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

Re: [orthodox-synod] Re: collaborators and assistants to Metropolitan Anthony

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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.