Author Topic: Questions about ROCOR and the Russian True Orthodox Church  (Read 33189 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Questions about ROCOR and the Russian True Orthodox Church
« Reply #90 on: July 21, 2009, 08:31:31 PM »
I apologize; the offence was unintentional.

I suspected that you were a decent fellow.   God bless.

Offline Anastasios

  • Webdespota
  • Administrator
  • Merarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,524
  • St. Chrysostomos the New
    • AnastasiosHudson.com
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Re: Questions about ROCOR and the Russian True Orthodox Church
« Reply #91 on: July 22, 2009, 01:00:52 PM »
Jonathan, it still seems you have not read post #71 in this thread. Please do so, it will save us all much time and consternation.

The trouble for those in the "True Orthodoxy" Movement is that it undercuts much of their reason for continuing in existence. So it may be uncomfortable reading. 

Do you really think it's that simple and easy?  If it were, of course, the numerous people who were actually alive at the time of St Philaret, Archbishop Leonty, Bishops Seraphim and Seraphim, St. John Maximovitch, etc., (many of whom are elderly folk in our Church) would have all said, "yep, it's time to return." Many did, some didn't.  Just goes to show this is a matter of interpretation ultimately, unless someone wants to try to ascribe motives to others like, "they're just crazy."

Statements like, "you obviously still haven't read post #71" and "it must make for uncomfortable reading" are not neutral but rather loaded.  I dislike that level of discourse, and it's what made me stop posting for almost a month. Maybe I'll take another such break. I don't have time to play a game of scoring points like that.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2009, 01:01:59 PM by Fr. Anastasios »
Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism and may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: Questions about ROCOR and the Russian True Orthodox Church
« Reply #92 on: July 22, 2009, 02:36:57 PM »
Jonathan, it still seems you have not read post #71 in this thread. Please do so, it will save us all much time and consternation.

The trouble for those in the "True Orthodoxy" Movement is that it undercuts much of their reason for continuing in existence. So it may be uncomfortable reading. 

Do you really think it's that simple and easy?  If it were, of course, the numerous people who were actually alive at the time of St Philaret, Archbishop Leonty, Bishops Seraphim and Seraphim, St. John Maximovitch, etc., (many of whom are elderly folk in our Church) would have all said, "yep, it's time to return." Many did, some didn't.  Just goes to show this is a matter of interpretation ultimately, unless someone wants to try to ascribe motives to others like, "they're just crazy."

Statements like, "you obviously still haven't read post #71" and "it must make for uncomfortable reading" are not neutral but rather loaded.  I dislike that level of discourse, and it's what made me stop posting for almost a month. Maybe I'll take another such break. I don't have time to play a game of scoring points like that.

Right. Think about it: does it make any canonical sense to refuse communion with an ecclesiastical jurisdiction because of what the _secular_ government happens to be or do? The only way to make sense of this is to fill in the context: Met Philaret, and the other ROCA hierarchs, did not have communion with the MP because they knew the MP was completely under the thumb of the atheist government. MP hierarchs preached the compatibility of communism and Christianity, and they participated in ecumenism very energetically, both on the instructions of their KGB masters. They said not a word about the persecution of believers, but lied that there was freedom of religion in the Soviet Union.

Now the government no longer persecutes the MP (though they still persecute the True Orthodox). So, does this mean the MP has nothing to repent of? If there is no persecution, then they have NO EXCUSE WHATSOEVER for not renouncing the Sergianist Declaration and their past collaboration. What they do in fact is make excuses for themselves and talk about how Met Sergius 'saved the Church' by his actions. This betrays the witness of the ROCA and the Catacomb Church in the eyes of the True Orthodox.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,778
Re: Questions about ROCOR and the Russian True Orthodox Church
« Reply #93 on: July 22, 2009, 02:39:47 PM »
Jonathan, it still seems you have not read post #71 in this thread. Please do so, it will save us all much time and consternation.

The trouble for those in the "True Orthodoxy" Movement is that it undercuts much of their reason for continuing in existence. So it may be uncomfortable reading. 

Do you really think it's that simple and easy?  If it were, of course, the numerous people who were actually alive at the time of St Philaret, Archbishop Leonty, Bishops Seraphim and Seraphim, St. John Maximovitch, etc., (many of whom are elderly folk in our Church) would have all said, "yep, it's time to return." Many did, some didn't.  Just goes to show this is a matter of interpretation ultimately, unless someone wants to try to ascribe motives to others like, "they're just crazy."

