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

Apology and question to Vladimir K.

Expand Messages
  • cantor71
    Dear Vladimir, I did not wish to ridicule you or anyone. I was simply wondering why the thread continued to bear the name of the late Abp Seraphim. Perhaps I
    Message 1 of 51 , Dec 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Vladimir,

      I did not wish to ridicule you or anyone. I was simply wondering why
      the thread continued to bear the name of the late Abp Seraphim.
      Perhaps I got carried away, and I apologize for my ad hominem
      remarks.

      As for the letter of "Kazantsev," I respect his right to publish
      such a statement and agree with many if not most of his points,
      including where he says that those who left ROCOR made a serious
      mistake, because opposing the course of union can be done only from
      the inside. If I am not mistaken, you are one of those who left
      ROCOR to join the new organization under Vl. Vitaly. This group
      subsequently declared that "The apostates led by archbp. Lavr cannot
      be considered as being within the enclosure of the Church."

      Why worry about us now when you don't consider us to be part of the
      church? Had the earlier schism not occurred, your "speaking out" at
      this time would be better received and much more constructive. I am
      trying to listen to all the voices within our church (as an example,
      see M. Nazarov's article, recently posted by Fr. Dcn. Basil) but
      please help me understand why I should be interested in what is said
      by those who tell me my bishops are not Orthodox?

      George

      --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "vkozyreff"
      <vladimir.kozyreff@s...> wrote:
      > Dear Father Daniel, bless.
      >
      > After I quoted « Nikolay Kazantsev's » letter in which he
      warned
      that
      > many parishes might leave, George ironically suggested that I
      entitle
      > the subject "why only 144 will be saved". This was ridiculing
      Nicolay
      > Kazantsev.
      >
      > After his retirement, as far as I know, Vl Seraphim was very
      silent
      > and declined to make any declaration. He nevertheless published
      his
      > solemn appeal under the pseudonym of Kazantsev a few days before
      his
      > death. I reported this. Is this "adding to a long list
      > of "authorities" used for people's advantage"? Whose advantage do
      you
      > have in mind? His? Mine? Did you read the last sentence of the
      > letter, in which he requests the orthodox to speak out?
      >
      > I do not equate myself to the Saviour (I took the precaution to
      > mention this explicitly). However (and again), "Meekness and
      > humility...should not yield before manifest evil…" (Vl Averky).
      >
      > Instead of a reply to the content of the letter, we have seen only
      > mockery about numbers and "ad hominem remarks", which suggests
      that
      > the letter is really good.
      >
      > Is the ROCOR hierarchy well informed about whom, even among the
      > clergy, does support its MP policy?
      >
      > In God,
      >
      > Vladimir Kozyreff
      >
      >
      > --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "orthodoxchurch_sg"
      > <orthodoxchurch_sg@y...> wrote:
      > > --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "vkozyreff"
      > > <vladimir.kozyreff@s...> wrote:
      > > > Dear in Christ Father Daniel and George,
      > > >
      > > > Is the Truth on the side of those who ridicule, or on the side
      of
      > > > those who are ridiculed?
      > > >
      > > > "Then Herod and his soldiers ridiculed and mocked him". (Luke
      > 23:10-
      > > > 12)
      > > >
      > > > Please remember that you are not ridiculing me, but Archbishop
      > > > Seraphim of blessed memory. Remember also that the number of
      > > parishes
      > > > was among Vl Mark's concerns as well.
      > >
      > > Evlogeite!
      > > So - you put yourself on the level of our Saviour? Interesting.
      He
      > > was mocked unjustly - this in no way shows that some ideas do
      not
      > > deserve ridicule.
      > > Please indicate anywhere I ridiculed Archbishop Seraphim ~ this
      is
      > an
      > > unjust accusation.
      > > Sadly it looks like Archbishop Seraphim will be added to a long
      > list
      > > of "authorities" used for people's advantage. For years he is
      not
      > > mentioned or quoted - the moment he dies (and is conveniently
      > unable
      > > to confirm or deny) he is being quoted left right and centre and
      > > saying this and that to support causes and positions.
      > > God bless / Fr Daniel
    • vkozyreff
      Dear Mr. Boitchenko, The most important think for a captain is the safety of the ship and crew. Captains can take whatever advice they want, but they should
      Message 51 of 51 , Dec 8, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Mr. Boitchenko,

        The most important think for a captain is the safety of the ship and
        crew. Captains can take whatever advice they want, but they should
        take first the advice of their experienced and respected teachers and
        colleagues before they embark for dangerous crossings by new routes
        to new destinations.

        They should also refer to the classical teaching that they followed
        when they were trained. Examples of authoritative messages of caution
        to innovative captains have been numerous on this forum recently (See
        messages 9613, 9695, 9693, etc.etc).

        The fact that those messages of caution are systematically denied,
        ignored or deleted by the shipping company is worrying and seems to
        sign a change in the latter's policy. The management's denial sounds
        like a confirmation. A significant part of the fleet seems to have
        been lost and more losses are predicted.

        In God,

        Vladimir Kozyreff




        --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "V. Boitchenko"
        <venceslav@s...> wrote:
        > Should captains take advice from "concerned passengers" as well?
        >
        >
        > >>As a rule, captains do take the weather warnings into account,
        > because their duty is to protect the ship and the crew at any cost
        > and because they know that they get severely condemned in case of
        > avoidable accident. At sea, captains have an obligation of results,
        > and they get condemned even if they took only one precaution when
        > they might have taken two of them. I guess you would not be
        > reassured, if you were on a ship commanded by a reckless captain,
        > with your brothers, sisters and all those who are dear to you.
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.