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

THE MAIN DANGER TO ORTHODOXY

Expand Messages
  • stnephon@aol.com
    THE MAIN DANGER TO ORTHODOXY A Letter from father Timothy Selsky to his Spiritual Son    Dear in the Lord N.N: Who could possibly have the daring to claim
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 27, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      THE MAIN DANGER TO
      ORTHODOXY
      A Letter from father Timothy Selsky
      to his Spiritual Son 
       
      Dear in the Lord N.N:
      Who could possibly have the daring to claim that Orthodox Christians are
      completely deprived of Grace when they leave official Orthodox jurisdictions
      and join us (ROCOR)? On the contrary if one is to judge by the signs of Grace
      filled activity, those described by the ascetic fathers, then in the passage
      to join the Church there is observed: a more active spiritual growth, an
      increase in the voice of the conscience, a strengthening of decisiveness in
      baring one's cross, thos manifestations which are in general not experienced
      by those who live comfortably in official Orthodoxy. It is precisely at the
      time of these reunions with the Church that special help is granted in the
      form  of signs or unusual course of events. All of these witness to the
      activity of Grace. In your letter you touched upon a very important question.
      You have gathered the impression that the Russian periodicals of the Russian
      Church Abroad [In Russia] are preocupied with polemics concerning the "Moscow
      Patriarchate", as if it is the "Patriarchate" that is the main enemy of
      Russian Orthodoxy and not the various western false teachings and
      denominations.
      ...The root of the question is this: Who is the main enemy of Orthodoxy at
      the present time? The trivial answer 'the devil' will not satisfy us since
      immediatedly the question arises, Whom is the devil using? Of course the
      devil in his madness desired the death of Christ not realizing that His death
      would destroy the devil's power over mankind. Who on the other hand directly
      carried out the hellish plot of deicide? Who was Chrit's main persecutor
      during His earthly life? The Roman officials? Greek philosophers? Barbarian
      Scythians? Atheists who had no true understanding of worshipping God? No,
      Christ did not disturb them in the least.
      Who among those possessing an understand about the true God was Christ's main
      enemy? Perhaps the Samaritans, those Old Testament heretics who recognized
      nothing except the five books of Moses? Obviously not. Pehaps it was the
      Sadducees, thos Old Testament rationalists and "God seekers" near the Church
      [though not in it]? Of course they did not accept Christ and even tried to
      tempt Him with the foolish fantasy of the woman with the seven husbands. But
      the Gospel tells us of no wicked hatred of theirs towards Christ.
      Who was more wicked that any one? Who pursued, spying on the Saviour's every
      move, frequently laying traps for Him, working out plans for Christ-killing
      at various gatherings? Who languished with envy and fear of losing influence
      over the broad masses of people? Who finally judged Christ, and justified the
      greatest of all humanity's crimes by using both religious and civil arguments?
      Were these God-killers heretics or schismatics? Had they previously betrayed
      openly and vocally the Law of God which was passed on to them? Did they
      depart from the divinely established altar and its services? Could one say:
      here are the followers of the true Faith, here is their Church, and over
      there are the various heretics who war against this Church. Could one repeat
      the following: here is the seat of Moses, where sits the rightful highpriest,
      who has preserved succession from Aaron, and over there is the false seat,
      raised up by human fantasy? No, for those leaders from the seat of Moses, the
      preservers of the law of Moses in all its purity, the bearers of the
      priesthood of Aaron and the servers of the altar in Solomon's Temple it was
      in fact they who did not just reject the Son of god but also became His
      murderers.
      Herein lies the whole essence of your question. I am amazed why so many do
      not see this direct comparison between the past apostasy of Judaism at the
      time of the first coming of Christ and the present religious situation within
      official apostatized Orthodoxy captures by Pharisees. Our present times have
      no precedence in the history of the Church, There are reminiscent of the time
      of the first coming of Christ. Now the "seat of Moses" i.e., the Hierarchs of
      the official Orthodox Church, is occupied by Pharisees, people who do not
      openly reject the letter of Orthodox teaching but mix the Truth with their
      new religious understanding with the goal of controlling God's people. No
      single heresy in the past can compare to that of the ecumenical-modernist
      feeling planted in the masses by contemporary pharisees. None of the
      fallings-away during times of the kings of Israel can be compared to our
      present and all embracing apostacy of those pharisees who have connived to
      preserve the whole outward mask of religious truth.
      Here we can see the chief moral indication of the closeness of our times to
      the end of world history. Old Testament Pharisaism could be removed from the
      consciousness of God's people only by the direct interference of God, i.e.,
      the first appereance of Christ. Christ Himself taught that one should do all
      that the Pharisees commanded, but only not imitate their works (Mt. 11:3),
      for the Pharisees preserved the truth in unrighteousness. But where is the
      limit between the true teaching which they preserved and theri works which
      anulled the teaching and which could not be followed? The question is not a
      simple one.
      Official Orthodoxy in its resourceful actions strives to give people at least
      some teaching, although distorted, according to the letter -fir them who in
      fact value the letter. For example, those who want to fast and pray, are
      instructed about the usefulness of fasting and are taught "the theory of
      prayer". As for those who consider all of this unnecessary they are allowed
      to pay no attention to prayer and fasting, basing their permissiveness on
      some theory. If you want to be pious, be pious, if you don't want to be
      pious, do not be, and at the same time stay within your rights as a member of
