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

Re: The New Soviet Man-and the New American Man

Expand Messages
  • Michael Coleman
    This thread regarding the New Soviet Man and the untrustworthiness, sovietization, etc of the pre-1991 Russian Episcopate has its merits, as, I think, any
    Message 1 of 12 , Mar 27, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      This thread regarding the "New Soviet Man" and the untrustworthiness, sovietization, etc of the pre-1991 Russian Episcopate has its merits, as, I think, any reasonable person must admit. However, it is often what a person or persons *don't* assert (or at the least, ignore) that is most telling.
      While there are significant historical differences between the Soviet Union over the last 80-odd years and that of the United States, sometimes I wonder if *our* American Bishops (and the rest of the clergy, not to mention the lot of the converts) are not equally, if not identically exposed to some of the most dangerous spiritual attitudes in existence.
      We see the symptoms of this peculiarly American disease in various jurisdictions (modernism, a protestant attitude (literalism, stubbornness, recourse to schism, etc), relativism, revisionism, etc) and we can think of some Bishops (and priests and deacons) who have succumbed to this American disease. The difference is that *our* Bishops have done so willingly; the Soviet ones had done so unwillingly.
      Should we be wary of the Russian Orthodox Church because of her compromised history with the Soviet state? Of course. But sometimes I wonder if they have something to fear from us as well: a spirit here in America that breeds arrogance, schism and nihilism. Should the Russian Bishops be wary of us? I hope that they would be.

      This focus on the Sovietization of the Bishops seems to me a bit of an ignoring of the spiritual realities and temptations that befall us all (both in captivity and in freedom); and sometimes freedom breeds worse demons.

      Michael Coleman
      Los Alamitos, CA
      Protection of the Theotokos Church
      Los Angeles, CA
      Kiril Bart <kirbart@...> wrote:
      Or he would be a Metropolitan already??
      Subdeacon Kirill
      Michael Nikitin wrote:Stalin also relaxed his grip on the Church during WW2. Then after the war
      the grip tightened again...tighter.

      Who consecrated those bishops that came after 1991? Would it be those KGB
      bishops before 1991? Those that were consecrated after 1991 were already
      primed for the *new* Russia. They didn't just become priests overnight. They
      were educated the New Soviet Man.

      A pious priest would never become a bishop under communism.
      He would be expected to do their bidding.

      Those thugs who were in power during communism are the same thugs in power
      now. The names of the parties changed, but they remain.

      Fr.John never lived in the Soviet Union and therefore didn't encounter the
      horrors. Perhaps that's why he defends the Patriarch or is it because of an
      agenda. If he lived in the Soviet Union his outlook on the whole situation
      might be different.

      Michael N.


      From: "Fr. John R. Shaw"
      Reply-To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
      To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [orthodox-synod] Re: The New Soviet Man-Comments Fr. John Shaw?
      Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 12:20:35 -0500

      Vladimir Kozyreff wrote:

      > "� the overwhelming majority of the current one hundred and nineteen
      > bishops of the Moscow Patriarchate were ordained to the episcopacy
      > prior to August of 1991 [the date of the effective end of Communist
      > rule in Russia].

      JRS: I see you really want to hear my response to this.

      Actually, there are 158, not "119", MP bishops listed in the
      2003 "Pravoslavny Tserkovny Kalendar".

      Of these, only 78 were consecrated bishops before the date you set.
      This is a little over half, but hardly "the overwhelming majority".

      However, in reality the Soviet state had relaxed its grip on the Church
      before the fall of communism; and out of 158 bishops, there are now
      only 33 left who were consecrated before the time of Gorbachev
      and "Perestroika" (1985).

      But even that is pretty arbitrary. The fact that someone was allowed to
      be consecrated a bishop under Soviet rule does not prove that he is
      utterly corrupt. They would have had difficulty finding too many people
      who were "on their side" and who also were pious and desired to live
      the life of an Orthodox bishop -- and who would *continue* with this
      life, after they had nothing to gain from the state for doing so.

      However, I repeat that Orthodox Christians should have better things to
      do during Great Lent than seek to engage others in disputes. I doubt
      that anything I might say would convince you, any more than the
      erroneous information that you have posted would convince me of
      anything, except your lack of knowledge of the facts...

      In Christ
      Fr. John R. Shaw






      _________________________________________________________________
      Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
      http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail



      Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




      ---------------------------------
      Do you Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!

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



      Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod



      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




      ---------------------------------
      Do you Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!

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