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

Address

Expand Messages
  • Olga Mitrenina
    http://www.roac-suzdal.narod.ru ADDRESS Of the 8th Congress of the clergy, monastics and laity of the Suzdal Diocese of the Russian [Rossijskaya] Orthodox
    Message 1 of 6 , Jan 10, 2001
      http://www.roac-suzdal.narod.ru
      ADDRESS
      Of the 8th Congress of the clergy, monastics and laity of the Suzdal Diocese
      of the Russian [Rossijskaya] Orthodox Church
      to all Orthodox Christians in the Fatherland and in the Diaspora

      We, participants in the 8th Congress of the clergy, monastics and laity
      of the Suzdal Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church, being zealous for the
      glory of God and the preservation of the patristic Orthodox teaching,
      address
      all those to whom Orthodoxy is dear. And first of all we address those
      clergy
      and laity of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCA), both in Russia and
      abroad, whose Christian conscience cannot be reconciled with the treacherous
      course of action chosen by the hierarchy of the Church Abroad.

      In spite of difficulties and obstacles raised up on the path of our
      salvation, the Suzdal Diocese and the whole Russian [Rossijskaya] Orthodox
      Church strives to go by that path which was trodden by the Russian Orthodox
      Church headed by his Holiness Patriarch Tikhon. By the mercy of God and the
      prayers of the Holy New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, our parishes have
      increased the numbers of their members and continue, as far as they are
      able,
      the work of regenerating Orthodoxy in Russia.

      For us a huge significance attaches to the blessing and instruction of
      Bishop Gregory (Grabbe) that was given by him before his blessed end to the
      parishes of the Suzdal Diocese that were in the process of regeneration.

      10 years ago, the parish of the Emperor Constantine left the Moscow
      Patriarchate. This became an important event in the history of the Russian
      Orthodox Church, since in Russia for the first time there appeared a legal
      Orthodox community not entering into the structure of the sergianist
      hierarchy.

      Much has changed in the past years. But the saddest thing for us has
      been the clear apostasy of the Church Abroad for its own confessing path.
      That which has been taking place there in the last years witnesses to the
      fact that power in the Hierarchical Synod belongs now, not to the zealots of
      Orthodoxy, but to people who are not ashamed crudely to violate the canons
      and wills of the Blessed First Hierarchs Metropolitans Anthony, Anastasy and
      Philaret. An eloquent witness to this apostasy from true Orthodoxy has the
      acceptance by the Church Abroad in 1994 of the heretical ecclesiology of
      Metropolitan Cyprian of Fili.

      The results of the last Hierarchical Council of the ROCA vividly
      witness
      to the fact that the hierarchs of the Church Abroad are intending to unite
      with the Moscow Patriarchate, and this elicited the perplexity of many
      representatives of the clergy, monastics and laity.

      The situation that has developed is fraught with schism, which
      threatens
      to become the last event in the life of the ROCA: a part of her will be
      swallowed up by the Moscow patriarchate, while another part will disperse
      amongst various jurisdictions.

      Many have been deceived by the council of the MP which took place in
      August, 2000, at which the following documents were approved:

      1) "The Basic Principles of the Relationship of the ROC to heterodoxy;
      2) An Act glorifying the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia;
      3) "The Bases of the Social Conception of the ROC".

      An analysis of these documents shows that no substantial change in the
      sergianist-ecumenist course of the Moscow patriarchate can be foreseen.
      Ecumenism has not been condemned as a heresy, and the Moscow patriarchate
      remains a member of the World Council of Churches and other ecumenist
      organisations.

      The glorification of some of the Holy New Martyrs and Confessors of
      Russia was not done without omissions and cunning, that is, it was not done
      in an ecclesiastical manner. In particular, the Moscow patriarchate did not
      repent of its own many years of slander against the Holy New Martyrs, who
      condemned sergianism.

      In the "social doctrine of the MP" many have seen a renunciation of the

      declaration of Metropolitan Sergius and his course of action. But not only
      is
      there not a word about repenting of the heresy of sergianism in this
      document: the name of Metropolitan Sergius is not mentioned at all. The
      document, like many previous sergianist declarations, is unsubstantiated.