      the Church- only honor and accept the indivisible spiritual rule of the
      Pharisees.
      Perhaps this reasoning seems too general to you. Then allow me to introduce
      some concrete leading questions in answer to your quandary.
      Do you agree that the spiritual essence of our present civil [Russian]
      government is deeply hostile to Orthodoxy, that the present government, like
      the previous one, bears within the spiritual signs of the Antichrist? Who
      among the religious leaders more often appears hand in hand with our civil
      leaders? The Catholics, Protestants, Muslims? Whose churches do the civil
      leaders most often visit in order to receive blessings for their crimes
      -spiritual, political, economic, etc.?
      Who constantly approves of the massive demonic-psychic cultivation of the
      population in the past years in the form of "sessions" (seances) for
      drunkness and psychic "healing"? What Catholic priest or Protestant pastor in
      Russia (not abroad) provided this phenomenon with such an effective
      pseudo-Christian cover? Are there not in fact more Orthodox "spiritual
      fathers" who instituted this demonic cure beginning with "Patriarch" Alexis
      II and the late "Metropolitan" John of Petersburg and ending with the whole
      school of practicing psychics among the clergy, for example like "Archpriest"
      Vassily Lesnyak?
      Which religious group in Russia has more agents in the gouvernment among its
      clergy, and also so patently exposed? Where are more Chekists: in turbans,
      birettas, or in klobuks and mitres? Finally the last question: what
      denomination in Russia at the present time has more immunity, privileges,
      stability and other materialistic benefits granted to them by an
      antichristian government?
      The explaination for this discomforting comparison for the "Moscow
      Patriarchate" is simple. Russia is historically an Orthodox country and now
      like the rest of the world is under the power of antichristian forces. Russia
      has even been exploited by these forces in the course of 70 years as a
      testing area in preparation for the coming of the Antichrist. In historically
      Catholic countries the arrival of the Antichrist is being assisted by
      official Latinism, in Protestant countries by Protestantism, and now in our
      country by the historical religion wish has been "worked over" for the past
      70 years.
      A state religion in an antireligious state is critically important commodity
      for the stability of such a government and demands many years of effort to
      create. The foundation of such a state religion has now been established
      throughout the civilized world. All official Christian denominations now have
      greatly departed from their original foundations. That which has remained in
      them is an ecumenical pharisaical spirit and constant hypocrisy: they say one
      thing to their people and themselves do something completedly the opposite.
      This attitude binds them together. They experience something in common in
      ecumenical contacts, and in their common departure from theri former
      traditions, those traditions which are very troublesome for ecumenists, but
      which they have not entirely cast off, for the sake of their flocks.
      For example, in the autum of 1994 the first Catholic parish was opened in
      Novgorod. the newspaper NOVGOROD NEWS (April 8, 1995), publisehd an interview
      with the rector of the church, The Catholic priest Myroslav Danielsky
      announced that he receives no salary, rides in the bus, rents a one room
      apartment and serves in the building of a movie theater. His flock amounts to
      a few dozen people.
      In light of thos sorri state of Catholicism in Novgorod we learn from the
      Parisian Newspaper RUSSIAN TOUGHT, that the Pope assigns $6,000,000 yearly
      through a special fund VERENPHREDA-VAN-STRAATEN towards the material support
      not of his own priests in Russia huddling in one room appartments and living
      off of hand-outs, but for "Patriarchal" priests to the ammount of $1,000 a
      year each. Does the Pope really love Orthodoxy so much? Priest Danielsky
      unknowingly solves the riddle himself when he speaks of the good relations he
      has with the local "Patriarchal Bishop" Lev: "The task of both of our
      Churches is the same...."(!).
      That priest was sent in order to witness to this sommon "task" before the
      majority of the Norvogord's population, and not to care for the needs of a
      few dozen Catholics. If he was an opponent of Ecumenism he would never
      be there. The common master [of both groups] who has assigned a "single task"
      to both "sister churches" understands perfectly well who is richer and more
      popular in Warsaw, and who in Novgorod, who there can "care for the people's
      souls" better in order to bring them to the false christ, and who here. The
      stipend is distributed accordingly...
      Take note how the intervention of foreign preachers in Russia has dropped to
      a minimum, in  the booklet "Laws of the Russian Federation on Religions", the
      number of registered heterodox communities (which includes true orthodox
      communities) is given at two or three hundred maximum. The leaders of the
      "Moscow Patriarchate" have succeeded in convincing the
      behind-the-stage-scene-bosses "we are not only the most obedient to you of
      all the groups but also the most popular, place your stakes on us".
      What can one say about the simple believing people? They, like the believers
      at the time of the first Pharisees, are divided. The morally sensitive
      minority is maturing and looks for something better. The remainder will
      develop under the pharisaical system. THERE IS NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN (Ec.
      1:9)
      I close with the words of St Maximus the Confessor which were engraved for me
      as a gift and rest under the glass of my desk: "if you wish to find the way
      leading unto life, seek it in that Way, Who said, 'I AM THE WAY, THE TRUTH,
      AND THE LIFE'; I AM THE DOOR (Jn. 14:6, 10:9); and there you will find it.
      but seek diligently, for 'FEW THAT BE THAT FIND IT' (Mt 7:14),  lest you be
      left behind by the few, and find thyself among the many (four centuries on
      Love, 2:8).
      From the collection, "Discussion on Love" (in russian) St. Petersburg, 1995.
      Extracted from "Orthodox Life"  Vol. 46, No.2 March-April, 1996 pp 23-28


      brotherhood of st Nephon - NYC -  br.hadzi Stefan~Igor  - bratstvo sv Nifona




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