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

Re: collaborators and assistants to Metropolitan Anthony

Expand Messages
  • maestro_vg
    What signature? It appears that bishop Amvrosy was merely addressed... perhaps another example of how the super-orthodox observe everything but the facts...
    Message 1 of 16 , Apr 6, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      What signature? It appears that bishop Amvrosy was merely
      addressed... perhaps another example of how the "super-orthodox"
      observe everything but the facts...
      dVG


      --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Nikitin"
      <mikeniki@h...> wrote:
      > The signature of Bishop Ambrosy tells it all. The Synod didn't want
      anyone
      > interfering with their union with MP and therefore got rid of those
      who were
      > in their way. To some this was obvious in 1986 when many parishes
      left. Now
      > everyone knows why the French were driven out also.
      >
      > The Anathema Against Ecumenism which ROCOR signed in 1983 and later
      > confirmed doesn't matter?
      >
      > The MP is in the WCC and prays with heretics.
      >
      > We have to find a hard hat or seek somewhere it doesn't rain
      Anathema's on
      > our heads.
      >
      > Michael N.
      >
      > From: "vkozyreff" <vladimir.kozyreff@s...>
      > Reply-To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
      > To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [orthodox-synod] collaborators and assistants to
      Metropolitan
      > Anthony
      > Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 16:26:00 -0000
      >
      > Dear List,
      >
      > Below is a very interesting document dated April 1, 2003, and
      > particularly the paragraph below, were Vl Amvrosii and vl Mark are
      > invited to collaborate with metropolitan Anthony.
      >
      > "…In the period preceding the election the Most Reverend Archbishop
      > Simon of Brussels and Belgium, the Most Reverend Archbishop
      > Innokentii of Korsun, the Right Reverend Bishop Gabriel of Komana,
      > the Right Reverend Bishop Amvrosii of Geneva and Western Europe, as
      > well as Archbishop Anatolii of Kerch, Bishop Basil of Sergievo and
      > Bishop Michael of Klavdiopolis, whilst retaining their usual powers,
      > are invited to become close collaborators and assistants to
      > Metropolitan Anthony.
      >
      > At the next stage the Most Reverend Archbishop Mark of Berlin,
      > Germany and Great Britain (Russian Church Abroad), the Most Reverend
      > Archbishop Longin of Klinsk, the Most Reverend Archbishop Feofan of
      > Berlin and Germany, and the Most Reverend Archbishop Paul of Vienna
      > and Budapest should obviously also be invited to take part in the
      > process, so that the restoration of Church unity in the Russian
      > diaspora can be extended to the countries of Central Europe as
      well…"
      >
      >
      > in God
      >
      > Vladimir Kozyreff
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > http://www.sourozh.org/news/patriarch010403_en.htm
      >
      >
      > The following letter has been received by Metropolitan Anthony and
      he
      > has asked that it be placed on our diocesan website and given
      general
      > distribution. The proposals made in it are quite clearly of great
      > importance for the Diocese of Sourozh. Indeed, if it proves possible
      > to implement them, they will significantly affect the development of
      > Orthodoxy in Western and Central Europe.
      >
      > + Basil
      >
      > Bishop of Sergievo
      > Assistant Bishop
      > Diocese of Sourozh
      >
      >
      >
      > THE PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW AND ALL RUSSIA
      > ALEXIS
      > 1st April
      > 2003
      > 119034 Moscow, Chistiy per.
      5
      > Doc. No. 1378
      >
      > His Grace the Most Reverend Anthony,
      > Metropolitan of Sourozh
      > His Grace the Most Reverend Simon,
      > Archbishop of Brussels and Belgium
      > His Grace the Most Reverend Innokentii,
      > Archbishop of Korsun
      > His Grace the Right Reverend Gabriel,
      > Bishop of Komana,
      > Locum Tenens of the Archdiocese
      > of Russian Orthodox Parishes in Western Europe
      > His Grace the Right Reverend Amvrosii,
      > Bishop of Geneva and Western Europe
      > (Russian Orthodox Church Abroad)
      > and all Orthodox parishes of Russian tradition in Western Europe
      >
      > Most Reverend Bishops,
      > dear Fathers, Brothers and Sisters!
      > During these forty days of Holy Lent we think constantly about the
      > future of the heritage of the Russian Church which follows the
      > traditions of Russian Orthodoxy in the countries of the West.
      > By the grace of God, through the intercession of the Queen of Heaven
      > and the prayers of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, Church
      > life in our country is being successfully reborn in all its
      fullness.
      > Of course one must not yield to the temptation of a misplaced
      > triumphalism: on the human side there are still very many
      > shortcomings in the good ordering of our Holy Church. The Lord
      > expects from us a greater depth of repentance, a greater readiness
      > for sacrifice, a greater zeal in our work for the salvation and
      > enlightenment of the millions of people, who though they have been
      > baptised were not brought up in the Orthodox faith as children.
      > However, the temptations and weaknesses to be observed in the Church
      > community in our country are mainly due to "growing pains". A
      > spring-like awakening after a long and cruel winter of enforced god-
      > lessness can be neither instantaneous nor painless.
      > The picture changes when we look at the Church life of our
      > compatriots in the diaspora. The first question which inevitably
      > arises is: how can one explain the continuing separation of the
      > sundered parts of the Russian Church? Clearly it was brought into
      > being by the historical tragedy of the Russian people, the breakdown
      > of society as a result of the catastrophe that was the Revolution.
      > Both Metropolitan Anthony [Khrapovitsky – Ed.] and Metropolitan
      > Evlogii made it clear that their move away from full unity with the
      > Mother Church in our country was motivated only by political rather
      > than by any other reasons. These outstanding bishop-pastors, each
      in
      > his own way, deeply loved the Russia they were never to see again,
      > and each believed that Church unity would be restored as soon as the
      > yoke of godlessness oppressing their country was broken. Their
      > fellow bishops, who experienced the full ferocity of the persecution
      > of the Church in the USSR of that time, believed this too. His
      > Holiness Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, also believed this
      > when, in 1931, he voiced his opinion that the temporary
      subordination
      > of the Russian Exarchate in Western Europe to the throne of
      > Constantinople would continue "until, God willing, unity and the
      > unbroken image of the Holy sister Russian Church are restored." His
      > Holiness Patriarch Athenagoras confirmed this when, in 1965, he gave
      > his blessing to the Exarchate of Russian Parishes in Western Europe
      > for their return to the bosom of the Russian Orthodox Church.
      > We can hardly doubt that the time has come for a restoration of
      > unity. We have already written on this matter in brotherly epistles,
      > in September of last year to His Holiness Bartholomew, Patriarch of
      > Constantinople, and in the preceding year to the members of the
