOR is being trumpeted. Very sadly, these
                > statements most often
                > issue from the mouths of people for whom yearning
                > for ecclesiastical truth
                > is foreign, and who sow discord into the minds of
                > their spiritual children.
                > ....
                >
                > And if "unification" with the MP, which Archbishop
                > Mark is trying to
                > accomplish, has become so timely, then why are there
                > so many pastors within
                > Russia who are struggling to find a way out of the
                > spiritual dead-end that
                > the post-Soviet church administration is ardently
                > trying to lead them into?
                > (We know well that the price of searching for the
                > truth is very high -
                > sometimes it even costs lives - for example, take
                > the threats that were
                > received by the recently murdered Archpriest
                > Alexander Zharkoff in St.
                > Petersburg just before his transfer under the
                > omophorion of the Russian
                > Church Abroad)."
                >
                >
                > >From: "Michael Nikitin" <mikeniki@...>
                > >Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re:Epistle of ROAC Synod
                > to ROCA Sobor
                > >
                > >How about the issue of the M.P.?
                >
                > The position of our ROCOR, as expressed by our First
                > Hierarchs, is clear:
                >
                > From the founding First Hierarch of the Russian
                > Orthodox Church Abroad,
                > Metropolitan Antony of Kiev (quoted by Vladyka
                > Philaret):
                >
                > "A quotation from a Paschal encyclical of Vladyka
                > Anthony's (1934): 'The
                > present age is rich not in ascetical feats of piety
                > and
                > confession of faith, but in cheating, lies, and
                > deceits. It is noteworthy
                > that several hierarchs and their flocks, for the
                > most part
                > Russians, have already fallen away from Ecumenical
                > unity, and to the
                > question: 'What dost thou believe?', reply with
                > references to
                > self-proclaimed heads of all sorts of schisms in
                > Moscow, America, and
                > Western Europe. It is clear that they have ceased to
                > believe in the unity of
                > the Church throughout the whole world and do not
                > wish to admit it,
                > attempting to bear calmly the refusal of the true
                > Church to have relations
                > with them, and imagining that one can supposedly
                > save ones soul even without
                > communion with Her. . . Those who have cut
                > themselves off from Her deprive
                > themselves of the hope of salvation, as the Fathers
                > of the Sixth Ecumenical
                > Council teach concerning this, having recognized the
                > renegades as being
                > totally devoid of grace,
                >
                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                > according
                > to the word of Christ: but if he neglect to hear the
                > church, let him be unto
                > thee as an heathen man and a publican."
                >
                > From the sainted Metropolitan Philaret:
                >
                > The so-called Moscow Patriarchate is "*outside of
                > the true Church*.
                >
                > What then is the "Soviet church"? Archimandrite
                > Constantine has often and
                > insistently stated that the most horrible thing that
                > the God-hating regime
                > has done in Russia is the creation of the "Soviet
                > church," which the
                > Bolsheviks presented to the people as the true
                > Church, having driven the
                > genuine Orthodox Church into the catacombs or into
                > the concentration camps.
                >
                > This pseudo-church has been twice anathematized. His
                > Holiness Patriarch
                > Tikhon and the All-Russian Church Sobor
                > anathematized the Communists and
                > *all their collaborators.* This dread anathema has
                > not been lifted till this
                > day and remains in force, since it can be lifted
                > only by a similar
                > All-Russian Church Sobor, as the canonical supreme
                > ecclesiastical authority.
                > And a terrifying thing happened in 1927, when the
                > head of the Church,
                > Metropolitan Sergius, by his infamous and apostate
                > Declaration, subjected
                > the Russian Church to the Bolsheviks and proclaimed
                > collaboration with them.
                > And thus in a most exact sense was fulfilled the
                > expression in the prayer at
                > the beginning of Confession: "having fallen under
                > their own anathema"! For
                > in 1918 the Church anathematized all the
                > confederates of Communism, while in
                > 1927 she herself joined the camp of these
                > collaborators and began to laud
                > the red, God-hating regime - to laud the red beast
                > spoken of in the
                > Apocalypse.
