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


Expand Messages
  • goossir
    Dear list, I found the following letter quite interesting . Allow me to share it with you. Yours in Christ, Irina Pahlen A Letter from father Timothy Selsky
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 23, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear list,

      I found the following letter quite interesting . Allow me to share
      it with you.
      Yours in Christ,
      Irina Pahlen

      A Letter from father Timothy Selsky to his Spiritual Son
      From the collection, "Discussion on Love" (in russian) St.
      Petersburg, 1995.

      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? 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.
      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
      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,
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.