Statements like, "you obviously still haven't read post #71" and "it must make for uncomfortable reading" are not neutral but rather loaded.  I dislike that level of discourse, and it's what made me stop posting for almost a month. Maybe I'll take another such break. I don't have time to play a game of scoring points like that.

Right. Think about it: does it make any canonical sense to refuse communion with an ecclesiastical jurisdiction because of what the _secular_ government happens to be or do? The only way to make sense of this is to fill in the context: Met Philaret, and the other ROCA hierarchs, did not have communion with the MP because they knew the MP was completely under the thumb of the atheist government. MP hierarchs preached the compatibility of communism and Christianity, and they participated in ecumenism very energetically, both on the instructions of their KGB masters. They said not a word about the persecution of believers, but lied that there was freedom of religion in the Soviet Union.

Now the government no longer persecutes the MP (though they still persecute the True Orthodox). So, does this mean the MP has nothing to repent of? If there is no persecution, then they have NO EXCUSE WHATSOEVER for not renouncing the Sergianist Declaration and their past collaboration. What they do in fact is make excuses for themselves and talk about how Met Sergius 'saved the Church' by his actions. This betrays the witness of the ROCA and the Catacomb Church in the eyes of the True Orthodox.

Father Ambrose, I seem to remember Pat. Alexei of blessed memory apologizing on behalf of the patriarchate for shortcomings of collabotors with the Soviets and some such thing.  In fact, he apologized to the Germans in 1995 for the imposition of Communist after WWII, leading to accusations of treason against him by the Russian Communists and the National Bolshevik Party.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2009, 02:42:18 PM by ialmisry »
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,541
Re: Questions about ROCOR and the Russian True Orthodox Church
« Reply #94 on: July 22, 2009, 02:52:58 PM »
Jonathan, it still seems you have not read post #71 in this thread. Please do so, it will save us all much time and consternation.

The trouble for those in the "True Orthodoxy" Movement is that it undercuts much of their reason for continuing in existence. So it may be uncomfortable reading. 

Do you really think it's that simple and easy?  If it were, of course, the numerous people who were actually alive at the time of St Philaret, Archbishop Leonty, Bishops Seraphim and Seraphim, St. John Maximovitch, etc., (many of whom are elderly folk in our Church) would have all said, "yep, it's time to return." Many did, some didn't.  Just goes to show this is a matter of interpretation ultimately, unless someone wants to try to ascribe motives to others like, "they're just crazy."

Statements like, "you obviously still haven't read post #71" and "it must make for uncomfortable reading" are not neutral but rather loaded.  I dislike that level of discourse, and it's what made me stop posting for almost a month. Maybe I'll take another such break. I don't have time to play a game of scoring points like that.

Right. Think about it: does it make any canonical sense to refuse communion with an ecclesiastical jurisdiction because of what the _secular_ government happens to be or do? The only way to make sense of this is to fill in the context: Met Philaret, and the other ROCA hierarchs, did not have communion with the MP because they knew the MP was completely under the thumb of the atheist government. MP hierarchs preached the compatibility of communism and Christianity, and they participated in ecumenism very energetically, both on the instructions of their KGB masters. They said not a word about the persecution of believers, but lied that there was freedom of religion in the Soviet Union.

Now the government no longer persecutes the MP (though they still persecute the True Orthodox). So, does this mean the MP has nothing to repent of? If there is no persecution, then they have NO EXCUSE WHATSOEVER for not renouncing the Sergianist Declaration and their past collaboration. What they do in fact is make excuses for themselves and talk about how Met Sergius 'saved the Church' by his actions. This betrays the witness of the ROCA and the Catacomb Church in the eyes of the True Orthodox.

Father Ambrose, I seem to remember Pat. Alexei of blessed memory apologizing on behalf of the patriarchate for shortcomings of collabotors with the Soviets and some such thing.  In fact, he apologized to the Germans in 1995 for the imposition of Communist after WWII, leading to accusations of treason against him by the Russian Communists and the National Bolshevik Party.

Yes I remember reading that 'apology'. First of all, it was not exactly specific on what the MP actually did wrong: he says there was 'untruth mixed in the declaration', whatever that means, and that 'we are sorry for the forced silence', without admitting that he himself was silent, i.e. he betrayed the Church. Why didn't he repent properly before those bishops who were never silent and ask them for forgiveness? In any case, he later went back on it by saying that Met Sergius' action, that is, his Declaration, was 'clever' and saved the Church.

