Author Topic: Resolutions of the Synod of ROCOR Concerning the Election of the P.M. in 2009  (Read 31986 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline IPC

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 308
RESOLUTIONS OF THE SYNOD OF BISHOPS OF ROCOR (RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH OUTSIDE RUSSIA) CONCERNING THE ELECTION OF THE NEW PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW.

SEPTEMBER 22/OCTOBER 5 2009

The Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, after analyzing and discussing the meeting of the self proclaimed "Synod of the positional Russian Orthodox Church" that took place in Moscow on January14/22 2009, and the appointment by this meeting of "metropolitan" Cyril (Gundyaev) to the patriarchal throne, it has been determined:

1.- The election of Metropolitan Cyril as Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia is not only an uncanonical act, but also antiecclesiastical political act. All the elections of the patriarchs of Moscow, since 1943, are ineffective, on the basis 30th apostolic canon and 3rd canon of the seventh Ecumenical Council.

2. The declaration of metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodski) of 1927, which is an oath of loyalty to the Soviet regime marked the beginning of separation of the Moscow Patriarchate from the Russian Orthodox Church in Russia and abroad. After taking this new path, the Moscow Patriarchate became completely dependent on the godless authority. Its hierarchy became the obedient instruments of the persecutors of Church.

3. In 2004, the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthoox Church Outside Russia carried out the following solemn proclamation: "To the Christians who in full conscience worship the godless authority, allegedly by the command of God, and serve it not out of fear, but in full conscience, blessing all its lawlessness and justifying the persecutions of the True Church of Christ by the theomachists, thinking that by this they serve god, but in reality are the ones who continue  the heresy of the disgraceful metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodskiy), and to all his followers - ANATHEMA!”.

Taking into account all the above mentioned, the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia Resolved the following:

Based on facts given at the present resolution, the election of Cyril (Gundyaev) as Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia, is recognized as uncanonical and void, and all its acts,  resolutions, and orders remain without authority and force.


Source : http://www.roca-sobor.org/ru/node/391 (In Russian)




THIS USER USED THE SCREEN NAME PRAVOSLAV09 BEFORE.

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Which of the many ROCORs is this?
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Fr. George

  • formerly "Cleveland"
  • Administrator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 21,323
  • May the Lord bless you and keep you always!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Did your cufflinks work out well?
How in Mor's good name
one hundred fifty four posts
No Rachel Weisz pic

Selam

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
I lost one. Which is a sign of a very good party.
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,576
...but the caravan moves on....
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 Alpo

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,776
  • Why am I still here?
  • Faith: New Calendarist
  • Jurisdiction: Priestly Society of St. John Ireland
So are they electing some kind of diaspora-Patriarch or do they act within Russia? Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia inside Russia? :P
I just need to find out how to say it in Slavonic!

Offline Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,080
Quote
Which of the many ROCORs is this?

Not the right one.  ;)

Offline Fr. George

  • formerly "Cleveland"
  • Administrator
  • Stratopedarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 21,323
  • May the Lord bless you and keep you always!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Pittsburgh
...but the caravan moves on....

"Sallah, I said no camels! That's five camels; can't you count?"
How in Mor's good name
one hundred fifty four posts
No Rachel Weisz pic

Selam

Offline arimethea

  • Getting too old for this
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,966
  • Does anyone really care what you think?
I went to their website to see which group this is and something I don't understand, with the ability of of purchasing any Orthodox liturgical item on the web for decent prices, why do all these groups look like the are playing dress up with mismatched vestments? They just don't look legit.
Joseph

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,602
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Hmmmm. An uncanonical group denouncing the enthronement of a canonical Patriarch. Sigh.  ::)
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Which of the many ROCORs is this?
Under Bishop Vladimir of San Francisco and Western America, whoever he is.
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Hmmmm. An uncanonical group denouncing the enthronement of a canonical Patriarch. Sigh.  ::)

Is outrage!

Merry Christmas!
or Happy Hermanmas!
 

Offline Andrew21091

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,272
Why should we care what this bishop says? Who is he? What makes this guy any different than the other ROCOR groups around who claim to be the true ROCOR? What do you think the current Patriarch of Moscow (I am talking about Kyril) should do about this?