                >
                > As if that is not enough. When Metropolitan Sergius
                > promulgated his criminal
                > Declaration, then the faithful children of the
                > Church immediately separated
                > themselves from the Soviet church, and thus the
                > Catacomb Church was formed.
                > And she, in her turn, has anathematized the official
                > church for its betrayal
                > of Christ."
                >
                > And from our current First Hierarch Metropolitan
                > Vitaly:
                >
                > "The last four patriarchs of the Moscow Patriarchate
                > have been chosen by the
                > communist state * , which has suddenly declared
                > itself to be a democracy.
                > This senior administration of the Moscow
                > Patriarchate is simply a government
                > institution, devoid of Divine grace, and those who
                > comprise it are no more
                > than government officials in cassocks. There are
                > "clever" people who will
                > tell you that this entire letter is just the
                > Metropolitan's own personal
                > opinion. But here I will reply that I have been
                > compelled to write this
                > letter by endless protests from throughout our great
                > Russian diaspora."
                >
                > And from His Eminence's most recent pre-conciliar
                > epistle:
                >
                > "We must ourselves understand, and also declare for
                > all to hear, that since
                > 1927, when Metropolitan Sergius signed his
                > lamentable "declaration," and up
                > to the present day, our Russian Orthodox Church
                > Outside Russia has not had
                > and does not have any communion in prayer with the
                > Moscow Patriachate, which
                > is nothing other than the uncanonical creation of
                > the former Soviet regime."
                >
                > I think this amply shows the true position of ROCOR
                > on the Sergianist
                > organization. I could close with words of my own...
                > but I think it far
                > better to end with the admonition of our First
                > Hierarch:
                >
                === message truncated ===


                __________________________________________________
                Do You Yahoo!?
                Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!
                http://photos.yahoo.com/
              • Joseph Digrande
                Everyone has a right and responsibility to speak out wherever they see fit. There have been times when ROCA hierarchs has considered the MP devoid of grace.
                Message 7 of 18 , Oct 5, 2000
                • 0 Attachment
                  Everyone has a right and responsibility to speak out
                  wherever they see fit. There have been times when ROCA
                  hierarchs has considered the MP "devoid of grace."
                  This belief exists amongst many of the clergy. Reader
                  Constantine has posted several quotes to this effect.
                  I don't see the logic of denying one thing to Met.
                  Sergius and then giving it right back to a Met.
                  Nikodim, Alexi II or even Alexi I. By doing so, it
                  breaks theological unity with the Catacomb Church,
                  whose basic thesis was that the Soviet Church has no
                  grace. This is the position that ROAC has taken over.
                  Their view of the ecumenical activity of both the
                  Serbs and Mp is also consistent with the view of the
                  Catacomb Church of 30/40 years ago.
                  Father Alexander has not answered Vladimir Moss's
                  lengthy essay in my mind (and I am not alone). It will
                  take more than just posting to this site. It requires
                  as long and as detailed and scholarly an essay,
                  something our ROCA theological journals have not taken
                  on.
                  As far as insulting language- I have heard the
                  conservatives on this list termed "fanatics- followers
                  of Panteleimon (without the slightest evidence) and
                  Father Stephen's decision considered "�diocy", when in
                  fact he moved from the Synod for reasons of
                  conscience. If every controversial subject here is met
                  by the rebuttal of �diocy or fanatics"- how will this
                  help us understand the real facts here?
                  Again the Synod is not consistent in my mind on
                  ecumenism and grace of heretics. My spiritual father
                  was certain that the MP had no grace. To prevent
                  confusion, I would pray that our Synod would speak out
                  on this issue in a clear voice.
                  Recognizing Met. Cyprian as the only Synod in Greece
                  means that the Synod accepts their theology hook, line
                  and sinker. It also negates the Anathema of 1983.
                  There are Bishops and priests in our Synod who
                  encourage laity to attend, confess and commune in OCA
                  and Antiochian parishes when there is no Synod
                  parishes close by. My spiritual father forbid me from
                  entering or taking a blessing from any New Calendar
                  priest as well as the Serbs and MP. My spiritual
                  father was in the Synod well into his 90's. This
                  division is in the Synod and needs to be healed.
