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

Re: [orthodox-synod] Re: Defrocked but First Hierarch Commemorated

Expand Messages
  • V. Boitchenko
    Dear Mr. Kozyrev, May I ask if someone in the Synod gave you any authority to speak in the name of the ROCOR? I am really confused. Are you sure you are in the
    Message 1 of 24 , Jun 3, 2003
      Dear Mr. Kozyrev,

      May I ask if someone in the Synod gave you any authority to speak in the name of the ROCOR? I am really confused. Are you sure you are in the right church? Do you have any authority to accuse anyone of heresy or should it be the Council to have such authority? I also wonder if you (or anyone else) individually have any authority to apply anathemas as they feel fit in order to suit their political convictions. I do not know that the Synod has ever stated officially that all the anathemas against ecumenism or any other false doctrine specifically apply to the Moscow Patriarchate, and therefore MP is "heretical." If it is only your personal opinion please say so.

      v.


      Dear Lawrence,

      The ROCOR has been watchful for eighty years, and we have become
      tired of defending the faith. That is the first reason for us to pray.

      « Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The
      spirit is willing, but the body is weak." Mark 14:37-39)

      You are perfectly right in saying that we should pray for the
      sinners.

      I think however you are mistaken when you say that we should pray
      *instead* of denouncing the sin. Denouncing the sin and praying for
      the sinner are both inseparable obligations for the Christian. The
      horror of their sin is the reason why we must pray for them and why
      we cannot endorse their sin by associating with them before they
      renounced it.

      « It is therefore unlawful, and a profanation, and an act the
      punishment of which is death, to love to associate with unholy
      heretics, and to unite yourself to their communion ». (St. Cyril of
      Alexandria).

      It is an error to believe that we should chose between faith and
      love. None can suffer from the other. Both are inseparable. This was
      discussed many times on this site.

      "Frequently, on this forum and in many other circumstances, the
      relationship of our Church with the heretical MP is presented in a
      wrong way, in my opinion. That is why many around us believe that we
      must soften somewhat the rigor of the dogma in order to accommodate
      the necessity to love the victims of heresy and apostasy". (message
      6598).

      Let us not overlook the danger of being seduced under the pretext of
      brotherly love.

      « Do not, even for the sake of defending the faith, converse with
      heretics, for fear less their words instill their venom into thy
      mind. If thou meet with a book said to be by one of the heretics,
      read it not, lest it fill thy heart with deadly poison; but so
      continue in that doctrine which thou hast learnt in holy church, as
      neither to add or to take from it. « Isaias, Abbot [4th Cent.]


      In God,

      Vladimir Kozyreff



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • sergerust2002
      ... Dear Mr Boytchenko, Do you mean that ROCOR *has not* been watchful for 80 years ? Where do you think Mr Kozyreff is at odds with ROCOR teaching ? Your
      Message 2 of 24 , Jun 4, 2003
        Mr Kozyreff wrote:
        > The ROCOR has been watchful for eighty years,
        > and we have become tired of defending the faith.

        Mr Boytchenko answered:
        > May I ask if someone in the Synod gave you any authority to speak
        > in the name of the ROCOR? I am really confused.
        > Are you sure you are in the right church?


        Dear Mr Boytchenko,

        Do you mean that ROCOR *has not* been watchful for 80 years ?

        Where do you think Mr Kozyreff is at odds with ROCOR teaching ?

        Your rhetorical question "Are you sure you are in the right
        church ?" does not bring any evidence to the subject. It is simply an
        ad hominem consideration. The debated question is not whether Mr
        Kozyreff is sure or not sure of his opinions.

        The debated question is much more important. Its importance is
        recognized by the Sobor, since it is has appointed a Commission for
        the "Unity of the Russian Church" (while Metropolitan Vitaly
        claims that such commission has no object).

        Maybe it would be more clear to put it this way : How come you do not
        ask to Fr John Show "Are you sure you are in the right church ?",
        when he claims that the anathema against ecumenism was "a damage" ?

        In Christ,

        Serge Rust
      • vkozyreff
        Dear Mr Boitchenko, Thank you for your message. Your question: May I ask if someone in the Synod gave you any authority to speak in the name of the ROCOR? I am
        Message 3 of 24 , Jun 4, 2003
          Dear Mr Boitchenko,

          Thank you for your message.

          Your question: May I ask if someone in the Synod gave you any
          authority to speak in the name of the ROCOR? I am really confused.

          I do not speak in the name of ROCOR, I just express what she has
          always taught me (and you, if you are orthodox). If I say "the ROCOR
          has been faithful for eighty years", I make a statement, which I
          claim to be correct, and which, I claim, will be supported by most
          believers.

          Your question: Are you sure you are in the right church?

          Yes, I am in the orthodox Church.

          Your question: Do you have any authority to accuse anyone of heresy
          or should it be the Council to have such authority?

          Stating that the MP is heretical is not exerting any authority or
          accusing it any longer in our days. It is just mentioning a well know
          established fact. Since ecumenism and sergianism are heresies, and
          have been anathematised, professing them is being heretical. In the
          same way, calling the Latino-catholic heretical is not accusing them
          any more. It is mentioning an established fact.

          Your question: I also wonder if you (or anyone else) individually
          have any authority to apply anathemas as they feel fit in order to
          suit their political convictions.

          I did not apply any anathema. An anathema is not "applied". An
          anathema has been proclaimed or has not. It is as simple as that. If
          you knowingly profess an opinion that has been anathematised, you are
          anathema without any further administrative measure.