      The Moscow patriarchate for many decades faithfully served Soviet
      power,
      and now it serves the New World Order. And it is with this "church" that the
      hierarchy of the Church Abroad wishes to unite.

      All heretics in all ages have, under the guise of serving Christ,
      served
      Antichrist and prepared his coming. But most of them, on falling away from
      the Church, have departed from Orthodox tradition. Sergianism is
      particularly
      dangerous because it strives to preserve unchanged the external forms, using
      them as nets in which to catch, if it were possible, even the elect.

      Beloved in Christ Jesus, brothers and sisters!

      Many today are faced with the question: is it possible to preserve
      one's
      faithfulness to True Orthodoxy while remaining in the Church Abroad, which
      is
      consciously hurling itself into the embraces of the ecumenist "World
      Orthodoxy". We all very well understand that a significant part of the ROCA
      will not follow its clerical leadership along the false path.

      The Congress of the Russian Orthodox Church calls on all these zealots
      of Orthodoxy to come over under the omophorion of the Hierarchs of the
      Russian Orthodox Church.

      We wish to emphasise that we are far from a striving to lord it over
      whomever it may be. We only want to help those who need help in acquiring a
      canonical ground for their ecclesiastical existence.

      The Russian Orthodox Church is not striving to close in on itself. On
      the contrary, we desire communion with the True Orthodox Christians of all
      countries and peoples. We intend to take practical steps to establish full
      canonical communion with sister True Orthodox Local Churches.

      November 12/25, 2000.

      Archbishop Valentine, President of the Hierarchical Synod of the Russian
      Orthodox Church.
      Members of the Hierarchical Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church: Bishop
      Theodore, Bishop Seraphim, Bishop Victor, Bishop Anthony, Bishop Timothy.
      Protopriest Andrew Osetrov, Secretary of the Hierarchical Synod.
      And the signatures of many other participants in the Congress.
    • lmickle@concentric.net
      As the moderator of this list has already underscored, the orthodox-synod list consists of ROCOR members and those well-disposed toward ROCOR. One of our
      Message 2 of 6 , Jan 10, 2001
        As the moderator of this list has already underscored, the orthodox-synod
        list consists of ROCOR members and those well-disposed toward ROCOR. One of
        our "well-disposed friends," a person one who had already been preparing the
        field for a schism while she was still claiming to be a part of ROCOR and
        denying that she was a part of the Suzdal group, now presents an unambiguous
        manifesto: ROCOR has been an apostate organization since at least 1994,
        with a hierarchy which is "...not ashamed crudely to violate the canons and
        wills of the Blessed First Hierarchs Metropolitans Anthony, Anastasy and
        Philaret..." ...to set upon on a "treacherous course of action," and is "...
        intending to unite with the Moscow Patriarchate...," and to "...[hurl]
        itself into the embraces of the ecumenist 'World Orthodoxy.'" Now the
        Suzdal group adds that ROCOR is neither canonical nor part of the Church,
        for it calls for the zealots of Orthodoxy to leave ROCOR and come under the
        omorphorion of the Russian Orthodox Church., so that they might "acquir[e] a
        canonical ground for their ecclesiastical existence...," "...seek communion
        with the True Orthodox Christians of all countries and peoples..." and take
        practical steps "...to establish full canonical communion with sister True
        Orthodox Local Churches...."