      > Episcopal Council of the Russian Church Abroad. We consider that
      the
      > time has now come for us to address this epistle directly to our
      > compatriots in the countries of Western Europe and to their
      spiritual
      > pastors. Why is it that now, when the years of sore trials have
      > passed, when the Mother Church can freely fulfil its calling and
      > Russia aspires to restore continuity with its historical past,
      Church
      > divisions still continue, though the reasons for them have long
      > disappeared? Why do we not fulfil the hopes of our predecessors and
      > spiritual fathers?
      > Apart from those reasons that have their roots in human sinfulness,
      > there are other, more benign reasons for this. The grandchildren and
      > great grandchildren of the `first generation' émigrés feel that they
      > have in every sense put down roots in the countries where they now
      > live and where they play an active part in social and cultural life.
      > While the heritage of their fathers is precious to them, many of
      > these representatives of the Russian spiritual tradition who live in
      > Western Europe wish to preserve the forms of Church life which have
      > gradually developed over many years conditions quite unlike those in
      > which the Church found itself in Russia, though these forms are
      > rooted in the same canonical tradition, as set out in the
      regulations
      > established by the Ecumenical and Local Councils and by the Fathers
      > of the Church, traditions made manifest in the acts and decisions of
      > the All-Russian Local Council (Sobor) of 1917-1918.
      > In addition to this, parishes founded by Russians and following
      > Russian traditions have over the years acquired a multinational
      > character and in liturgical practice make widespread use of local
      > languages, which since the time of Saints Cyril and Methodius, Equal
      > to the Apostles, has invariably been a characteristic of Orthodox
      > pastoral and missionary work.
      > Therefore, so as to have a certain guarantee in the preservation of
      > an established, familiar order, some of our compatriots living in
      > Western countries - and some of the local Orthodox who form part of
      > communities living according to the Russian tradition - wish to
      > structure their Church life according to their own Statutes, which
      > guarantee internal self-government and the election of their own
      > ruling bishop, on condition that the bishop so elected is then
      > confirmed by the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and the Holy
      > Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church.
      > Such wishes have been expressed in particular by the Diocesan
      > Assembly of the Diocese of Sourozh and have found expression in
      their
      > draft Statutes. They also represent a very significant element in
      > the conclusions arrived at by the "Commission on the Future of the
      > Archdiocese of Russian Orthodox Parishes in Western Europe"
      > established two years ago by the late Archbishop Serge of Evkarpia.
      > Such an arrangement is also envisaged in the current Statutes of the
      > Archdiocese.
      > Taking into consideration the combined weight of these wishes, I
      > consider that they could be realised through the creation in Western
      > Europe of a single Metropolia, consisting of several diocese and
      > embracing all the Orthodox parishes, monasteries and communities of
      > Russian origin and Russian spiritual tradition who would wish to be
      a
      > part of such a Metropolia. In addition to this it is envisaged that
      > such a Metropolia would be granted the right of self-government,
      > including the election of its ruling bishop by a Council of the
      > Metropolia consisting of bishops, presbyters and laity on the basis
      > of Statutes to be worked out with the participation of all groups in
      > the Orthodox Russian diaspora in the countries of Western Europe.
      > Until the first election of a Ruling Bishop (Metropolitan) takes
      > place we consider it right to entrust the care of the newly
      > constituted Metropolia to His Grace Anthony, Metropolitan of
      Sourozh,
      > despite his previously expressed wish to retire. The immense
      pastoral
      > experience and recognised spiritual authority of this universally
      > respected Bishop will act as a guarantee of success for this new way
      > of organising the life of the Russian Orthodox Church in Western
      > Europe.
      > In the period preceding the election the Most Reverend Archbishop
      > Simon of Brussels and Belgium, the Most Reverend Archbishop
      > Innokentii of Korsun, the Right Reverend Bishop Gabriel of Komana,
      > the Right Reverend Bishop Amvrosii of Geneva and Western Europe, as
      > well as Archbishop Anatolii of Kerch, Bishop Basil of Sergievo and
      > Bishop Michael of Klavdiopolis, whilst retaining their usual powers,
      > are invited to become close collaborators and assistants to
      > Metropolitan Anthony. At the next stage the Most Reverend Archbishop
      > Mark of Berlin, Germany and Great Britain (Russian Church Abroad),
      > the Most Reverend Archbishop Longin of Klinsk, the Most Reverend
      > Archbishop Feofan of Berlin and Germany, and the Most Reverend
      > Archbishop Paul of Vienna and Budapest should obviously also be
      > invited to take part in the process, so that the restoration of
      > Church unity in the Russian diaspora can be extended to the
      countries
      > of Central Europe as well.
      > We hope that an autonomous Metropolia, uniting all the faithful of
      > the Russian Orthodox tradition in the countries of Western Europe,
      > will serve, at a time pleasing to God, as the foundation for the
      > future canonical establishment of a multinational Local Orthodox
      > Church of Western Europe, to be built in a spirit of conciliarity by
      > all the Orthodox faithful living in those countries.
      > In a spirit of love I call upon you all, dear Bishops, Fathers,
      > Brothers and Sisters, to labour in the great work of healing the
      > painful divisions of the Russian diaspora. May the God of love and
      > peace bless your efforts.
      >
      > (signed) + ALEXIS
      > PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW AND ALL RUSSIA
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > _________________________________________________________________
      > STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
      > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
    • orthodoxchurch_sg
      Evlogite! Indeed ~ if I am invited to become a Mason, have I erred? If I am asked to a BBQ next week, have I broken the Fast? The desire of the
      Message 2 of 16 , Apr 6, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Evlogite!
        Indeed ~ if I am invited to become a Mason, have I erred? If I am
        asked to a BBQ next week, have I broken the Fast?
        The desire of the 'super-Orthodox' to run to condemnation does no
        credit to their cause. "Help me to see my own faults and not to judge
        my brother" we pray most days during the Great Lent, but the desire
        on the part of some to condemn and judge their hierarchs sometimes
        beggars belief.
        Fr Daniel
      • boulia_1
        This is indeed interesting and it will be interesting to see the reactions to this letter, particularly from the Synod. My husband pointed out its date: April
        Message 3 of 16 , Apr 7, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          This is indeed interesting and it will be interesting to see the
          reactions to this letter, particularly from the Synod.