                  Polite dialogue on this subject is needed.
                  Joseph Digrande
                  --- "Rev. John R. Shaw" <vrevjrs@...> wrote:
                  > On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Joseph Digrande wrote:
                  >
                  > > The real issue in this post is not Reader
                  > Constantine
                  > > but rather does ROAC have legitimate concerns
                  > about
                  > > the road that ROCA has taken in the last 5 years.
                  >
                  > They would like, for obvious reasons, to portray
                  > ROCOR as having
                  > "deviated from its former positions", and to portray
                  > themselves as true
                  > bearers of the tradition of the Russian Church.
                  >
                  > > There have been attacks
                  > on Vladimir
                  > Moss and Father > Stephen of Denver on the Indiana
                  > list but the Synod
                  > > through the priests who have responded have not
                  > been
                  > > able yet to present a valid rebuttal to essays of
                  > Moss
                  > > (e.g. Do the Heretics Have Grace?) I think this
                  > list
                  > > is an excellent place to debate the ecclesial
                  > > positions of Met. Cyprian of Fili in that the
                  > Synod
                  > > has swallowed them hook, line and sinker.
                  >
                  > In fact, Met. Cyprian of Fili is not the object of
                  > much attention
                  > in ROCOR circles, aside from a few clergy that are
                  > friends with his
                  > followers. His views are not talked about--except by
                  > a few that disagree
                  > with them. Consequently it seems strange to me that
                  > we should hear all
                  > this talk about "Cyprian of Fili having converted
                  > ROCOR to his teachings".
                  > 99% of our laity have never even heard of him or his
                  > Synod.
                  >
                  > However, it is a clear enough fact that the Church
                  > Abroad has
                  > traditionally *not* denied that the other Orthodox
                  > Churches have grace.
                  > This has been amply documented by Fr. Alexander
                  > Lebedeff.
                  >
                  > The beauty of > Orthodoxy is that one can question
                  > policies and
                  > > ecclesial positions without being silenced,
                  > threatened
                  > > or excommunicated. Reader Constantine has every
                  > right
                  > > to question these policies and remain in the
                  > Synod. He
                  > > has a right to question them publically and
                  > privately.
                  > > In a sense it is more than a right, it is a
                  > > responsibility that no one should shirk.
                  >
                  > It is interesting that we should hear so much about
                  > C's "right and
                  > obligation to speak out", yet he makes a habit of
                  > treating the ROCOR
                  > clergy who disagree with him in a disrespectful and
                  > rude manner. I do not
                  > recall seeing anyone--clergy or laity--reply to Rd.
                  > Constantine in the
                  > kind of tone that he himself seems to favor.
                  >
                  > Be that as it may, the rest of us also have a right
                  > to speak out
                  > about these matters that concern us; and if we see
                  > that misinformation
                  > (let alone *dis*information!) is being propounded,
                  > day after day, on the
                  > internet, and that outsiders are starting to believe
                  > and repeat it,--then
                  > we too have a duty to speak up for our Church.
                  >
                  > Ecumenism and
                  > > Sergism need to be seen like Arians were and
                  > discussed
                  > > in the marketplace (as St. Gregory Nyssa said the
                  > > Byzantine Romans used to do). The marketplace is
                  > the
                  > > Internet and Reader Constantine has the
                  > responsibility
                  > > to throw his two cents in and not be hammered for
                  > it.
                  > > Ad hominen attacks have been made by priests on
                  > this
                  > > list too and they have been given a lot of room to
                  > > make those attacks.
                  >
                  > "Ad hominem" means that instead of saying that
                  > Joseph DiGrande is
                  > the victim of disinformation, I say that "Joseph
                  > Digrande is
                  > such-and-such, therefore he is discredited adn
                  > disqualified; therefore his
                  > words should be ignored and his testimony rejected".
                  > Whom do you know that talks in this manner?