        Forgive me for "stirring the pot" by asking a series of questions:
        1) Fr. Moderator: Does this type of agitprop belong on the orthodox-synod
        list?
        2) How often must we be told that the Sobor said things it did not say, did
        things it did not do, planned a course it has not planned?
        3) How often is it necessary to repeat, both with respect to the
        pronouncements of the MP and our bishops' assessments -both the positive and
        the negative - of those pronouncements: Read the actual statements, and
        don't rely on the statements of those who [now overtly state] that they wish
        to rend the body of the Church.
        4) Is it necessary to remind the intended audience of the Suzdal manifesto
        that a bit of history is being rewritten? When the Suzdal group joined
        ROCOR, it seemed to think ROCOR was canonical, and was part of the Russian
        Church. I believe that it was Metropolitan Vitaly, speaking on behalf of
        the Synod of Bishops of Rocor, who subsequently declared Valentin and those
        with him to be outside the Church.
        5) If a unification with the TOCs is anticipated, do those TOCs include the
        group which in violation of the canons, left ROCOR to avoid canonical
        proceedings brought to sort out charges of sexual improprieties among their
        clergy? Do they include those under a former ROCOR archimandrite Antony
        Grabbe, who, in violation of the canons, fled ROCOR rather than face
        canonical proceedings on a number of charges, and who has been advertised on
        this list by a (former?) member of ROCOR as Archbishop of North America?
        What "canonical status" will those who leave ROCOR find by responding to
        this call for schism?
        6)Would it be inappropriate to ask why the zealous defenders of Orthodoxy
        who are publishing assessments critical of the ROCOR Sobor do not also
        publish those assessments which are in support of our bishops, statements by
        those who trust in their Hierarchs, and who do not read into the statements
        of our Hierarchs things they have not said?

        Once again, asking your forgiveness for wearying you all with my inchoate
        musings.

        Deacon Leonid Mickle


        -----Original Message-----
        From: Olga Mitrenina [mailto:alektor@...]
        Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 11:48 AM
        To: orthodox-synod@egroups.com
        Subject: [orthodox-synod] Address

        http://www.roac-suzdal.narod.ru
        ADDRESS
        Of the 8th Congress of the clergy, monastics and laity of the Suzdal Diocese
        of the Russian [Rossijskaya] Orthodox Church
        to all Orthodox Christians in the Fatherland and in the Diaspora

        We, participants in the 8th Congress of the clergy, monastics and laity
        of the Suzdal Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church, being zealous for the
        glory of God and the preservation of the patristic Orthodox teaching,
        address
        all those to whom Orthodoxy is dear. And first of all we address those
        clergy
        and laity of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCA), both in Russia and
        abroad, whose Christian conscience cannot be reconciled with the treacherous
        course of action chosen by the hierarchy of the Church Abroad.

        In spite of difficulties and obstacles raised up on the path of our
        salvation, the Suzdal Diocese and the whole Russian [Rossijskaya] Orthodox
        Church strives to go by that path which was trodden by the Russian Orthodox
        Church headed by his Holiness Patriarch Tikhon. By the mercy of God and the
        prayers of the Holy New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, our parishes have
        increased the numbers of their members and continue, as far as they are
        able,
        the work of regenerating Orthodoxy in Russia.

        For us a huge significance attaches to the blessing and instruction of
        Bishop Gregory (Grabbe) that was given by him before his blessed end to the
        parishes of the Suzdal Diocese that were in the process of regeneration.

        10 years ago, the parish of the Emperor Constantine left the Moscow
        Patriarchate. This became an important event in the history of the Russian
        Orthodox Church, since in Russia for the first time there appeared a legal
        Orthodox community not entering into the structure of the sergianist
        hierarchy.

        Much has changed in the past years. But the saddest thing for us has
        been the clear apostasy of the Church Abroad for its own confessing path.
        That which has been taking place there in the last years witnesses to the
        fact that power in the Hierarchical Synod belongs now, not to the zealots of
        Orthodoxy, but to people who are not ashamed crudely to violate the canons
        and wills of the Blessed First Hierarchs Metropolitans Anthony, Anastasy and
        Philaret. An eloquent witness to this apostasy from true Orthodoxy has the
        acceptance by the Church Abroad in 1994 of the heretical ecclesiology of
        Metropolitan Cyprian of Fili.

        The results of the last Hierarchical Council of the ROCA vividly
        witness
        to the fact that the hierarchs of the Church Abroad are intending to unite
        with the Moscow Patriarchate, and this elicited the perplexity of many
        representatives of the clergy, monastics and laity.

        The situation that has developed is fraught with schism, which
        threatens
        to become the last event in the life of the ROCA: a part of her will be
        swallowed up by the Moscow patriarchate, while another part will disperse
        amongst various jurisdictions.