          My husband pointed out its date: April Fool's Day (Ne komu ne veri).

          Still, if this letter IS 'for real,' it is interesting that Abp. Mark
          (who is healthy and active; as opposed to Vl. Amvrossy, who is unwell
          and wishes to retire) was not 'invited' to participate in the
          organization of this proposed new Metropolitinate now, even though
          his (ROCOR)diocese includes Great Britain (Metropolitan Anthony Bloom
          is in Great Britain).

          Also, I have heard from my relatives in England that Metropolitan
          Anthony's health is very poor.

          I certainly hope that everyone will restrain themselves from jumping
          to conclusions and rushing to condemn our ROCOR hierarchs; remember,
          THEY did not write this letter (in fact, I wonder who did?).


          Wishing all a joyous Feast of the Annunciation,
          Elizabeth




          --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "vkozyreff"
          <vladimir.kozyreff@s...> wrote:
          > Dear List,
          >
          > Below is a very interesting document dated April 1, 2003, and
          > particularly the paragraph below, were Vl Amvrosii and vl Mark are
          > invited to collaborate with metropolitan Anthony.
          >
          > "…In the period preceding the election the Most Reverend Archbishop
          > Simon of Brussels and Belgium, the Most Reverend Archbishop
          > Innokentii of Korsun, the Right Reverend Bishop Gabriel of Komana,
          > the Right Reverend Bishop Amvrosii of Geneva and Western Europe, as
          > well as Archbishop Anatolii of Kerch, Bishop Basil of Sergievo and
          > Bishop Michael of Klavdiopolis, whilst retaining their usual
          powers,
          > are invited to become close collaborators and assistants to
          > Metropolitan Anthony.
          >
          > At the next stage the Most Reverend Archbishop Mark of Berlin,
          > Germany and Great Britain (Russian Church Abroad), the Most
          Reverend
          > Archbishop Longin of Klinsk, the Most Reverend Archbishop Feofan of
          > Berlin and Germany, and the Most Reverend Archbishop Paul of Vienna
          > and Budapest should obviously also be invited to take part in the
          > process, so that the restoration of Church unity in the Russian
          > diaspora can be extended to the countries of Central Europe as
          well…"
          >
          >
          > in God
          >
          > Vladimir Kozyreff
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > http://www.sourozh.org/news/patriarch010403_en.htm
          >
          >
          > The following letter has been received by Metropolitan Anthony and
          he
          > has asked that it be placed on our diocesan website and given
          general
          > distribution. The proposals made in it are quite clearly of great
          > importance for the Diocese of Sourozh. Indeed, if it proves
          possible
          > to implement them, they will significantly affect the development
          of
          > Orthodoxy in Western and Central Europe.
          >
          > + Basil
          >
          > Bishop of Sergievo
          > Assistant Bishop
          > Diocese of Sourozh
          >
          >
          >
          > THE PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW AND ALL RUSSIA
          > ALEXIS
          > 1st April
          >
          2003
          > 119034 Moscow, Chistiy per. 5
          > Doc. No. 1378
          >
          > His Grace the Most Reverend Anthony,
          > Metropolitan of Sourozh
          > His Grace the Most Reverend Simon,
          > Archbishop of Brussels and Belgium
          > His Grace the Most Reverend Innokentii,
          > Archbishop of Korsun
          > His Grace the Right Reverend Gabriel,
          > Bishop of Komana,
          > Locum Tenens of the Archdiocese
          > of Russian Orthodox Parishes in Western Europe
          > His Grace the Right Reverend Amvrosii,
          > Bishop of Geneva and Western Europe
          > (Russian Orthodox Church Abroad)
          > and all Orthodox parishes of Russian tradition in Western Europe
          >
          > Most Reverend Bishops,
          > dear Fathers, Brothers and Sisters!
          > During these forty days of Holy Lent we think constantly about the
          > future of the heritage of the Russian Church which follows the
          > traditions of Russian Orthodoxy in the countries of the West.
          > By the grace of God, through the intercession of the Queen of
          Heaven
          > and the prayers of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, Church
          > life in our country is being successfully reborn in all its
          fullness.
          > Of course one must not yield to the temptation of a misplaced
          > triumphalism: on the human side there are still very many
          > shortcomings in the good ordering of our Holy Church. The Lord
          > expects from us a greater depth of repentance, a greater readiness
          > for sacrifice, a greater zeal in our work for the salvation and
          > enlightenment of the millions of people, who though they have been
          > baptised were not brought up in the Orthodox faith as children.
          > However, the temptations and weaknesses to be observed in the
          Church
          > community in our country are mainly due to "growing pains". A
          > spring-like awakening after a long and cruel winter of enforced god-
          > lessness can be neither instantaneous nor painless.
          > The picture changes when we look at the Church life of our
          > compatriots in the diaspora. The first question which inevitably
          > arises is: how can one explain the continuing separation of the
          > sundered parts of the Russian Church? Clearly it was brought into
          > being by the historical tragedy of the Russian people, the
          breakdown
          > of society as a result of the catastrophe that was the Revolution.
          > Both Metropolitan Anthony [Khrapovitsky – Ed.] and Metropolitan
          > Evlogii made it clear that their move away from full unity with the
          > Mother Church in our country was motivated only by political rather
          > than by any other reasons. These outstanding bishop-pastors, each
          in
          > his own way, deeply loved the Russia they were never to see again,
          > and each believed that Church unity would be restored as soon as
          the
          > yoke of godlessness oppressing their country was broken. Their
          > fellow bishops, who experienced the full ferocity of the
          persecution
          > of the Church in the USSR of that time, believed this too. His
          > Holiness Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, also believed this
          > when, in 1931, he voiced his opinion that the temporary
          subordination
          > of the Russian Exarchate in Western Europe to the throne of
          > Constantinople would continue "until, God willing, unity and the
          > unbroken image of the Holy sister Russian Church are restored." His
          > Holiness Patriarch Athenagoras confirmed this when, in 1965, he
          gave
          > his blessing to the Exarchate of Russian Parishes in Western Europe
          > for their return to the bosom of the Russian Orthodox Church.
          > We can hardly doubt that the time has come for a restoration of
          > unity. We have already written on this matter in brotherly
          epistles,
          > in September of last year to His Holiness Bartholomew, Patriarch of
          > Constantinople, and in the preceding year to the members of the
          > Episcopal Council of the Russian Church Abroad. We consider that
          the
          > time has now come for us to address this epistle directly to our
          > compatriots in the countries of Western Europe and to their
          spiritual
          > pastors. Why is it that now, when the years of sore trials have
          > passed, when the Mother Church can freely fulfil its calling and
          > Russia aspires to restore continuity with its historical past,
          Church
          > divisions still continue, though the reasons for them have long
          > disappeared? Why do we not fulfil the hopes of our predecessors and
          > spiritual fathers?
          > Apart from those reasons that have their roots in human sinfulness,
          > there are other, more benign reasons for this. The grandchildren
          and
          > great grandchildren of the `first generation' émigrés feel that
          they
          > have in every sense put down roots in the countries where they now
          > live and where they play an active part in social and cultural
          life.
          > While the heritage of their fathers is precious to them, many of
          > these representatives of the Russian spiritual tradition who live
          in
          > Western Europe wish to preserve the forms of Church life which have
          > gradually developed over many years conditions quite unlike those
          in
          > which the Church found itself in Russia, though these forms are
          > rooted in the same canonical tradition, as set out in the
          regulations
          > established by the Ecumenical and Local Councils and by the Fathers
          > of the Church, traditions made manifest in the acts and decisions
          of
          > the All-Russian Local Council (Sobor) of 1917-1918.
          > In addition to this, parishes founded by Russians and following
          > Russian traditions have over the years acquired a multinational
          > character and in liturgical practice make widespread use of local
          > languages, which since the time of Saints Cyril and Methodius,
          Equal
          > to the Apostles, has invariably been a characteristic of Orthodox
          > pastoral and missionary work.
          > Therefore, so as to have a certain guarantee in the preservation of
          > an established, familiar order, some of our compatriots living in
          > Western countries - and some of the local Orthodox who form part of
          > communities living according to the Russian tradition - wish to
          > structure their Church life according to their own Statutes, which
          > guarantee internal self-government and the election of their own
          > ruling bishop, on condition that the bishop so elected is then
          > confirmed by the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and the Holy
          > Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church.
          > Such wishes have been expressed in particular by the Diocesan
          > Assembly of the Diocese of Sourozh and have found expression in
          their
          > draft Statutes. They also represent a very significant element in
          > the conclusions arrived at by the "Commission on the Future of the
          > Archdiocese of Russian Orthodox Parishes in Western Europe"
          > established two years ago by the late Archbishop Serge of Evkarpia.
          > Such an arrangement is also envisaged in the current Statutes of
          the
          > Archdiocese.
          > Taking into consideration the combined weight of these wishes, I
          > consider that they could be realised through the creation in
          Western
          > Europe of a single Metropolia, consisting of several diocese and
          > embracing all the Orthodox parishes, monasteries and communities of
          > Russian origin and Russian spiritual tradition who would wish to be
          a
          > part of such a Metropolia. In addition to this it is envisaged that
          > such a Metropolia would be granted the right of self-government,
          > including the election of its ruling bishop by a Council of the
          > Metropolia consisting of bishops, presbyters and laity on the basis
          > of Statutes to be worked out with the participation of all groups
          in
          > the Orthodox Russian diaspora in the countries of Western Europe.
          > Until the first election of a Ruling Bishop (Metropolitan) takes
          > place we consider it right to entrust the care of the newly
          > constituted Metropolia to His Grace Anthony, Metropolitan of
          Sourozh,
          > despite his previously expressed wish to retire. The immense
          pastoral
          > experience and recognised spiritual authority of this universally
          > respected Bishop will act as a guarantee of success for this new
          way
          > of organising the life of the Russian Orthodox Church in Western
          > Europe.
          > In the period preceding the election the Most Reverend Archbishop
          > Simon of Brussels and Belgium, the Most Reverend Archbishop
          > Innokentii of Korsun, the Right Reverend Bishop Gabriel of Komana,
          > the Right Reverend Bishop Amvrosii of Geneva and Western Europe, as
          > well as Archbishop Anatolii of Kerch, Bishop Basil of Sergievo and
          > Bishop Michael of Klavdiopolis, whilst retaining their usual
          powers,
          > are invited to become close collaborators and assistants to
          > Metropolitan Anthony. At the next stage the Most Reverend
          Archbishop
          > Mark of Berlin, Germany and Great Britain (Russian Church Abroad),
          > the Most Reverend Archbishop Longin of Klinsk, the Most Reverend
          > Archbishop Feofan of Berlin and Germany, and the Most Reverend
          > Archbishop Paul of Vienna and Budapest should obviously also be
          > invited to take part in the process, so that the restoration of
          > Church unity in the Russian diaspora can be extended to the
          countries
          > of Central Europe as well.
          > We hope that an autonomous Metropolia, uniting all the faithful of
          > the Russian Orthodox tradition in the countries of Western Europe,
          > will serve, at a time pleasing to God, as the foundation for the
          > future canonical establishment of a multinational Local Orthodox
          > Church of Western Europe, to be built in a spirit of conciliarity
          by
          > all the Orthodox faithful living in those countries.
          > In a spirit of love I call upon you all, dear Bishops, Fathers,
          > Brothers and Sisters, to labour in the great work of healing the
          > painful divisions of the Russian diaspora. May the God of love and
          > peace bless your efforts.
          >
          > (signed) + ALEXIS
          > PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW AND ALL RUSSIA
        • vkozyreff
          Dear Father Daniel, bless. The autonomy that Patriarch Aleksy II is suggesting here has already been suggested by Vl Mark before. Vl Mark probably does not
          Message 4 of 16 , Apr 7, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Father Daniel, bless.

            The autonomy that "Patriarch" Aleksy II is suggesting here has
            already been suggested by Vl Mark before. Vl Mark probably does not
            consider that the invitation is that negative and would probably not
            equate this to an invitation to become a Mason. Vl Amvrosii, I
            believe, has always agreed with Vl Mark in this matter. The
            invitation does not mention ecumenism or sergianism, but neither Vl
            Mark nor Vl Amvrosii seemed to believe that these are obstacles.