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,576
Why should we care what this bishop says? Who is he? What makes this guy any different than the other ROCOR groups around who claim to be the true ROCOR? What do you think the current Patriarch of Moscow (I am talking about Kyril) should do about this?
Is it printed on thin paper?

He doesn't have to do a thing.
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 Andrew21091

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,272
Why should we care what this bishop says? Who is he? What makes this guy any different than the other ROCOR groups around who claim to be the true ROCOR? What do you think the current Patriarch of Moscow (I am talking about Kyril) should do about this?
Is it printed on thin paper?

He doesn't have to do a thing.

I agree that he doesn't have to do a thing about it but I'm interested in what the original poster thinks should happen.

Offline IPC

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 308
Which of the many ROCORs is this?

ROCOR-V V Stands for Metropolitan Vitaly. This is the sole canonical and legitimate ROCOR as its confession of faith, ecclesiology, and traditions witness.

After the repose of Met. Vitaly of thrice blessed memory, ROCOR is temporarily presided by Ab. Vladimir, until the election of a new Metropolitan.

I understand your confusion ozgeorge and I sympathize with you, after the creation of all those pernicious, impostor, uncanonical and heterodox groups usurping the name of ROCOR, such as the Moscow Patriarchate runned "ROCOR" managed by Metropolitan Hilarion, the danger of being confused and fooled by them, increases greatly.

If you want more information about ROCOR, and the origin of the impostor groups usurping Her name, you can visit the archives at http://www.rocor-v.com/rocor/index.html, there are official documents in english and russian. This link http://www.listok.com/ has information mostly in russian, with a few things in english. If you need anything else, feel free to contact me anytime.



 

« Last Edit: December 23, 2009, 10:23:22 PM by IPC »
THIS USER USED THE SCREEN NAME PRAVOSLAV09 BEFORE.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,576
Why should we care what this bishop says? Who is he? What makes this guy any different than the other ROCOR groups around who claim to be the true ROCOR? What do you think the current Patriarch of Moscow (I am talking about Kyril) should do about this?
Is it printed on thin paper?

He doesn't have to do a thing.

I agree that he doesn't have to do a thing about it but I'm interested in what the original poster thinks should happen.

Ah, that might prove interesting.  Well what about it, IPC?
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 ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,576
Which of the many ROCORs is this?

ROCOR-V V Stands for Metropolitan Vitaly. This is the sole canonical and legitimate ROCOR as its confession of faith, ecclesiology, and traditions witness.

After the repose of Met. Vitaly of thrice blessed memory, ROCOR is temporarily presided by Ab. Vladimir, until the election of a new Metropolitan.

I understand your confusion ozgeorge and I sympathize with you, after the creation of all those pernicious, impostor, uncanonical and heterodox groups usurping the name of ROCOR, such as the Moscow Patriarchate runned "ROCOR" managed by Metropolitan Hilarion, the danger of being confused and fooled by them, increases greatly.

If you want more information about ROCOR, and the origin of the impostor groups usurping Her name, you can visit the archives at http://www.rocor-v.com/rocor/index.html, there are official documents in english and russian. This link http://www.listok.com/ has information mostly in russian, with a few things in english. If you need anything else, feel free to contact me anytime.

You claim exclusive canonical jurisdiction for a territory that your own name says you are outside of, and we've confused?
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 Alveus Lacuna

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,352
  • Faith: Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: OCA
ROCOR-V V Stands for Metropolitan Vitaly. This is the sole canonical and legitimate ROCOR as its confession of faith, ecclesiology, and traditions witness.

:yawn:

Offline LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,602
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
ROCOR-V V Stands for Metropolitan Vitaly. This is the sole canonical and legitimate ROCOR as its confession of faith, ecclesiology, and traditions witness.

:yawn:

My sentiments exactly. This post is a complete irrelevance. IPC is looking for attention. My advice is to ignore him. He has brought nothing but strife on this forum, and, in this Nativity fast season, that's not what we need.  :angel:
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Which of the many ROCORs is this?

ROCOR-V V Stands for Metropolitan Vitaly. This is the sole canonical and legitimate ROCOR as its confession of faith, ecclesiology, and traditions witness....