        Many have been deceived by the council of the MP which took place in
        August, 2000, at which the following documents were approved:

        1) "The Basic Principles of the Relationship of the ROC to heterodoxy;
        2) An Act glorifying the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia;
        3) "The Bases of the Social Conception of the ROC".

        An analysis of these documents shows that no substantial change in the
        sergianist-ecumenist course of the Moscow patriarchate can be foreseen.
        Ecumenism has not been condemned as a heresy, and the Moscow patriarchate
        remains a member of the World Council of Churches and other ecumenist
        organisations.

        The glorification of some of the Holy New Martyrs and Confessors of
        Russia was not done without omissions and cunning, that is, it was not done
        in an ecclesiastical manner. In particular, the Moscow patriarchate did not
        repent of its own many years of slander against the Holy New Martyrs, who
        condemned sergianism.

        In the "social doctrine of the MP" many have seen a renunciation of the

        declaration of Metropolitan Sergius and his course of action. But not only
        is
        there not a word about repenting of the heresy of sergianism in this
        document: the name of Metropolitan Sergius is not mentioned at all. The
        document, like many previous sergianist declarations, is unsubstantiated.

        The Moscow patriarchate for many decades faithfully served Soviet
        power,
        and now it serves the New World Order. And it is with this "church" that the
        hierarchy of the Church Abroad wishes to unite.

        All heretics in all ages have, under the guise of serving Christ,
        served
        Antichrist and prepared his coming. But most of them, on falling away from
        the Church, have departed from Orthodox tradition. Sergianism is
        particularly
        dangerous because it strives to preserve unchanged the external forms, using
        them as nets in which to catch, if it were possible, even the elect.

        Beloved in Christ Jesus, brothers and sisters!

        Many today are faced with the question: is it possible to preserve
        one's
        faithfulness to True Orthodoxy while remaining in the Church Abroad, which
        is
        consciously hurling itself into the embraces of the ecumenist "World
        Orthodoxy". We all very well understand that a significant part of the ROCA
        will not follow its clerical leadership along the false path.

        The Congress of the Russian Orthodox Church calls on all these zealots
        of Orthodoxy to come over under the omophorion of the Hierarchs of the
        Russian Orthodox Church.

        We wish to emphasise that we are far from a striving to lord it over
        whomever it may be. We only want to help those who need help in acquiring a
        canonical ground for their ecclesiastical existence.

        The Russian Orthodox Church is not striving to close in on itself. On
        the contrary, we desire communion with the True Orthodox Christians of all
        countries and peoples. We intend to take practical steps to establish full
        canonical communion with sister True Orthodox Local Churches.

        November 12/25, 2000.

        Archbishop Valentine, President of the Hierarchical Synod of the Russian
        Orthodox Church.
        Members of the Hierarchical Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church: Bishop
        Theodore, Bishop Seraphim, Bishop Victor, Bishop Anthony, Bishop Timothy.
        Protopriest Andrew Osetrov, Secretary of the Hierarchical Synod.
        And the signatures of many other participants in the Congress.

























        Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
      • Fr. Gregory Williams
        ... Far from inchoate musings. Hear, hear! I think it is high time, Fr. Mark, to bar such propaganda from this list, whether coming from some sort of 5th
        Message 3 of 6 , Jan 10, 2001
          Fr. Leonid Mickle's post began:

          >As the moderator of this list has already underscored, the orthodox-synod
          >list consists of ROCOR members and those well-disposed toward ROCOR. One of
          >our "well-disposed friends," a person one who had already been preparing the
          >field for a schism while she was still claiming to be a part of ROCOR and
          >denying that she was a part of the Suzdal group, now presents an unambiguous
          >manifestoŠ?
          >
          >Once again, asking your forgiveness for wearying you all with my inchoate
          >musings.
          >
          >Deacon Leonid Mickle
          >
          Far from inchoate musings. Hear, hear! I think it is high time, Fr.
          Mark, to bar such propaganda from this list, whether coming from some
          sort of 5th column within, or from schismatics and/or heretics (how
          much difference is there!) without.
          --
          --Fr. Gregory Williams

          * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
          1180 Orthodox Way
          Liberty, TN 37095-4366 USA

          Phone: (615) 536-5239
          FAX: (615) 536-5945
          E-mail: frgregory@...
        • Oleg
          I did not graduate from a seminary. I did not read the decisions of the October Sobor with a loupa, so I may have missed something. But beyond saying that
          Message 4 of 6 , Jan 10, 2001
            I did not graduate from a seminary. I did not read the decisions of the
            October Sobor with a loupa, so I may have missed something. But beyond
            saying that there are some positive moves in the MP, there was nothing there
            to indicate an impending union of ROCOR with MP.