            I think the question is not about judging people, be it our ROCOR
            hierarchs or the MP hierarchs. The question is to know whether ROCOR
            follows the right course. As we all know, there have been
            disagreements on this matter. Observing contradictions and detecting
            them has nothing to do with "the desire on the part of some to
            condemn and judge their hierarchs". Again, we are not judging people.
            We are discussing proposals. Lay people too may do this. The question
            is:

            1. Is that autonomy acceptable in the present conditions? (Union
            before the MP has renounced sergianism and ecumenism.)
            2. How will the 2 ROCOR hierarchs reply? (The invitation seems to
            correspond to wishes that they already expressed before.)

            I would like to add that there is no "super orthodox", in my opinion.
            There are only orthodox and non - orthodox. An orthodox should be
            fundamentally orthodox, because nothing is wrong in orthodoxy. You
            cannot become better by becoming a little bit less orthodox. There is
            no such thing as being "too much orthodox".

            In God,

            Vladimir Kozyreff

            In his June 5, 2002 interview to "Nezavisimaya gazeta", Vl Mark
            says:
            - "In the remote prospect there could be a form of coexistence, and a
            further dialogue in the form which was described already by Patriarch
            Aleksy II.
            - In one of the interviews he gave, he recognised natural, that the
            ROCOR part of the Russian Church has a life, features which were
            developed for 80 years, and nobody should bury them into oblivion.
            - For example, among our parishioners there are a a lot of non-
            Russians. We thus in many respects differ from the Russian parishes.
            - Any model of a mutual recognition which gradually would pass in the
            form of an autonomy is therefore necessary".

            http://religion.ng.ru/people/2002-06-05/1_looking.html




            --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "orthodoxchurch_sg"
            <orthodoxchurch_sg@y...> wrote:
            >
            > Evlogite!
            > Indeed ~ if I am invited to become a Mason, have I erred? If I am
            > asked to a BBQ next week, have I broken the Fast?
            > The desire of the 'super-Orthodox' to run to condemnation does no
            > credit to their cause. "Help me to see my own faults and not to
            judge
            > my brother" we pray most days during the Great Lent, but the desire
            > on the part of some to condemn and judge their hierarchs sometimes
            > beggars belief.
            > Fr Daniel
          • Joachim Wertz
            I have some problems with this letter. The language just doesn t sound official or ecclesiastical enough. It is unclear, at least to me, whether Bishop Simon
            Message 5 of 16 , Apr 7, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              I have some problems with this letter. The language just doesn't sound
              official or ecclesiastical enough. It is unclear, at least to me, whether
              Bishop Simon is already Bishop of Brussels or "will be" elected. Is it a
              foregone conclusion? Also, when all these MP vicar Bishops are mentioned,
              why is not Bishop Agapit mentioned along side of Archbishop Mark? What ever
              became of the MP Bishop Hilarion of Brussels? Now as I understand it, there
              might be some legal considerations involved that necessitate treating Bishop
              Amvrosii and Archbishop Mark on different levels. For example, I think that
              any ecclesiastical institution based in Germany cannot legally exercise
              jurisdiction in Austria. I have heard or read this, although the situation
              of the Serbian Church in Germany and western Europe would seem to contradict
              this. Those who know better, please correct me if I am wrong. So any Russian
              Orthodox Metropolia for Western Europe might have to be administratively
              distinct from one for Germany.

              Joachim Wertz

              From: "boulia_1" <eledkovsky@...>
              Reply-To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
              Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 12:15:11 -0000
              To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re: collaborators and assistants to Metropolitan
              Anthony


              This is indeed interesting and it will be interesting to see the
              reactions to this letter, particularly from the Synod.

              My husband pointed out its date: April Fool's Day (Ne komu ne veri).

              Still, if this letter IS 'for real,' it is interesting that Abp. Mark
              (who is healthy and active; as opposed to Vl. Amvrossy, who is unwell
              and wishes to retire) was not 'invited' to participate in the
              organization of this proposed new Metropolitinate now, even though
              his (ROCOR)diocese includes Great Britain (Metropolitan Anthony Bloom
              is in Great Britain).

              Also, I have heard from my relatives in England that Metropolitan
              Anthony's health is very poor.

              I certainly hope that everyone will restrain themselves from jumping
              to conclusions and rushing to condemn our ROCOR hierarchs; remember,
              THEY did not write this letter (in fact, I wonder who did?).