If you need anything else, feel free to contact me anytime.


Thank you. Could you offer documentation from the Russian Zarist Church to support this claim or is it just a private opinion?  
« Last Edit: December 23, 2009, 11:46:14 PM by Irish Hermit »

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Which of the many ROCORs is this?

ROCOR-V V Stands for Metropolitan Vitaly. This is the sole canonical and legitimate ROCOR as its confession of faith, ecclesiology, and traditions witness.

After the repose of Met. Vitaly of thrice blessed memory, ROCOR is temporarily presided by Ab. Vladimir, until the election of a new Metropolitan.

I understand your confusion ozgeorge and I sympathize with you, after the creation of all those pernicious, impostor, uncanonical and heterodox groups usurping the name of ROCOR, such as the Moscow Patriarchate runned "ROCOR" managed by Metropolitan Hilarion, the danger of being confused and fooled by them, increases greatly.

If you want more information about ROCOR, and the origin of the impostor groups usurping Her name, you can visit the archives at http://www.rocor-v.com/rocor/index.html, there are official documents in english and russian. This link http://www.listok.com/ has information mostly in russian, with a few things in english. If you need anything else, feel free to contact me anytime.
Thanks IPC. I don't read Russian, so I can't use the links you provided, but I know a little about the history of Metropolitan Vitaly.
These are confusing times indeed for many from what I see on forums such as this. Everything seems to be up for question, whether it is the definition of "Canonical" or "Orthodox" or "Tradition" or "Genuine" or "True". I think it is a noble mark of young people today that they are seeking what is genuine and authentic, but I also think that there are many wolves in "authentic" sheep's clothing, so I would hate to have to be young again and having to sort through it all.
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Andrew21091

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,272
Seriously, I cannot give much attention to stuff like this. There are too many "true", "genuine", "exile", etc. groups out there who all claim to be the true church. How can we know which one is true? Is it the Russian Church is Exile, the ROCOR PSCA, Genuine Orthodox Church of Greece, True Orthodox Church of Bulgaria, HOCNA, Russian Zarist Church, Synod in Resistence or maybe its the Old Believers. There are so many groups that have formed when one bishop decided to break away and form his own group. Since there are so many groups out there that claim the truth and hold what they call "world" Orthodoxy in heresy. How do we know that these so called "true" groups truly aren't the one's of world Orthodoxy? I know the anti-Christ wants to make one universal religion but to create a hundred different "Orthodox" groups in the world who hate everyone around them doesn't make sense. I don't know what to think. I could go ahead and join the GOC but I'll have the Russians in exile calling me a heretic or vis versa. I think most of it has to do with pride than holding the truth.
« Last Edit: December 25, 2009, 07:09:21 PM by Andrew21091 »

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Dear IPC,

Could I ask you to look at the question in Message #20 and make a reply please.

Offline IPC

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 308
If  ROCOR was not canonical, and did not preach the Truth, and all Her members were just as some of you say, then the Moscow Patriarchate and others wouldn't be putting so much effort and hard work to exterminate Her and bring us all under its control.

Andrew I understand your confusion, you are not alone. Many persons both from World Orthodoxy, and from other religions are also confused. There are the many denominations claiming to the the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, calling themselves Church of Christ, Orthodox Church, Restored, Renewed, etc. In addition to this, the names put on our Church by Her enemies, such as the ones you mentioned. For example, the term "zarist" was used by the soviets, who were instilling in people the classical monarchphobia, and by applying that term to the Russian True-Orthodox Church, they tried to scare people away from us. We take pride of being the continuation of the pre-revolutionary Church, and our fidely to the Zar, and we use this term with pride, but it is not our official name.


One day when I was listening to a sermon in an oriental orthodox church in India, the priest in his sermon refered to his church, not as malankara, but as the One Catholic Church. They insist that we left the Church and accepted the "innovations" of Chalcedon, and modernity. I, as a christian, can see the truth, but the unenlightened, like you, can be easily confused and deceived.

