Re: Holy and worldly mathematics
- Dear Mr Artzimiovich,
You want me to prove my assertions. You say that what I am reporting
The Church is often compared to a ship, which sails in dangerous
waters or in heavy weather.
In the art of sailing, the concept of "good seamanship" is constantly
used. One of its principles is as follows: if there are doubt as to
the existence of a danger, the danger must be considered as real and
every precaution should be taken to protect the ship and the crew
from it*. Not many captains allow themselves to ignore unproven
dangers, because not many of those who tried returned safely to
explain how they managed.
The question in our case is thus not to give evidence, as in a court
of justice, that Vl Seraphim did warn against union with the
patriarchate. The question is rather whether we will ignore the
reported warnings, whether we will consider that there is no reality
behind them, and whether we will behave as foolish seamen.
Do we have evidence that bishop Seraphim (and other orthodox clergy
and lay people) did not rightly warn the faithful and the hierarchy
against premature union with the MP? Would you bet eternal your life
I would recommend you to double-check that what I have reported does
not correspond to any reality, that the waters on which the ROCOR is
venturing are safe, and that her captains practice good seamanship.
* International regulations to avoid collisions at sea, Rule 7, Risk
of Collision, (a) Every vessel shall use all available means
appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions to
determine if risk of collision exists. If there is any doubt such
risk shall be deemed to exist.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Victor Artzimovitch"
> Dear Mr.Kozyreff,of your
> the moment the you disseminated incorrect information, all the rest
> explanations are to be considered as "wishful thinking" andprobably not
> related to the truth.exact
> Please be so kind to disclose all truth and only the truth on the
> (quote)I took more information, and I am now able to give a more
> account of the reality(unquote) From whom? What is your sourceof
> (quote)One may consider that Mr. Kazantsev's article is in fact a
> reproduction of Vl Seraphim's thought, based on documentation andideas
> provided byarticle was
> Vl. Seraphim, maybe even "authored" by him(unquote)
> (quote)Vl Seraphim has sent, at about the same moment that the
> published, a letter of about the same content as the article's to Vlyour (may
> I believe in your "good faith" but would recommend to double-check
> be) not so trustworthy sources.beg
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "vkozyreff" <vladimir.kozyreff@s...>
> To: <email@example.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 11:32 AM
> Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re: Holy and worldly mathematics
> Dear Mr. Artzimovich,
> Thank you for your message. I could have found that indeed, Mr.
> Kazantsev is a real person, not a pseudonym. I have been misled, and
> I have disseminated incorrect information. I did it in good faith,
> but I accept full responsibility for this involuntary mistake and
> your and the List's pardon.you
> I took more information, and I am now able to give a more exact
> account of the reality: (if you were familiar with both), you know
> that Vl Seraphim was in close contact with Mr. Kazantsev. The latter
> is a brilliant journalist, but not a specialist in Church matters at
> all. We know that he was in perfect agreement with Vl Seraphim about
> the policy being followed by the ROCOR with the MP.
> One may consider that Mr. Kazantsev's article is in fact a faithful
> reproduction of Vl Seraphim's thought, based on documentation and
> ideas provided by Vl. Seraphim, maybe even "authored" by him, as one
> says that Vl Philaret's sorrowful epistles were "authored" by Vl A.
> Grabbe. This does not take anything away from Mr. Kazantsev's paper,
> on the contrary. Nevertheless, this is not, strictly and technically
> speaking, an article written by Vl Seraphim under a pseudonym, as I
> mistakenly reported it.
> Vl Seraphim has sent, at about the same moment that the article was
> published, a letter of about the same content as the article's to Vl
> Lavr. It would be most interesting to see whether the ROCOR will
> publish it, but I fear she will not.
> Vl Seraphim wrote many papers under pseudonyms in "Nasha Strana",
> sometimes writing about himself in the third person, under titles
> like "They write to us from Lyon or Grenoble". His collaborators
> regretted this and tried to convince him to sign under his own name,
> but unsuccessfully. As seen again in this case, his authority, even
> in retirement would have been much greater under his own name.
> Below are a few references, which I should have found in due time.
> In God,
> Vladimir Kozyreff
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Victor Artzimovitch"
> <vartzimovitch@v...> wrote:
> > Dear Mr.Kozyreff,
> > if you are referring to the article published in the russian
> > "Nasha Strana" in Buenos Aires (Argentina) under the signature of
> > Kazantsev, please be informed that Mr.Kazantsev is the editor of
> > publication.
> > Having very well known Vl. Seraphim and Mr. Kazantsev (during my
> long stay
> > in Argentina), I would be very interested to know from where do
> have thehis
> > information about :
> > (Quote)He nevertheless published his
> > solemn appeal under the pseudonym of Kazantsev a few days before
> > death. I reported this.(unquote)silent
> > Thanks for letting the List know.
> > V.Artzimovitch
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "vkozyreff" <vladimir.kozyreff@s...>
> > To: <email@example.com>
> > Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 10:07 AM
> > Subject: [orthodox-synod] Re: Holy and worldly mathematics
> > Dear Father Daniel, bless.
> > After I quoted « Nikolay Kazantsev's » letter in which he warned
> > many parishes might leave, George ironically suggested that I
> > the subject "why only 144 will be saved". This was ridiculing
> > Kazantsev.
> > After his retirement, as far as I know, Vl Seraphim was very
> > and declined to make any declaration. He nevertheless publishedhis
> > solemn appeal under the pseudonym of Kazantsev a few days beforehis
> > death. I reported this. Is this "adding to a long listthat
> > of "authorities" used for people's advantage"? Whose advantage do
> > 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
> > the letter is really good.He
> > Is the ROCOR hierarchy well informed about whom, even among the
> > clergy, does support its MP policy?
> > In God,
> > Vladimir Kozyreff
> > --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "orthodoxchurch_sg"
> > <orthodoxchurch_sg@y...> wrote:
> > > --- In email@example.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
> > > > 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.
> > > was mocked unjustly - this in no way shows that some ideas donot
> > > deserve ridicule.is
> > > Please indicate anywhere I ridiculed Archbishop Seraphim ~ this
> > annot
> > > 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
> > > mentioned or quoted - the moment he dies (and is convenientlyhttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > 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
> > Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> Archives located at http://www.egroups.com/group/orthodox-synod
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
- 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 firstname.lastname@example.org, "V. Boitchenko"
> 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]