              Wishing all a joyous Feast of the Annunciation,
              Elizabeth




              --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "vkozyreff"
              <vladimir.kozyreff@s...> wrote:
              > Dear List,
              >
              > Below is a very interesting document dated April 1, 2003, and
              > particularly the paragraph below, were Vl Amvrosii and vl Mark are
              > invited to collaborate with metropolitan Anthony.
              >
              > "…In the period preceding the election the Most Reverend Archbishop
              > Simon of Brussels and Belgium, the Most Reverend Archbishop
              > Innokentii of Korsun, the Right Reverend Bishop Gabriel of Komana,
              > the Right Reverend Bishop Amvrosii of Geneva and Western Europe, as
              > well as Archbishop Anatolii of Kerch, Bishop Basil of Sergievo and
              > Bishop Michael of Klavdiopolis, whilst retaining their usual
              powers,
              > are invited to become close collaborators and assistants to
              > Metropolitan Anthony.
              >
              > At the next stage the Most Reverend Archbishop Mark of Berlin,
              > Germany and Great Britain (Russian Church Abroad), the Most
              Reverend
              > Archbishop Longin of Klinsk, the Most Reverend Archbishop Feofan of
              > Berlin and Germany, and the Most Reverend Archbishop Paul of Vienna
              > and Budapest should obviously also be invited to take part in the
              > process, so that the restoration of Church unity in the Russian
              > diaspora can be extended to the countries of Central Europe as
              well…"
              >
              >
              > in God
              >
              > Vladimir Kozyreff
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > http://www.sourozh.org/news/patriarch010403_en.htm
              >
              >
              > The following letter has been received by Metropolitan Anthony and
              he
              > has asked that it be placed on our diocesan website and given
              general
              > distribution. The proposals made in it are quite clearly of great
              > importance for the Diocese of Sourozh. Indeed, if it proves
              possible
              > to implement them, they will significantly affect the development
              of
              > Orthodoxy in Western and Central Europe.
              >
              > + Basil
              >
              > Bishop of Sergievo
              > Assistant Bishop
              > Diocese of Sourozh
              >
              >
              >
              > THE PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW AND ALL RUSSIA
              > ALEXIS
              > 1st April
              >
              2003
              > 119034 Moscow, Chistiy per. 5
              > Doc. No. 1378
              >
              > His Grace the Most Reverend Anthony,
              > Metropolitan of Sourozh
              > His Grace the Most Reverend Simon,
              > Archbishop of Brussels and Belgium
              > His Grace the Most Reverend Innokentii,
              > Archbishop of Korsun
              > His Grace the Right Reverend Gabriel,
              > Bishop of Komana,
              > Locum Tenens of the Archdiocese
              > of Russian Orthodox Parishes in Western Europe
              > His Grace the Right Reverend Amvrosii,
              > Bishop of Geneva and Western Europe
              > (Russian Orthodox Church Abroad)
              > and all Orthodox parishes of Russian tradition in Western Europe
              >
              > Most Reverend Bishops,
              > dear Fathers, Brothers and Sisters!
              > During these forty days of Holy Lent we think constantly about the
              > future of the heritage of the Russian Church which follows the
              > traditions of Russian Orthodoxy in the countries of the West.
              > By the grace of God, through the intercession of the Queen of
              Heaven
              > and the prayers of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, Church
              > life in our country is being successfully reborn in all its
              fullness.
              > Of course one must not yield to the temptation of a misplaced
              > triumphalism: on the human side there are still very many
              > shortcomings in the good ordering of our Holy Church. The Lord
              > expects from us a greater depth of repentance, a greater readiness
              > for sacrifice, a greater zeal in our work for the salvation and
              > enlightenment of the millions of people, who though they have been
              > baptised were not brought up in the Orthodox faith as children.
              > However, the temptations and weaknesses to be observed in the
              Church
              > community in our country are mainly due to "growing pains". A
              > spring-like awakening after a long and cruel winter of enforced god-
              > lessness can be neither instantaneous nor painless.
              > The picture changes when we look at the Church life of our
              > compatriots in the diaspora. The first question which inevitably
              > arises is: how can one explain the continuing separation of the
              > sundered parts of the Russian Church? Clearly it was brought into
              > being by the historical tragedy of the Russian people, the
              breakdown
              > of society as a result of the catastrophe that was the Revolution.
              > Both Metropolitan Anthony [Khrapovitsky – Ed.] and Metropolitan
              > Evlogii made it clear that their move away from full unity with the
              > Mother Church in our country was motivated only by political rather
              > than by any other reasons. These outstanding bishop-pastors, each
              in
              > his own way, deeply loved the Russia they were never to see again,
              > and each believed that Church unity would be restored as soon as
              the
              > yoke of godlessness oppressing their country was broken. Their
              > fellow bishops, who experienced the full ferocity of the
              persecution
              > of the Church in the USSR of that time, believed this too. His
              > Holiness Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, also believed this
              > when, in 1931, he voiced his opinion that the temporary
              subordination
              > of the Russian Exarchate in Western Europe to the throne of
              > Constantinople would continue "until, God willing, unity and the
              > unbroken image of the Holy sister Russian Church are restored." His
              > Holiness Patriarch Athenagoras confirmed this when, in 1965, he
              gave
              > his blessing to the Exarchate of Russian Parishes in Western Europe
              > for their return to the bosom of the Russian Orthodox Church.
              > We can hardly doubt that the time has come for a restoration of
              > unity. We have already written on this matter in brotherly
              epistles,
              > in September of last year to His Holiness Bartholomew, Patriarch of
              > Constantinople, and in the preceding year to the members of the
              > Episcopal Council of the Russian Church Abroad. We consider that
              the
              > time has now come for us to address this epistle directly to our
              > compatriots in the countries of Western Europe and to their
              spiritual
              > pastors. Why is it that now, when the years of sore trials have
              > passed, when the Mother Church can freely fulfil its calling and
              > Russia aspires to restore continuity with its historical past,
              Church
              > divisions still continue, though the reasons for them have long
              > disappeared? Why do we not fulfil the hopes of our predecessors and
              > spiritual fathers?
              > Apart from those reasons that have their roots in human sinfulness,
              > there are other, more benign reasons for this. The grandchildren
              and
              > great grandchildren of the `first generation' émigrés feel that
              they
              > have in every sense put down roots in the countries where they now
              > live and where they play an active part in social and cultural
              life.
              > While the heritage of their fathers is precious to them, many of
              > these representatives of the Russian spiritual tradition who live
              in
              > Western Europe wish to preserve the forms of Church life which have
              > gradually developed over many years conditions quite unlike those
              in
              > which the Church found itself in Russia, though these forms are
              > rooted in the same canonical tradition, as set out in the
              regulations
              > established by the Ecumenical and Local Councils and by the Fathers
              > of the Church, traditions made manifest in the acts and decisions
              of
              > the All-Russian Local Council (Sobor) of 1917-1918.
              > In addition to this, parishes founded by Russians and following
              > Russian traditions have over the years acquired a multinational
              > character and in liturgical practice make widespread use of local
              > languages, which since the time of Saints Cyril and Methodius,
              Equal
              > to the Apostles, has invariably been a characteristic of Orthodox
              > pastoral and missionary work.
              > Therefore, so as to have a certain guarantee in the preservation of
              > an established, familiar order, some of our compatriots living in
              > Western countries - and some of the local Orthodox who form part of
              > communities living according to the Russian tradition - wish to
              > structure their Church life according to their own Statutes, which
              > guarantee internal self-government and the election of their own
              > ruling bishop, on condition that the bishop so elected is then
              > confirmed by the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia and the Holy
              > Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church.
              > Such wishes have been expressed in particular by the Diocesan
              > Assembly of the Diocese of Sourozh and have found expression in
              their
              > draft Statutes. They also represent a very significant element in
              > the conclusions arrived at by the "Commission on the Future of the
              > Archdiocese of Russian Orthodox Parishes in Western Europe"
              > established two years ago by the late Archbishop Serge of Evkarpia.
              > Such an arrangement is also envisaged in the current Statutes of
              the
              > Archdiocese.
              > Taking into consideration the combined weight of these wishes, I
              > consider that they could be realised through the creation in
              Western
              > Europe of a single Metropolia, consisting of several diocese and
              > embracing all the Orthodox parishes, monasteries and communities of
              > Russian origin and Russian spiritual tradition who would wish to be
              a
              > part of such a Metropolia. In addition to this it is envisaged that
              > such a Metropolia would be granted the right of self-government,
              > including the election of its ruling bishop by a Council of the
              > Metropolia consisting of bishops, presbyters and laity on the basis
              > of Statutes to be worked out with the participation of all groups
              in
              > the Orthodox Russian diaspora in the countries of Western Europe.
              > Until the first election of a Ruling Bishop (Metropolitan) takes
              > place we consider it right to entrust the care of the newly
              > constituted Metropolia to His Grace Anthony, Metropolitan of
              Sourozh,
              > despite his previously expressed wish to retire. The immense
              pastoral
              > experience and recognised spiritual authority of this universally
              > respected Bishop will act as a guarantee of success for this new
              way
              > of organising the life of the Russian Orthodox Church in Western
              > Europe.
              > In the period preceding the election the Most Reverend Archbishop
              > Simon of Brussels and Belgium, the Most Reverend Archbishop
              > Innokentii of Korsun, the Right Reverend Bishop Gabriel of Komana,
              > the Right Reverend Bishop Amvrosii of Geneva and Western Europe, as
              > well as Archbishop Anatolii of Kerch, Bishop Basil of Sergievo and
              > Bishop Michael of Klavdiopolis, whilst retaining their usual
              powers,
              > are invited to become close collaborators and assistants to
              > Metropolitan Anthony. At the next stage the Most Reverend
              Archbishop
              > Mark of Berlin, Germany and Great Britain (Russian Church Abroad),
              > the Most Reverend Archbishop Longin of Klinsk, the Most Reverend
              > Archbishop Feofan of Berlin and Germany, and the Most Reverend
              > Archbishop Paul of Vienna and Budapest should obviously also be
              > invited to take part in the process, so that the restoration of
              > Church unity in the Russian diaspora can be extended to the
              countries
              > of Central Europe as well.
              > We hope that an autonomous Metropolia, uniting all the faithful of
              > the Russian Orthodox tradition in the countries of Western Europe,
              > will serve, at a time pleasing to God, as the foundation for the
              > future canonical establishment of a multinational Local Orthodox
              > Church of Western Europe, to be built in a spirit of conciliarity
              by
              > all the Orthodox faithful living in those countries.
              > In a spirit of love I call upon you all, dear Bishops, Fathers,
              > Brothers and Sisters, to labour in the great work of healing the
              > painful divisions of the Russian diaspora. May the God of love and
              > peace bless your efforts.
              >
              > (signed) + ALEXIS
              > PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW AND ALL RUSSIA


              Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod



              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
              <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • orthodoxchurch_sg
              Dear in Christ Vladimir ~ You believe this, you assume that, you suspect the other. What are you actually saying, based on evidence, teaching, official
              Message 6 of 16 , Apr 7, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear in Christ Vladimir ~
                You believe this, you assume that, you suspect the other. What are
                you actually saying, based on evidence, teaching, official statements?
                You are quite right - we are Orthodox or not. And our Orthodoxy does
                not depend upon individual opinion, suspicion, assumption, however
                respected or revered the opinion giver may be. There is nothing in
                the official documents of ROCOR, that I have been shown or have read,
                which indicates that it is not possible to discuss possible ways
                forward following the fall of communism in Russia. Indeed, if we were
                not to consider it a possibilty we would be restricting the wisdom
                and the power and the glory of God. We must be careful, of course.
                Are you suggesting that Vl Mark is not careful? discerning? that he
                does not carry the grace of the Apostles poured out upon him at his
                consecration? Yes, the laity should be rational sheep, not unthinking
                automotons. Yet, surely, as I was taight and brought up in Orthodoxy
                among the clergy and laity of ROCOR (I am now a priest in EP)
                including Metropolitan Philaret, Bishops Gregory and Constantine and
                Mark, - humility and patience and obedience count for a great deal.
                Where are they when it comes to splashing documents you dont like on
                the InterNet?
                God bless you and keep you well / Fr Daniel
              • Michael Nikitin
                If dVG did observe the facts he would not be focusing on a signature, but on the Patriarch s proposed union of Churches in Europe. Which was not *merely*
                Message 7 of 16 , Apr 7, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  If dVG did observe the facts he would not be focusing on a signature, but on
                  the Patriarch's proposed union of Churches in Europe. Which was not *merely*
                  addressed, but a calculated move.