My piece of advice, repent, and sincerely seek God, and He will surely enlighten you and then, you will see. This is goes to all of you.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2010, 12:26:24 AM by IPC »
THIS USER USED THE SCREEN NAME PRAVOSLAV09 BEFORE.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,576
If  ROCOR was not canonical, and did not preach the Truth, and all Her members were just as some of you say, then the Moscow Patriarchate and others wouldn't be putting so much effort and hard work to exterminate Her and bring us all under its control.

What effort and hard work are you talking about.  Flies are a minor annoyance, but you still swat them.


Quote
Andrew I understand your confusion, you are not alone. Many persons both from World Orthodoxy, and from other religions are also confused. There are the many denominations claiming to the the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, calling themselves Church of Christ, Orthodox Church, Restored, Renewed, etc. In addition to this, the names put on our Church by Her enemies, such as the ones you mentioned. For example, the term "zarist" was used by the soviets, who were instilling in people the classical monarchphobia, and by applying that term to the Russian True-Orthodox Church, they tried to scare people away from us. We take pride of being the continuation of the pre-revolutionary Church, and our fidely to the Zar, and we use this term with pride, but it is not our official name.

Which would be what then?


Quote
One day when I was listening to a sermon in an oriental

ECUMENIST!

Quote
orthodox church in India, the priest in his sermon refered to his church, not as malankara, but as the One Catholic Church. They insist that we left the Church and accepted the "innovations" of Chalcedon, and modernity. I, as a christian, can see the truth, but the unenlightened, like you, can be easily confused and deceived.

Let him who thinks he stands take heed, lest he fall.

Quote
My piece of advice, repent, and sincerely seek God, and He will surely enlighten you and then, you will see. This is goes to all of you.


Physician, heal thyself.
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 ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,576
RESOLUTIONS OF THE SYNOD OF BISHOPS OF ROCOR (RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH OUTSIDE RUSSIA) CONCERNING THE ELECTION OF THE NEW PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW.

SEPTEMBER 22/OCTOBER 5 2009

The Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, after analyzing and discussing the meeting of the self proclaimed "Synod of the positional Russian Orthodox Church" that took place in Moscow on January14/22 2009, and the appointment by this meeting of "metropolitan" Cyril (Gundyaev) to the patriarchal throne, it has been determined:

1.- The election of Metropolitan Cyril as Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia is not only an uncanonical act, but also antiecclesiastical political act. All the elections of the patriarchs of Moscow, since 1943, are ineffective, on the basis 30th apostolic canon and 3rd canon of the seventh Ecumenical Council.

Oh, then you have a problem: the Czar (or do you say Zar) directly appointed each and every bishop before the fall of the empire.  That means, accdording to your interpretation of the 3rd canon cited:
Quote
Canon III.

That it does not pertain to princes to choose a Bishop.

Let every election of a bishop, presbyter, or deacon, made by princes stand null, according to the canon which says:  If any bishop making use of the secular powers shall by their means obtain jurisdiction over any church, he shall be deposed, and also excommunicated, together with all who remain in communion with him.  For he who is raised to the episcopate must be chosen by bishops, as was decreed by the holy fathers of Nice in the canon which says:  It is most fitting that a bishop be ordained by all the bishops in the province; but if this is difficult to arrange, either on account of urgent necessity, or because of the length of the journey, three bishops at least having met together and given their votes, those also who are absent having signified their assent by letters, the ordination shall take place.  The confirmation of what is thus done, shall in each province be given by the metropolitan thereof.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xvi.xiv.iii.html

you have no bishops with grace.

As to Apostolic canon 30:
Quote
30. If any bishop obtains that dignity by money, or even a presbyter or deacon, let him and the person that ordained him be deprived; and let him be entirely cut off from communion, as Simon Magus was by me Peter.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.ix.ix.vi.html?highlight=canon#highlight

Since Patriarch didn't buy his cathedra, it doesn't apply.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2010, 04:22:45 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 Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,981
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
I went to their website to see which group this is and something I don't understand, with the ability of of purchasing any Orthodox liturgical item on the web for decent prices, why do all these groups look like the are playing dress up with mismatched vestments? They just don't look legit.