            And I have not seen any MP rep inventorying property at my church (St.
            Sergius in San Francisco).

            The meanspirited and rebellious messages recently posted on this list (in
            the name of God's truth) disturb me much more than anything the MP has done
            lately.

            God have mercy.

            Oleg
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: <lmickle@...>
            To: <orthodox-synod@egroups.com>
            Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 11:46 AM
            Subject: RE: [orthodox-synod] Address


            > As the moderator of this list has already underscored, the orthodox-synod
            > list consists of ROCOR members and those well-disposed toward ROCOR. One
            of
            > our "well-disposed friends," a person one who had already been preparing
            the
            > field for a schism while she was still claiming to be a part of ROCOR and
            > denying that she was a part of the Suzdal group, now presents an
            unambiguous
            > manifesto: ROCOR has been an apostate organization since at least 1994,
            > with a hierarchy which is "...not ashamed crudely to violate the canons
            and
            > wills of the Blessed First Hierarchs Metropolitans Anthony, Anastasy and
            > Philaret..." ...to set upon on a "treacherous course of action," and is
            "...
            > intending to unite with the Moscow Patriarchate...," and to "...[hurl]
            > itself into the embraces of the ecumenist 'World Orthodoxy.'" Now the
            > Suzdal group adds that ROCOR is neither canonical nor part of the Church,
            > for it calls for the zealots of Orthodoxy to leave ROCOR and come under
            the
            > omorphorion of the Russian Orthodox Church., so that they might "acquir[e]
            a
            > canonical ground for their ecclesiastical existence...," "...seek
            communion
            > with the True Orthodox Christians of all countries and peoples..." and
            take
            > practical steps "...to establish full canonical communion with sister True
            > Orthodox Local Churches...."
            >
            > Forgive me for "stirring the pot" by asking a series of questions:
            > 1) Fr. Moderator: Does this type of agitprop belong on the orthodox-synod
            > list?
            > 2) How often must we be told that the Sobor said things it did not say,
            did
            > things it did not do, planned a course it has not planned?
            > 3) How often is it necessary to repeat, both with respect to the
            > pronouncements of the MP and our bishops' assessments -both the positive
            and
            > the negative - of those pronouncements: Read the actual statements, and
            > don't rely on the statements of those who [now overtly state] that they
            wish
            > to rend the body of the Church.
            > 4) Is it necessary to remind the intended audience of the Suzdal manifesto
            > that a bit of history is being rewritten? When the Suzdal group joined
            > ROCOR, it seemed to think ROCOR was canonical, and was part of the Russian
            > Church. I believe that it was Metropolitan Vitaly, speaking on behalf of
            > the Synod of Bishops of Rocor, who subsequently declared Valentin and
            those
            > with him to be outside the Church.
            > 5) If a unification with the TOCs is anticipated, do those TOCs include
            the
            > group which in violation of the canons, left ROCOR to avoid canonical
            > proceedings brought to sort out charges of sexual improprieties among
            their
            > clergy? Do they include those under a former ROCOR archimandrite Antony
            > Grabbe, who, in violation of the canons, fled ROCOR rather than face
            > canonical proceedings on a number of charges, and who has been advertised
            on
            > this list by a (former?) member of ROCOR as Archbishop of North America?
            > What "canonical status" will those who leave ROCOR find by responding to
            > this call for schism?
            > 6)Would it be inappropriate to ask why the zealous defenders of Orthodoxy
            > who are publishing assessments critical of the ROCOR Sobor do not also
            > publish those assessments which are in support of our bishops, statements
            by
            > those who trust in their Hierarchs, and who do not read into the
            statements