                  We know that Bishop Ambrosy permits his priests in France to serve with MP
                  and we know Bishops Mark's inclination for union with MP.

                  The French,who would oppose such union, are out of the way. The road is
                  open in Europe (the French left because of Bishop Ambrosy's leaning for
                  union with MP). In America, Canada and Australia more caution is taken,
                  because there are still a lot of parishes who are opposing union with MP.

                  The MP is in the WCC and prays with heretics.

                  In Russia, parishes of ROCOR(V) wanted to register, but were thwarted by
                  ROCOR(L) who wrote to the Gov't that they were not a Church. See
                  http://www.listok.com in Russian.

                  Someone doesn't want the faithful of ROCOR(L) in Russia to go to ROCOR(V)
                  when union with MP occurs.

                  With the MP nothing is *merely*.

                  It will be interesting to see what type of economia is used by the MP when
                  ROCOR(L), seen as a schismatic Church by MP, will be embraced.

                  Michael N.




                  From: "maestro_vg" <diakon@...>
                  Reply-To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
                  To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re: collaborators and assistants to Metropolitan
                  Anthony
                  Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 00:45:24 -0000

                  What signature? It appears that bishop Amvrosy was merely
                  addressed... perhaps another example of how the "super-orthodox"
                  observe everything but the facts...
                  dVG


                  _________________________________________________________________
                  The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
                  http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
                • vkozyreff
                  Dear Father Daniel, bless. I thank you for your good words. You write: Are you suggesting that Vl Mark is not careful? discerning? that he does not carry the
                  Message 8 of 16 , Apr 8, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dear Father Daniel, bless.

                    I thank you for your good words.

                    You write: "Are you suggesting that Vl Mark is not careful?
                    discerning? that he does not carry the grace of the Apostles poured
                    out upon him at his consecration?

                    1. Vl Mark was once disciplined for not being careful vis-à-vis the
                    MP. I cannot understand why, having been a NTS activist, he applied
                    to study in the Trinity St Sergius Lavra when it was the centre of
                    KGB anti God activity.

                    2. The number of bishops who, in the past, have erred and fallen into
                    schism, apostasy or heresy is considerable. Did they carry the grace
                    of the Apostles poured out upon him at his consecration?

                    3. We are not choosing between my opinion and that of a bishop. We
                    have to choose between the opinion of bishops and sizeable parts of
                    the Church that disagree with one another.

                    4. We are not accusing or condemning the captains of the ships. We
                    have only to choose which ship to board. We know that some maps that
                    were obviously wrong have not been corrected and are still in use. We
                    know also that some captains say now that it does not matter any
                    longer what maps will be used. They say that the most important thing
                    is to be all on the same ship.

                    5. You write: "There is nothing in the official documents of ROCOR,
                    that I have been shown or have read, which indicates that it is not
                    possible to discuss possible ways forward following the fall of
                    communism in Russia". Speaking about official documents, there is
                    none that show any will on the part of the MP to quit sergianism and
                    ecumenism, and yet, we are invited to unite. Vl Amvrosii allows his
                    flock to commune with the MP.

                    6. The question is not "to unite or not to unite with the MP". The
                    question is "To unite after the MP has renounced sergianism and
                    ecumenism or before it has renounced sergianism and ecumenism". I am
                    concerned, and this concern is not only mine. It is the concern of a
                    sizeable part of the Church and of bishops.

                    In God and asking your prayers,

                    Vladimir Kozyreff



                    --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "orthodoxchurch_sg"
                    <orthodoxchurch_sg@y...> wrote:
                    > Dear in Christ Vladimir ~
                    > You believe this, you assume that, you suspect the other. What are
                    > you actually saying, based on evidence, teaching, official
                    statements?
                    > You are quite right - we are Orthodox or not. And our Orthodoxy
                    does
                    > not depend upon individual opinion, suspicion, assumption, however
                    > respected or revered the opinion giver may be. There is nothing in
                    > the official documents of ROCOR, that I have been shown or have
                    read,
                    > which indicates that it is not possible to discuss possible ways
                    > forward following the fall of communism in Russia. Indeed, if we
                    were
                    > not to consider it a possibilty we would be restricting the wisdom
                    > and the power and the glory of God. We must be careful, of course.
                    > Are you suggesting that Vl Mark is not careful? discerning? that he
                    > does not carry the grace of the Apostles poured out upon him at his
                    > consecration? Yes, the laity should be rational sheep, not
                    unthinking
                    > automotons. Yet, surely, as I was taight and brought up in
                    Orthodoxy
                    > among the clergy and laity of ROCOR (I am now a priest in EP)
                    > including Metropolitan Philaret, Bishops Gregory and Constantine
                    and
                    > Mark, - humility and patience and obedience count for a great deal.
                    > Where are they when it comes to splashing documents you dont like
                    on
                    > the InterNet?
                    > God bless you and keep you well / Fr Daniel
                  • Victor Artzimovitch
                    ... From: vkozyreff To: Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 12:48 PM Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re:
                    Message 9 of 16 , Apr 8, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "vkozyreff" <vladimir.kozyreff@...>
                      To: <orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 12:48 PM
                      Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re: collaborators and assistants to Metropolitan
                      Anthony

                      Please allow some comments:

                      Dear Father Daniel, bless.

                      I thank you for your good words.

                      You write: "Are you suggesting that Vl Mark is not careful?
                      discerning? that he does not carry the grace of the Apostles poured
                      out upon him at his consecration?

                      1. Vl Mark was once disciplined for not being careful vis-à-vis the
                      MP. I cannot understand why, having been a NTS activist, he applied
                      to study in the Trinity St Sergius Lavra when it was the centre of
                      KGB anti God activity.

                      Vl.Mark studied (as far as I know) in the Belgrade academy.
                      Vl.Mark was disciplined as was ex-Vl. Varnava, but for very different
                      reasons.

                      2. The number of bishops who, in the past, have erred and fallen into
                      schism, apostasy or heresy is considerable. Did they carry the grace
                      of the Apostles poured out upon him at his consecration?

                      ...so is the case of ex-Vl. Varnava....

                      3. We are not choosing between my opinion and that of a bishop. We
                      have to choose between the opinion of bishops and sizeable parts of
                      the Church that disagree with one another.

                      ... what is a "sizeable part of the Church" ? One ex-bishop and some
                      preasts...?

                      4. We are not accusing or condemning the captains of the ships. We
                      have only to choose which ship to board. We know that some maps that
                      were obviously wrong have not been corrected and are still in use. We
                      know also that some captains say now that it does not matter any
                      longer what maps will be used. They say that the most important thing
                      is to be all on the same ship.

                      ...it's like flying a Boeing 747 with maps dated back to ancient Rome!!!!
                      Times have changed, Russia is in a very difficult process of reforms. So is
                      probably MP.
                      Yes, the most important thing is to be on the same ship in order to help the
                      captains to find back the right track...
                      Just pointing that the map is wrong is not enough....

                      5. You write: "There is nothing in the official documents of ROCOR,
                      that I have been shown or have read, which indicates that it is not
                      possible to discuss possible ways forward following the fall of
                      communism in Russia". Speaking about official documents, there is
                      none that show any will on the part of the MP to quit sergianism and
                      ecumenism, and yet, we are invited to unite. Vl Amvrosii allows his
                      flock to commune with the MP.

                      Our Lord has not refused Judas of being part in the Last Supper...
                      How can we not accept "just" a discussion?

                      6. The question is not "to unite or not to unite with the MP". The
                      question is "To unite after the MP has renounced sergianism and
                      ecumenism or before it has renounced sergianism and ecumenism". I am
                      concerned, and this concern is not only mine. It is the concern of a
                      sizeable part of the Church and of bishops.

                      Should this question not be part of our discussions? ...and not a statement?