Offline simplygermain

  • beer-bellied tellitubby
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 771
  • Zechariah 11:7
    • The Hairshirt Agenda
Re: Questions about ROCOR and the Russian True Orthodox Church
« Reply #95 on: July 22, 2009, 03:19:56 PM »

...This betrays the witness of the ROCA and the Catacomb Church in the eyes of the True Orthodox.
By this train of thought are you saying that the MP must repent and ask forgiveness of those who broke from her? Also, is it correct for me to assume that you believe in a "guilty by association" theory for Churches like the Serbian Church 'et al?
« Last Edit: July 22, 2009, 03:27:48 PM by simplygermain »
I believe, help Thou my unbelief!! - St. John of Krondstadt

http://Http://hairshirtagenda.blogspot.com

 Witega: "Bishops and Metropolitans and even Patriarchs have been removed under decidedly questionable circumstances before but the Church moves on."

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,778
Re: Questions about ROCOR and the Russian True Orthodox Church
« Reply #96 on: July 22, 2009, 03:33:58 PM »
Jonathan, it still seems you have not read post #71 in this thread. Please do so, it will save us all much time and consternation.

The trouble for those in the "True Orthodoxy" Movement is that it undercuts much of their reason for continuing in existence. So it may be uncomfortable reading. 

Do you really think it's that simple and easy?  If it were, of course, the numerous people who were actually alive at the time of St Philaret, Archbishop Leonty, Bishops Seraphim and Seraphim, St. John Maximovitch, etc., (many of whom are elderly folk in our Church) would have all said, "yep, it's time to return." Many did, some didn't.  Just goes to show this is a matter of interpretation ultimately, unless someone wants to try to ascribe motives to others like, "they're just crazy."

Statements like, "you obviously still haven't read post #71" and "it must make for uncomfortable reading" are not neutral but rather loaded.  I dislike that level of discourse, and it's what made me stop posting for almost a month. Maybe I'll take another such break. I don't have time to play a game of scoring points like that.

Right. Think about it: does it make any canonical sense to refuse communion with an ecclesiastical jurisdiction because of what the _secular_ government happens to be or do? The only way to make sense of this is to fill in the context: Met Philaret, and the other ROCA hierarchs, did not have communion with the MP because they knew the MP was completely under the thumb of the atheist government. MP hierarchs preached the compatibility of communism and Christianity, and they participated in ecumenism very energetically, both on the instructions of their KGB masters. They said not a word about the persecution of believers, but lied that there was freedom of religion in the Soviet Union.

Now the government no longer persecutes the MP (though they still persecute the True Orthodox). So, does this mean the MP has nothing to repent of? If there is no persecution, then they have NO EXCUSE WHATSOEVER for not renouncing the Sergianist Declaration and their past collaboration. What they do in fact is make excuses for themselves and talk about how Met Sergius 'saved the Church' by his actions. This betrays the witness of the ROCA and the Catacomb Church in the eyes of the True Orthodox.

Father Ambrose, I seem to remember Pat. Alexei of blessed memory apologizing on behalf of the patriarchate for shortcomings of collabotors with the Soviets and some such thing.  In fact, he apologized to the Germans in 1995 for the imposition of Communist after WWII, leading to accusations of treason against him by the Russian Communists and the National Bolshevik Party.

Yes I remember reading that 'apology'. First of all, it was not exactly specific on what the MP actually did wrong: he says there was 'untruth mixed in the declaration', whatever that means, and that 'we are sorry for the forced silence', without admitting that he himself was silent, i.e. he betrayed the Church. Why didn't he repent properly before those bishops who were never silent and ask them for forgiveness? In any case, he later went back on it by saying that Met Sergius' action, that is, his Declaration, was 'clever' and saved the Church.

Which of those bishops a) lived under the Soviets and b) were in ROCOR?
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Questions about ROCOR and the Russian True Orthodox Church
« Reply #97 on: July 22, 2009, 05:02:27 PM »
Discussion of the Russian Orthodox Church's current position on ecumenism moved to this thread:  The Russian Orthodox Church on Ecumenism
« Last Edit: July 22, 2009, 05:29:08 PM by PeterTheAleut »
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Re: Questions about ROCOR and the Russian True Orthodox Church
« Reply #98 on: July 22, 2009, 08:14:59 PM »
Removed message since, on reflection, it probably ought to be in the new ecumenism thread.

Fr Ambrose
« Last Edit: July 22, 2009, 08:16:17 PM by Irish Hermit »