Re: [orthodox-synod] More about the Putin meeting with ROCA Bishops
- Dear All
"Give ear to my prayer, O God, And do not hide Yourself from my
supplication. Attend to me, and hear me; I am restless in my complaint, and
moan noisily." Psalm 55:1,2
"....All is possible for Thee, o Lord! There is no misfortune, no sorrow
from which Thou cannot deliver us. There is no evil which Thou cannot
overcome for the salvation of our souls..." A PRAYER TO THE ALMIGHTY GOD.
It seems I am not alone in my sorrow & concern about the RUSH of our ROCA
to be corralled by the sergianist & ecumenist MP in to their fenced in
influence & subordination. The KGB sure rules RUSSIA through PUTIN & the
MP is still governed by KGB collaborant colleagues in cassocks.
I thank all the Fathers,brothers & others that have written to me on this
issue & would like to quote, inter alia, one of these responses in the hope
that we all become more concerned about this forcefully driven unification
of 2 parts of the Russian Orthodox Church,& I repeat again, prematurely.
The time is not right but the MP will be happy to silence the voice of the
"Sorrowful Epistles" & the Royal (narrow) Path will be available to many
more of our brothers & sisters in our Lord Jesus Christ & His Holy Orthodox
Church. Many in the MP, including Bishops, believe that the time for such
unification will be right only, when those in power make an unequivocal
condemnation of sergianism in all its historical & present day forms &
(without giving the most recent excuse) that globalisation (or terrorism)
is forcing them to continue (recently increased) participation in all
ecumenist forums because they do not want to be "isolated" & to leave all
of these forums.
".......I wanted to comment on your recent postings. I too am concerned
rush to some sort of accomodation with the MP. I have a feeling that the
MP (along with the Russian government) has become more concerned about the
Russian diaspora. Many of the new immigrants in the US and Australia end
up in ROCOR parishes. Diasporas can be very important in international
politics as the Jewish and Greek diasporas in the US show. Not long ago
the MP proposed sending a MP bishop from Russia to be in charge of the
Russian OCA parishes. I think the idea that we could unite with the MP
and continue to have an independent existence is a chimera. And what
about our long-standing position on ecumenism? Do we really expect the MP
to withdraw from the ecumenical movement just because ROCOR wants them to?
I would be interested in knowing about the situation in Australia. Is
there a lot of enthusiasm there for this proposed union? My impression is
that ROCOR in Australia is more conservative than it is here in the
......I am really astonished at Bp Kyrill of San Francisco; just a
couple of years ago he was swearing that he would never go over to the MP;
he has made a complete about-face. I have a strong feeling that the
impetus for this reunion is coming from the Russian government; otherwise
it is hard to understand why the first step was taken by President Putin.
We seem to have forgotten that Putin was a KGB agent and that the leaders
of the MP came into power under the Soviets.......I appreciate your
postings to the ,,,list.....".
The first step was also taken by Putin because Archbishop Mark at their
in Germany asked him to intervene but why ask a KGB agent?
To quote another concerned soul from the Synod List "....This is also why
'reunion' of ROCOR and the MP should be VERY SLOW. While the MP may be
'free' of the 'Atheist' government, etc. It is not free of sergianism,
innovation, and especially and worst of all the 'Panheresy' of Ecumenism.
(On the contrary,it is becoming more and
more involved in it!!!)...."
It seems ROCA is ready to capitulate to the MP & by doing so betray the
& glorious Royal Path that our blessed in memory metropolitans Anthony,
Anastassy, Philaret, Archbishop Averky & so many others rigorously adhered
& nurtured - so as the whole of our people in Russia & Abroad would in the
fullness of our Lord's time partake as brothers & sisters in our living
Lord Jesus Christ & his Holy Russian Orthodox Church. This is what the last
soviet patriarch, not so long ago, said about ROCA's Royal path.
"The patriarch called ROCOR's demands a "pretext" to prevent
unification,and defended the 1927 decision to recognize and cooperate with
state,saying it was a "courageous step."
"One had to live here to understand that situation," he said. He also
rejected the call to sever ecumenical contacts. "Today, when we face
the threat of global terrorism, not a single church, including ROCOR, can
go into isolation," the patriarch said.
"The infamous Declaration of 1927 by Metropolitan Sergii (Starogorodsky),
later to become known as the first "patriarch" of the official Soviet
Orthodox Church (ROC)- a
church that worked hand-in-hand with the communist regime in the
destruction of thousands of churches and monasteries as well as the
brutal torture and murder of millions of faithful, in other words - the
annihilation of Orthodoxy........" "The MP, which calls itself the Mother
despite the fact that it was established by Stalin and is younger than
the pre-revolutionary Church Abroad- the MP is not a church but an
organization that has been used as a tool to combat religion by the
atheist communist regime..." ..................
Thirty years ago I was taught that the term "Sergianism" refers to a
specific kind of behavior: betrayal--i.e., selling out for the sake of
preserving the external organization of the Church (which is what Met.
Sergius did in 1927). In other words, instead of letting Christ save His
Church, we mortals think we can save the Church ourselves by making deals,
compromising with the enemies of the Church, etc. Is this not still the
meaning of "Sergianism"? What other possible meaning could there be?
As for the term "Ecumenism": there's no better definition than that given
our bishops in the Anathema against Ecumenism. Why would we want a
different definition than that given by our own hierarchs?
Not having time at this moment to look up the exact wording (but will
do so if someone else doesn't have it at hand), my recollection of the
Anathema is quite clear in stating that "Ecumenism" is the heresy that
teaches the equality of all churches,--that the Church of Christ is divided
into separate but equal branches. (This, of course, is what the WCC
and preaches, which is an important reason why we do not and cannot belong
to it, and why other Orthodox Churches, such as the MP, should not do so
either.) This teaching--that the Church is divided and all denominations
together form the true Church--and those who espouse this error, is
anathematized by our bishops. That's the only official definition of
Ecumenism that I can remember having seen from the Bishops themselves (as
opposed to commentaries by individual bishops such as Met. Vitaly, etc.)
it seems both clear and sufficient to me. Fr. Alexey ....."
More on the meeting here: http://www.rusk.ru/st.php?idar=309852 (in
In our Lord Jesus Christ,
with much concern & love for our troubled ROCA
protodeacon Basil from Canberra