                      V.Artzimovitch

                      In God and asking your prayers,

                      Vladimir Kozyreff



                      --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "orthodoxchurch_sg"
                      <orthodoxchurch_sg@y...> wrote:
                      > Dear in Christ Vladimir ~
                      > You believe this, you assume that, you suspect the other. What are
                      > you actually saying, based on evidence, teaching, official
                      statements?
                      > You are quite right - we are Orthodox or not. And our Orthodoxy
                      does
                      > not depend upon individual opinion, suspicion, assumption, however
                      > respected or revered the opinion giver may be. There is nothing in
                      > the official documents of ROCOR, that I have been shown or have
                      read,
                      > which indicates that it is not possible to discuss possible ways
                      > forward following the fall of communism in Russia. Indeed, if we
                      were
                      > not to consider it a possibilty we would be restricting the wisdom
                      > and the power and the glory of God. We must be careful, of course.
                      > Are you suggesting that Vl Mark is not careful? discerning? that he
                      > does not carry the grace of the Apostles poured out upon him at his
                      > consecration? Yes, the laity should be rational sheep, not
                      unthinking
                      > automotons. Yet, surely, as I was taight and brought up in
                      Orthodoxy
                      > among the clergy and laity of ROCOR (I am now a priest in EP)
                      > including Metropolitan Philaret, Bishops Gregory and Constantine
                      and
                      > Mark, - humility and patience and obedience count for a great deal.
                      > Where are they when it comes to splashing documents you dont like
                      on
                      > the InterNet?
                      > God bless you and keep you well / Fr Daniel



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



                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    • vkozyreff
                      Dear V, Regarding the possibility of ROCOR to make the MP change course after the reunion, even Father Alexander Lebedeff does not believe in it. We all know
                      Message 10 of 16 , Apr 8, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Dear V,

                        Regarding the possibility of ROCOR to make the MP change course
                        after the reunion, even Father Alexander Lebedeff does not believe in
                        it.

                        We all know where Vl Mark did study, but we also know that his
                        application to the Trinity St Sergius Lavra was turned down.

                        You write: "How can we not accept "just" a discussion (with the MP)?
                        There are many recommendations to the contrary in the Holy Fathers.

                        This letter is probably a hoax, but it has been an interesting
                        opportunity to exchange ideas.

                        The good thing is that this time we did not fight. Glory to God.

                        In Christ,

                        Vladimir Kozyreff

                        PS I have a special friendship to your family (your father and your
                        sister), with regards to the marvellous memories that my children
                        have kept of their Vitiazi years. This friendship automatically
                        spills over to you.


                        --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "Victor Artzimovitch"
                        <vartzimovitch@v...> wrote:
                        >
                        > ----- Original Message -----
                        > From: "vkozyreff" <vladimir.kozyreff@s...>
                        > To: <orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com>
                        > Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 12:48 PM
                        > Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re: collaborators and assistants to
                        Metropolitan
                        > Anthony
                        >
                        > Please allow some comments:
                        >
                        > Dear Father Daniel, bless.
                        >
                        > I thank you for your good words.
                        >
                        > You write: "Are you suggesting that Vl Mark is not careful?
                        > discerning? that he does not carry the grace of the Apostles poured
                        > out upon him at his consecration?
                        >
                        > 1. Vl Mark was once disciplined for not being careful vis-à-vis the
                        > MP. I cannot understand why, having been a NTS activist, he applied
                        > to study in the Trinity St Sergius Lavra when it was the centre of
                        > KGB anti God activity.
                        >
                        > Vl.Mark studied (as far as I know) in the Belgrade academy.
                        > Vl.Mark was disciplined as was ex-Vl. Varnava, but for very
                        different
                        > reasons.
                        >
                        > 2. The number of bishops who, in the past, have erred and fallen
                        into
                        > schism, apostasy or heresy is considerable. Did they carry the grace
                        > of the Apostles poured out upon him at his consecration?
                        >
                        > ...so is the case of ex-Vl. Varnava....
                        >
                        > 3. We are not choosing between my opinion and that of a bishop. We
                        > have to choose between the opinion of bishops and sizeable parts of
                        > the Church that disagree with one another.
                        >
                        > ... what is a "sizeable part of the Church" ? One ex-bishop and some
                        > preasts...?
                        >
                        > 4. We are not accusing or condemning the captains of the ships. We
                        > have only to choose which ship to board. We know that some maps that
                        > were obviously wrong have not been corrected and are still in use.
                        We
                        > know also that some captains say now that it does not matter any
                        > longer what maps will be used. They say that the most important
                        thing
                        > is to be all on the same ship.
                        >
                        > ...it's like flying a Boeing 747 with maps dated back to ancient
                        Rome!!!!
                        > Times have changed, Russia is in a very difficult process of
                        reforms. So is
                        > probably MP.
                        > Yes, the most important thing is to be on the same ship in order to
                        help the
                        > captains to find back the right track...
                        > Just pointing that the map is wrong is not enough....
                        >
                        > 5. You write: "There is nothing in the official documents of ROCOR,
                        > that I have been shown or have read, which indicates that it is not
                        > possible to discuss possible ways forward following the fall of
                        > communism in Russia". Speaking about official documents, there is
                        > none that show any will on the part of the MP to quit sergianism and
                        > ecumenism, and yet, we are invited to unite. Vl Amvrosii allows his
                        > flock to commune with the MP.
                        >
                        > Our Lord has not refused Judas of being part in the Last Supper...
                        > How can we not accept "just" a discussion?
                        >
                        > 6. The question is not "to unite or not to unite with the MP". The
                        > question is "To unite after the MP has renounced sergianism and
                        > ecumenism or before it has renounced sergianism and ecumenism". I am
                        > concerned, and this concern is not only mine. It is the concern of a
                        > sizeable part of the Church and of bishops.
                        >
                        > Should this question not be part of our discussions? ...and not a
                        statement?
                        >
                        > V.Artzimovitch
                        >
                        > In God and asking your prayers,
                        >
                        > Vladimir Kozyreff
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "orthodoxchurch_sg"
                        > <orthodoxchurch_sg@y...> wrote:
                        > > Dear in Christ Vladimir ~
                        > > You believe this, you assume that, you suspect the other. What are
                        > > you actually saying, based on evidence, teaching, official
                        > statements?
                        > > You are quite right - we are Orthodox or not. And our Orthodoxy
                        > does
                        > > not depend upon individual opinion, suspicion, assumption, however
                        > > respected or revered the opinion giver may be. There is nothing in
                        > > the official documents of ROCOR, that I have been shown or have
                        > read,
                        > > which indicates that it is not possible to discuss possible ways
                        > > forward following the fall of communism in Russia. Indeed, if we
                        > were
                        > > not to consider it a possibilty we would be restricting the wisdom
                        > > and the power and the glory of God. We must be careful, of course.
                        > > Are you suggesting that Vl Mark is not careful? discerning? that
                        he
                        > > does not carry the grace of the Apostles poured out upon him at
                        his
                        > > consecration? Yes, the laity should be rational sheep, not
                        > unthinking
                        > > automotons. Yet, surely, as I was taight and brought up in
                        > Orthodoxy
                        > > among the clergy and laity of ROCOR (I am now a priest in EP)
                        > > including Metropolitan Philaret, Bishops Gregory and Constantine
                        > and
                        > > Mark, - humility and patience and obedience count for a great
                        deal.
                        > > Where are they when it comes to splashing documents you dont like
                        > on
                        > > the InterNet?
                        > > God bless you and keep you well / Fr Daniel
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                        http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                      • byakimov@csc.com.au
                        Dear Victor Our friend Vladimir meant that our current ROCA Bishops & priests who perefer any dialogue with the MP be undertaken when the ... MP has renounced
                        Message 11 of 16 , Apr 8, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Dear Victor

                          Our friend Vladimir meant that our current ROCA Bishops & priests who
                          perefer
                          any dialogue with the MP be undertaken when the "... MP has renounced
                          sergianism and
                          ecumenism...." etc. Indeed & I am glad that it is very sizeable!

                          protodeacon Basil from Canberra




                          "Victor Artzimovitch" <vartzimovitch@...> on 09/04/2003 03:17:03 AM

                          Please respond to orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com

                          To: <orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com>
                          cc:
                          Subject: Re: [orthodox-synod] Re: collaborators and assistants to
                          Metropolitan Anthony



                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: "vkozyreff" <vladimir.kozyreff@...>
                          To: <orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com>
                          Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 12:48 PM
                          Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re: collaborators and assistants to Metropolitan
                          Anthony

                          Please allow some comments:

                          Dear Father Daniel, bless.

                          I thank you for your good words.

                          You write: "Are you suggesting that Vl Mark is not careful?
                          discerning? that he does not carry the grace of the Apostles poured
                          out upon him at his consecration?

                          1. Vl Mark was once disciplined for not being careful vis-à-vis the
                          MP. I cannot understand why, having been a NTS activist, he applied
                          to study in the Trinity St Sergius Lavra when it was the centre of
                          KGB anti God activity.