            > of our Hierarchs things they have not said?
            >
            > Once again, asking your forgiveness for wearying you all with my inchoate
            > musings.
            >
            > Deacon Leonid Mickle
            >
            >
            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: Olga Mitrenina [mailto:alektor@...]
            > Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 11:48 AM
            > To: orthodox-synod@egroups.com
            > Subject: [orthodox-synod] Address
            >
            > http://www.roac-suzdal.narod.ru
            > ADDRESS
            > Of the 8th Congress of the clergy, monastics and laity of the Suzdal
            Diocese
            > of the Russian [Rossijskaya] Orthodox Church
            > to all Orthodox Christians in the Fatherland and in the Diaspora
            >
            > We, participants in the 8th Congress of the clergy, monastics and
            laity
            > of the Suzdal Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church, being zealous for
            the
            > glory of God and the preservation of the patristic Orthodox teaching,
            > address
            > all those to whom Orthodoxy is dear. And first of all we address those
            > clergy
            > and laity of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCA), both in Russia and
            > abroad, whose Christian conscience cannot be reconciled with the
            treacherous
            > course of action chosen by the hierarchy of the Church Abroad.
            >
            > In spite of difficulties and obstacles raised up on the path of our
            > salvation, the Suzdal Diocese and the whole Russian [Rossijskaya] Orthodox
            > Church strives to go by that path which was trodden by the Russian
            Orthodox
            > Church headed by his Holiness Patriarch Tikhon. By the mercy of God and
            the
            > prayers of the Holy New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, our parishes
            have
            > increased the numbers of their members and continue, as far as they are
            > able,
            > the work of regenerating Orthodoxy in Russia.
            >
            > For us a huge significance attaches to the blessing and instruction
            of
            > Bishop Gregory (Grabbe) that was given by him before his blessed end to
            the
            > parishes of the Suzdal Diocese that were in the process of regeneration.
            >
            > 10 years ago, the parish of the Emperor Constantine left the Moscow
            > Patriarchate. This became an important event in the history of the Russian
            > Orthodox Church, since in Russia for the first time there appeared a legal
            > Orthodox community not entering into the structure of the sergianist
            > hierarchy.
            >
            > Much has changed in the past years. But the saddest thing for us has
            > been the clear apostasy of the Church Abroad for its own confessing path.
            > That which has been taking place there in the last years witnesses to the
            > fact that power in the Hierarchical Synod belongs now, not to the zealots
            of
            > Orthodoxy, but to people who are not ashamed crudely to violate the canons
            > and wills of the Blessed First Hierarchs Metropolitans Anthony, Anastasy
            and
            > Philaret. An eloquent witness to this apostasy from true Orthodoxy has the
            > acceptance by the Church Abroad in 1994 of the heretical ecclesiology of
            > Metropolitan Cyprian of Fili.
            >
            > The results of the last Hierarchical Council of the ROCA vividly
            > witness
            > to the fact that the hierarchs of the Church Abroad are intending to unite
            > with the Moscow Patriarchate, and this elicited the perplexity of many
            > representatives of the clergy, monastics and laity.
            >
            > The situation that has developed is fraught with schism, which
            > threatens
            > to become the last event in the life of the ROCA: a part of her will be
            > swallowed up by the Moscow patriarchate, while another part will disperse
            > amongst various jurisdictions.
            >
            > Many have been deceived by the council of the MP which took place in
            > August, 2000, at which the following documents were approved:
            >
            > 1) "The Basic Principles of the Relationship of the ROC to heterodoxy;
            > 2) An Act glorifying the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia;