          Since sergianism and ecumenism were anathematised, those who profess
          them are anathema. "Ya zdyes ni pri chom". To hate sergianism and
          ecumenism is not political, it is being faithful to orthodoxy.

          Your question: I do not know that the Synod has ever stated
          officially that all the anathemas against ecumenism or any other
          false doctrine specifically apply to the Moscow Patriarchate, and
          therefore MP is "heretical." If it is only your personal opinion
          please say so.

          God does not know "official statements" and does not need them. An
          anathema applies to all those who profess the positions that have
          been anathematised, whether officially confirmed or not. The anathema
          is God's judgement and the Church only explicitly expresses it. As
          explained by Vladimir Moss, (Message 8513), all heresies and heretics
          are anathematised 'from all eternity' by the eternal Lord, for just
          as every truth is approved by the Truth Himself from all eternity, so
          is every lie and condemned by Him from all eternity, being condemned
          with 'the father of lies' to the gehenna of fire (Revelation 22.15).

          In God,

          Vladimir Kozyrrev

          --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "V. Boitchenko"
          <venceslav@s...> wrote:
          > Dear Mr. Kozyrev,
          >
          > May I ask if someone in the Synod gave you any authority to speak
          in the name of the ROCOR? I am really confused. Are you sure you are
          in the right church? Do you have any authority to accuse anyone of
          heresy or should it be the Council to have such authority? I also
          wonder if you (or anyone else) individually have any authority to
          apply anathemas as they feel fit in order to suit their political
          convictions. I do not know that the Synod has ever stated officially
          that all the anathemas against ecumenism or any other false doctrine
          specifically apply to the Moscow Patriarchate, and therefore MP
          is "heretical." If it is only your personal opinion please say so.
          >
          > v.
          >
          >
          > Dear Lawrence,
          >
          > The ROCOR has been watchful for eighty years, and we have become
          > tired of defending the faith. That is the first reason for us to
          pray.
          >
          > « Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The
          > spirit is willing, but the body is weak." Mark 14:37-39)
          >
          > You are perfectly right in saying that we should pray for the
          > sinners.
          >
          > I think however you are mistaken when you say that we should pray
          > *instead* of denouncing the sin. Denouncing the sin and praying
          for
          > the sinner are both inseparable obligations for the Christian.
          The
          > horror of their sin is the reason why we must pray for them and
          why
          > we cannot endorse their sin by associating with them before they
          > renounced it.
          >
          > « It is therefore unlawful, and a profanation, and an act the
          > punishment of which is death, to love to associate with unholy
          > heretics, and to unite yourself to their communion ». (St. Cyril
          of
          > Alexandria).
          >
          > It is an error to believe that we should chose between faith and
          > love. None can suffer from the other. Both are inseparable. This
          was
          > discussed many times on this site.
          >
          > "Frequently, on this forum and in many other circumstances, the
          > relationship of our Church with the heretical MP is presented in
          a
          > wrong way, in my opinion. That is why many around us believe that
          we
          > must soften somewhat the rigor of the dogma in order to
          accommodate
          > the necessity to love the victims of heresy and apostasy".
          (message
          > 6598).
          >
          > Let us not overlook the danger of being seduced under the pretext
          of
          > brotherly love.
          >
          > « Do not, even for the sake of defending the faith, converse with
          > heretics, for fear less their words instill their venom into thy
          > mind. If thou meet with a book said to be by one of the heretics,
          > read it not, lest it fill thy heart with deadly poison; but so
          > continue in that doctrine which thou hast learnt in holy church,
          as
          > neither to add or to take from it. « Isaias, Abbot [4th Cent.]
          >
          >
          > In God,
          >
          > Vladimir Kozyreff
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • V. Boitchenko
          Dear Mr. Rust, ... No, I did not mean that. However, can you tell me what is meant by that statement exactly? As Orthodox, I believe that my Church has been
          Message 4 of 24 , Jun 4, 2003
            Dear Mr. Rust,

            >>Do you mean that ROCOR *has not* been watchful for 80 years ?

            No, I did not mean that. However, can you tell me what is meant by that statement exactly? As Orthodox, I believe that my Church has been watchful for 2000 years and not some 80.

            >>Where do you think Mr. Kozyreff is at odds with ROCOR teaching ?

            In my opinion Mr. Kozyreff made statements that go beyond what the Church Abroad has taught. Here are some examples:

            >>VK:...the relationship of our Church with the heretical MP...

            Our Church has never taught or proclaimed MP to be "heretical." Mr. Kozyreff took the liberty to speak on behalf of the Church and make such claim.

            >>VK:...Let us not overlook the danger of being seduced under the pretext of brotherly love...

            I agree. Let us not. Who is the seducer?

            >>VK:...and we have become tired of defending the faith...

            Who is we? Did the Church Abroad or any of its officials ever declare that "they are tired of defending the faith?" Do you believe that is what we teach? If Mr. Kozyreff is "tired after defending the faith for 80 years", my question is not as rhetorical as it seems to you. Anyone who is tired of defending the faith must be in the wrong church.


            >Your rhetorical question "Are you sure you are in the right
            >church ?" does not bring any evidence to the subject. It is simply an
            >ad hominem consideration. The debated question is not whether Mr
            >Kozyreff is sure or not sure of his opinions.

            I hope this clarifies what I meant and answers your questions.

            In XC,

            v


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