                          Vl.Mark studied (as far as I know) in the Belgrade academy.
                          Vl.Mark was disciplined as was ex-Vl. Varnava, but for very different
                          reasons.

                          2. The number of bishops who, in the past, have erred and fallen into
                          schism, apostasy or heresy is considerable. Did they carry the grace
                          of the Apostles poured out upon him at his consecration?

                          ...so is the case of ex-Vl. Varnava....

                          3. We are not choosing between my opinion and that of a bishop. We
                          have to choose between the opinion of bishops and sizeable parts of
                          the Church that disagree with one another.

                          ... what is a "sizeable part of the Church" ? One ex-bishop and some
                          preasts...?

                          4. We are not accusing or condemning the captains of the ships. We
                          have only to choose which ship to board. We know that some maps that
                          were obviously wrong have not been corrected and are still in use. We
                          know also that some captains say now that it does not matter any
                          longer what maps will be used. They say that the most important thing
                          is to be all on the same ship.

                          ...it's like flying a Boeing 747 with maps dated back to ancient Rome!!!!
                          Times have changed, Russia is in a very difficult process of reforms. So is
                          probably MP.
                          Yes, the most important thing is to be on the same ship in order to help
                          the
                          captains to find back the right track...
                          Just pointing that the map is wrong is not enough....

                          5. You write: "There is nothing in the official documents of ROCOR,
                          that I have been shown or have read, which indicates that it is not
                          possible to discuss possible ways forward following the fall of
                          communism in Russia". Speaking about official documents, there is
                          none that show any will on the part of the MP to quit sergianism and
                          ecumenism, and yet, we are invited to unite. Vl Amvrosii allows his
                          flock to commune with the MP.

                          Our Lord has not refused Judas of being part in the Last Supper...
                          How can we not accept "just" a discussion?

                          6. The question is not "to unite or not to unite with the MP". The
                          question is "To unite after the MP has renounced sergianism and
                          ecumenism or before it has renounced sergianism and ecumenism". I am
                          concerned, and this concern is not only mine. It is the concern of a
                          sizeable part of the Church and of bishops.

                          Should this question not be part of our discussions? ...and not a
                          statement?

                          V.Artzimovitch

                          In God and asking your prayers,

                          Vladimir Kozyreff



                          --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "orthodoxchurch_sg"
                          <orthodoxchurch_sg@y...> wrote:
                          > Dear in Christ Vladimir ~
                          > You believe this, you assume that, you suspect the other. What are
                          > you actually saying, based on evidence, teaching, official
                          statements?
                          > You are quite right - we are Orthodox or not. And our Orthodoxy
                          does
                          > not depend upon individual opinion, suspicion, assumption, however
                          > respected or revered the opinion giver may be. There is nothing in
                          > the official documents of ROCOR, that I have been shown or have
                          read,
                          > which indicates that it is not possible to discuss possible ways
                          > forward following the fall of communism in Russia. Indeed, if we
                          were
                          > not to consider it a possibilty we would be restricting the wisdom
                          > and the power and the glory of God. We must be careful, of course.
                          > Are you suggesting that Vl Mark is not careful? discerning? that he
                          > does not carry the grace of the Apostles poured out upon him at his
                          > consecration? Yes, the laity should be rational sheep, not
                          unthinking
                          > automotons. Yet, surely, as I was taight and brought up in
                          Orthodoxy
                          > among the clergy and laity of ROCOR (I am now a priest in EP)
                          > including Metropolitan Philaret, Bishops Gregory and Constantine
                          and
                          > Mark, - humility and patience and obedience count for a great deal.
                          > Where are they when it comes to splashing documents you dont like
                          on
                          > the InterNet?
                          > God bless you and keep you well / Fr Daniel



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



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





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



                          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                        • cantor71
                          ... Well, it is clearly not a hoax, as it has just been posted on the MP website (so far in Russian only). George
                          Message 12 of 16 , Apr 9, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "vkozyreff"
                            <vladimir.kozyreff@s...> wrote:
                            >
                            > This letter is probably a hoax, but it has been an interesting
                            > opportunity to exchange ideas.
                            >

                            Well, it is clearly not a hoax, as it has just been posted on the MP
                            website (so far in Russian only).

                            George

                            http://www.russian-orthodox-church.org.ru/nr304091.htm
                          • Michael Nikitin
                            From: Victor Artzimovitch Reply-To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com To: Subject: Re:
                            Message 13 of 16 , Apr 9, 2003
                            • 0 Attachment
                              From: "Victor Artzimovitch" <vartzimovitch@...>
                              Reply-To: orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com
                              To: <orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com>
                              Subject: Re: [orthodox-synod] Re: collaborators and assistants to
                              Metropolitan Anthony
                              Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 19:17:03 +0200


                              ...it's like flying a Boeing 747 with maps dated back to ancient Rome!!!!
                              Times have changed, Russia is in a very difficult process of reforms. So is
                              probably MP.
                              Yes, the most important thing is to be on the same ship in order to help the
                              captains to find back the right track...
                              Just pointing that the map is wrong is not enough....

                              We should change the Church to the times?

                              The French did want to stay on course , but the Captains took the new
                              course . They are flying the ship and didn't want anyone interfering. I find
                              it is hard to help the Captains find back the right track. They won't
                              listen. That's why so many left and are leaving.
                              Why crash with them when one can take another ship and fly the same safe
                              route as our Holy Fathers? Knowing at least that we are following
                              the course the Captains took that never crashed.



                              6. The question is not "to unite or not to unite with the MP". The
                              question is "To unite after the MP has renounced sergianism and
                              ecumenism or before it has renounced sergianism and ecumenism". I am
                              concerned, and this concern is not only mine. It is the concern of a
                              sizeable part of the Church and of bishops.

                              Should this question not be part of our discussions? ...and not a statement?

                              V.Artzimovitch

                              ROCOR in it's letter to Patriarch Pavel begged him to pave the way for
                              dialogue and eventual union with MP. The MP wrote that ROCOR was in schism
                              from the Russian Church. Who's uniting to whom? How will ROCOR be united
                              with MP since they are in schism?

                              If we are not to waite for MP to show their good will to the faith and
                              renounce ecumenism that we Anathemetized, what should we expect from her?
                              Some concessions here and there and say they repented?
                              The MP have to show a desire to renounce these heresies, otherwise what's
                              stopping us from having dialogue with the Muslims, Jews, Latins,
                              Protestants, etc....Not a good idea.

                              Michael N.



                              _________________________________________________________________
                              Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
                              http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
                            • frpeterjackson
                              ... The phrase rational sheep is often misunderstood, mainly because of the clumsy tranlation. Rational as used here is an overly-literal rendering of the
                              Message 14 of 16 , Apr 14, 2003
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Just an aside: It was said:

                                >Yes, the laity should be rational sheep, not unthinking
                                > automotons.

                                The phrase "rational sheep" is often misunderstood, mainly because of
                                the clumsy tranlation. "Rational" as used here is an overly-literal
                                rendering of the Greek "logikos", which did not mean "logical" at the
                                time. (I don't think it took on this sense till the Middle Ages.) It
                                come from "logos", meaning the inner, non-literal sense of something,
                                rather the the superficial meaning. IOW, "logikos/rational" refers to
                                what we what call the metaphorical sense. "Metaphorical", then, is
                                the best way to render this (though I doubt anyone will ever bother
                                to do so). As Christ's sheep, we are to be reasonable, certainly, but
                                the phrase in question has nothing to do w/this. Rather, it simply
                                means that we are His "metaphorical sheep", rather than literal cud-
                                chewing, bleating creatures.

                                Another case which comes to mind is Romans 12:1, which speaks of us
                                offering ourselves as living sacrifices because this is
                                our "reasonable service". Again, the word "reasonable" is "logikos"
                                and should be translated as "metaphorical". More than once I have
                                heard (or read) people respond to this passage saying, "Yes, offering
                                our bodies as living sacrifices is only reasonable, after all."
                                Actually, it's not very reasonable, and if anyone tried to crawl up
                                onto the altar table, it would be a problem. "Reasonable" has nothing
                                to do with what St. Paul is saying. "Service" here means liturgical
                                worship, in the sense of the OT priests sacrificing animals in the
                                Temple. St. Paul is merely saying that instead of sacrificing
                                animals, we Christians are to offer ourselves; this is how we
                                metaphorically serve God around a metaphorical altar. It is true
                                service, to be sure, but not in the literal sense of a blood
                                sacrifice.

                                Fr. Peter Jackson
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.