            > 3) "The Bases of the Social Conception of the ROC".
            >
            > An analysis of these documents shows that no substantial change in
            the
            > sergianist-ecumenist course of the Moscow patriarchate can be foreseen.
            > Ecumenism has not been condemned as a heresy, and the Moscow patriarchate
            > remains a member of the World Council of Churches and other ecumenist
            > organisations.
            >
            > The glorification of some of the Holy New Martyrs and Confessors of
            > Russia was not done without omissions and cunning, that is, it was not
            done
            > in an ecclesiastical manner. In particular, the Moscow patriarchate did
            not
            > repent of its own many years of slander against the Holy New Martyrs, who
            > condemned sergianism.
            >
            > In the "social doctrine of the MP" many have seen a renunciation of
            the
            >
            > declaration of Metropolitan Sergius and his course of action. But not only
            > is
            > there not a word about repenting of the heresy of sergianism in this
            > document: the name of Metropolitan Sergius is not mentioned at all. The
            > document, like many previous sergianist declarations, is unsubstantiated.
            >
            > The Moscow patriarchate for many decades faithfully served Soviet
            > power,
            > and now it serves the New World Order. And it is with this "church" that
            the
            > hierarchy of the Church Abroad wishes to unite.
            >
            > All heretics in all ages have, under the guise of serving Christ,
            > served
            > Antichrist and prepared his coming. But most of them, on falling away from
            > the Church, have departed from Orthodox tradition. Sergianism is
            > particularly
            > dangerous because it strives to preserve unchanged the external forms,
            using
            > them as nets in which to catch, if it were possible, even the elect.
            >
            > Beloved in Christ Jesus, brothers and sisters!
            >
            > Many today are faced with the question: is it possible to preserve
            > one's
            > faithfulness to True Orthodoxy while remaining in the Church Abroad, which
            > is
            > consciously hurling itself into the embraces of the ecumenist "World
            > Orthodoxy". We all very well understand that a significant part of the
            ROCA
            > will not follow its clerical leadership along the false path.
            >
            > The Congress of the Russian Orthodox Church calls on all these
            zealots
            > of Orthodoxy to come over under the omophorion of the Hierarchs of the
            > Russian Orthodox Church.
            >
            > We wish to emphasise that we are far from a striving to lord it over
            > whomever it may be. We only want to help those who need help in acquiring
            a
            > canonical ground for their ecclesiastical existence.
            >
            > The Russian Orthodox Church is not striving to close in on itself. On
            > the contrary, we desire communion with the True Orthodox Christians of all
            > countries and peoples. We intend to take practical steps to establish full
            > canonical communion with sister True Orthodox Local Churches.
            >
            > November 12/25, 2000.
            >
            > Archbishop Valentine, President of the Hierarchical Synod of the Russian
            > Orthodox Church.
            > Members of the Hierarchical Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church: Bishop
            > Theodore, Bishop Seraphim, Bishop Victor, Bishop Anthony, Bishop Timothy.
            > Protopriest Andrew Osetrov, Secretary of the Hierarchical Synod.
            > And the signatures of many other participants in the Congress.
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • msg
            ... It is impossible to bar such propaganda preemptively. Without complete moderation of all postings, one can only act after the fact. Some contrary
            Message 5 of 6 , Jan 10, 2001
              At 03:58 PM 1/10/01 -0600, you wrote:
              >Far from inchoate musings. Hear, hear! I think it is high time, Fr.
              >Mark, to bar such propaganda from this list, whether coming from some
              >sort of 5th column within, or from schismatics and/or heretics (how
              >much difference is there!) without.