                  >
                  > But what I agree with in Mr. DiGrande's posting is
                  > that we should
                  > discuss the issues frankly--and courteously.
                  > Unfortunately there are several issues (such as
                  > church schisms)
                  > that have become inseparable from their central
                  > personalities; just as
                  > there are some personalities (e.g. Rd. Constantine)
                  > that are hard to view
                  > apart from their "positions".
                  >
                  > In Christ
                  > Fr. John R. Shaw
                  >
                  >


                  __________________________________________________
                  Do You Yahoo!?
                  Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!
                  http://photos.yahoo.com/
                • elias
                  Joseph: There are also those ROCOR members, I have heard, that are allowed to commune in an OCA parish which is practicing the Julian Calendar. There are a few
                  Message 8 of 18 , Oct 6, 2000
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Joseph:

                    There are also those ROCOR members, I have heard, that are allowed to
                    commune in an OCA parish which is practicing the Julian Calendar. There are
                    a few of those around the U.S. That would entail that those Old Calendar OCA
                    priests also periodically partake of the Eucharist from New Calendar priests
                    at conventions, parish visits, etc. Is this a gray area? Or do these
                    situations even exist?

                    elias

                    There are Bishops and priests in our Synod who
                    encourage laity to attend, confess and commune in OCA
                    and Antiochian parishes when there is no Synod
                    parishes close by. My spiritual father forbid me from
                    entering or taking a blessing from any New Calendar
                    priest as well as the Serbs and MP. My spiritual
                    father was in the Synod well into his 90's. This
                    division is in the Synod and needs to be healed.
                    Polite dialogue on this subject is needed.
                    Joseph Digrande
                  • Joseph Digrande
                    elias: these situations do exist. I live in Alaska and the priest who visits our village celebrates the services in the Old Calendar. He then flies back to
                    Message 9 of 18 , Oct 7, 2000
                    • 0 Attachment
                      elias: these situations do exist. I live in Alaska and
                      the priest who visits our village celebrates the
                      services in the Old Calendar. He then flies back to
                      Juneau, Sitka or Anchorage and does New Calendar
                      services. When he comes to our village, I don't attend
                      or even receive his blessing. I have explained to him
                      why this is. He is conservative (for the OCA) and is
                      opposed to ecumenism in theory. He says he agrees with
                      "95% of what I believe. "We discuss books and he is
                      welcome in my house- there is no hatred or bad
                      feelings between us but like everything else nowadays-
                      the theological situation requires contortions that
                      would make Houdini proud.
                      Wouldn't it be so simple for the Synod of the MP to
                      just confess publically (their relations with the
                      KGB), disavow ecumenism, become simple monks and I am
                      sure all of us would forgive them gladly. Who could
                      judge them in that situation. But they don't and so we
                      have to continue contorting ourselves. But it is all
                      about money and power unfortunately at the top of the
                      MP.
                      --- elias <h2o@...> wrote:
                      > Joseph:
                      >
                      > There are also those ROCOR members, I have heard,
                      > that are allowed to
                      > commune in an OCA parish which is practicing the
                      > Julian Calendar. There are
                      > a few of those around the U.S. That would entail
                      > that those Old Calendar OCA
                      > priests also periodically partake of the Eucharist
                      > from New Calendar priests
                      > at conventions, parish visits, etc. Is this a gray
                      > area? Or do these
                      > situations even exist?
                      >
                      > elias
                      >
                      > There are Bishops and priests in our Synod who
                      > encourage laity to attend, confess and commune in
                      > OCA
                      > and Antiochian parishes when there is no Synod
                      > parishes close by. My spiritual father forbid me
                      > from
                      > entering or taking a blessing from any New Calendar
                      > priest as well as the Serbs and MP. My spiritual
                      > father was in the Synod well into his 90's. This
                      > division is in the Synod and needs to be healed.
                      > Polite dialogue on this subject is needed.
                      > Joseph Digrande
                      >
                      >


                      __________________________________________________
                      Do You Yahoo!?
                      Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!
                      http://photos.yahoo.com/
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.