              It is impossible to "bar" such propaganda preemptively.
              Without complete moderation of all postings, one can
              only act after the fact. Some contrary opinions will
              see the light of day. Is that bad? First we limit
              the ravings of Fr Elia, now Olga posts, who's next?
              Where do you suggest we draw the line? This list was
              never meant to be an official organ of an approved
              line.

              When the diversity of this list's membership was questioned,
              I asked on the clergy list for accused "enemies" of ROCA
              (present on this list) to be revealed, so that the intended
              list membership (friends and members of ROCA) could be
              maintained. No one wanted to name names, but Olga herself
              has revealed, I think, the limits of our tolerance. She's
              entered into the realm of proselytization, and outright attack
              on ROCA. I am not suggesting she is an enemy, and it is
              easy to love someone such as herself who really believes she
              is doing us a service by posting what she has posted. It's
              not really friendly however for a guest to accuse one's hosts
              of treachery, schism and apostasy.

              But then, as Fr Alexander Lebedev has said about his own
              very controversial quotations posted to the orthodox-tradition
              list, these are not her words, she is only reporting them
              without comment.

              Ouch! our ox is being gored now, and the emotional response
              is predictably like that on the tradition list in response
              to Fr Alexander and Fr John Shaw's postings. Many would say
              turnabout is fair play. I appeal however to all posters on
              all lists to discern the membership and to not intentionally
              goad the primary audience.

              There are other forums with a more general audience, where
              such information as Olga has provided would not be considered
              inappropriate. Here in the context of the synod list it
              cannot be considered anything but.

              Of course we now have to have a conversation about the
              limits of tolerance and what constitutes "propaganda" or
              "agitprop"

              Fr Leonid wrote:

              > 1) Fr. Moderator: Does this type of agitprop belong on the
              >orthodox-synod list?

              I don't believe so.

              >2) How often must we be told that the Sobor said things it did not
              >say, did things it did not do, planned a course it has not planned?

              This is just my opinion, but I think there will continue
              to be questions until there is a clearer understanding of
              what happened - and people feel safe in asking questions
              without fear of being labeled with "fifth column" or other
              such epithets.

              >3) How often is it necessary to repeat,...

              How often do we repeat the cycle of the Gospel lessons?

              4) Is it necessary to remind the intended audience of the Suzdal manifesto
              that a bit of history is being rewritten? ...

              Yes, it is necessary. That would, in fact, be a good place
              to start. It is best to leave out personal digs, and only
              act on fact.

              >5) If a unification with the TOCs is anticipated, do those TOCs include the
              >group which in violation of the canons, left ROCOR to avoid canonical
              >proceedings brought to sort out charges of sexual improprieties among their
              >clergy? Do they include those under a former ROCOR archimandrite Antony
              >Grabbe, who, in violation of the canons, fled ROCOR rather than face
              >canonical proceedings on a number of charges, and who has been advertised on
              >this list by a (former?) member of ROCOR as Archbishop of North America?
              >What "canonical status" will those who leave ROCOR find by responding to
              >this call for schism?

              These are all good questions, which may now need to be
              taken to a more appropriate forum such as:

              Orthodox-tradition@egroups.com

              but since you have raised them here, perhaps there are
              some who will now feel compelled to present answers here.

              >6)Would it be inappropriate to ask why the zealous defenders of Orthodoxy
              >who are publishing assessments critical of the ROCOR Sobor do not also
              >publish those assessments which are in support of our bishops, statements by
              >those who trust in their Hierarchs, and who do not read into the statements
              >of our Hierarchs things they have not said?

              Not inappropriate, but surely more than a little beyond
              the realm of reasonable expectations. I don't see
              partisans doing such things elsewhere. Viable lists
              allow for more than one side of an issue to be aired,
              so that balance is not lost. I'm sure no one here is
              suggesting anything more authoritarian than that here.
              Counter the propaganda, don't squash it, otherwise people
              get paranoid and find it easy to believe the worst.

              As a ROCA priest today wrote on the orthodox-tradition
              list:

              "When emotion *prevails,* truth is cast aside. [...]

              "People who are in political, religious, and economic leadership
              know very well that emotion clouds the mind, tempers resolve,
              and divides members of any society. Used "properly" emotions
              can manipulate any person, institution, or nation caught in its
              unthinking, non-logical grasp. Spiritual abuse, as found in sects
              and may be found in the followers of a "charismatic" leader, for
              example, is based on knowing the emotional make-up of the
              adherent - and then using it against him/her.

              "Some of us tend to be more emotional in nature than others
              and are, therefore, more easily led, more easily discouraged,
              more easily depressed, and more easily maneuvered into sinful
              situations, than those who are less so and who are more
              cognitive and rational in thinking.

              "We are creatures who have emotions and also reasoning powers.
              They both have their proper place in life. Reason, however, must
              supercede emotion. Reason must temper emotion.

              "It seems that in all of us reason and emotion are in a constant
              struggle. Unfortunately, emotion comes easily. To exercise reason,
              in the throes of emotion, is the struggle.

              "As we walk through life the path to the goal must be paved with
              reason."
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.