Dude! I've been wondering this, too. Reminds me of the "Are You Being Served?" episode where one of them has to dress up like a Greek bishop using draperies and spraypainting a cardboard tube for the hat. The trick ends up fooling the people it needs to, though.
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Shanghaiski

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,981
  • Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia
If all the True, Genuine, Actual, For Real Orthodox Churches could actually unite and stay on message, then I might actually pay attention. But, as it is, they are neo-Donatists who cannot agree on anything. They jumped ship too early just like so many others throughout history.

It should be noted, especially for those of them that say the churches on the new calendar lack grace, that their bishops all used to be or used to commune with new calendarist bishops, since the new calendar was instituted in the 1920s, and bishops did not come over until the 1930s to form old calendarist churches separate from those following the new calendar. But, you go ahead and make up some sort of weird story how your interpretation of fidelity to tradition could circumvent all that. It will make for interesting reading.
Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

Offline Anastasios

  • Webdespota
  • Administrator
  • Merarches
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,517
  • St. Chrysostomos the New
    • AnastasiosHudson.com
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
If all the True, Genuine, Actual, For Real Orthodox Churches could actually unite and stay on message, then I might actually pay attention. But, as it is, they are neo-Donatists who cannot agree on anything. They jumped ship too early just like so many others throughout history.

How are we Donatists?

Quote
It should be noted, especially for those of them that say the churches on the new calendar lack grace, that their bishops all used to be or used to commune with new calendarist bishops, since the new calendar was instituted in the 1920s, and bishops did not come over until the 1930s to form old calendarist churches separate from those following the new calendar. But, you go ahead and make up some sort of weird story how your interpretation of fidelity to tradition could circumvent all that. It will make for interesting reading.

We're not interested in entertaining you.  :police:

In Christ,

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 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
In the interest of not allowing my ongoing discussion with Irish Hermit to derail this thread, I have moved the side discussion to Free-For-All > Religious Topics.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,25235.0.html
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
If  ROCOR was not canonical, and did not preach the Truth, and all Her members were just as some of you say, then the Moscow Patriarchate and others wouldn't be putting so much effort and hard work to exterminate Her and bring us all under its control.

What effort and hard work are you talking about.  Flies are a minor annoyance, but you still swat them.

I don't swat flies. When Eldress Gavrielia was a child, she once swatted a fly. Her elder sister asked her: "Can you create a fly?" to which she replied "No". Her sister then said "You should not kill what you cannot create." From that day onward, Eldress Gavrielia never killed anything again, and wouldn't even step on ants. I can't create a schismatic, therefore I will not swat him.
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Orthodox11

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,994
I can't create a schismatic, therefore I will not swat him.

I think needlessly swatting people is a good way to create schismatics.

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
I can't create a schismatic, therefore I will not swat him.

I think needlessly swatting people is a good way to create schismatics.
And history has borne that out.
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline podkarpatska

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 9,732
  • Pokrov
    • ACROD (home)
For many of us it's Christmas Eve. How about a little peace on earth?

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
If  ROCOR was not canonical, and did not preach the Truth, and all Her members were just as some of you say, then the Moscow Patriarchate and others wouldn't be putting so much effort and hard work to exterminate Her and bring us all under its control.

What effort and hard work are you talking about.  Flies are a minor annoyance, but you still swat them.

I don't swat flies. When Eldress Gavrielia was a child, she once swatted a fly. Her elder sister asked her: "Can you create a fly?" to which she replied "No". Her sister then said "You should not kill what you cannot create." From that day onward, Eldress Gavrielia never killed anything again, and wouldn't even step on ants. I can't create a schismatic, therefore I will not swat him.

Strange!   Was this comment from her time in India?   I mean she presumably ate fish as do monks and nuns.   Refusing to share what is offered to the brotherhood in the refectory (trapeza) will get a monk or nun an epitimia.   In those parts of the world, fish are often brought home alive to the monastery where the nun thwacks them over the head with a stout cudgel to kill them.    Not many nuns I know can create a fish though.   :laugh:

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
If  ROCOR was not canonical, and did not preach the Truth, and all Her members were just as some of you say, then the Moscow Patriarchate and others wouldn't be putting so much effort and hard work to exterminate Her and bring us all under its control.

What effort and hard work are you talking about.  Flies are a minor annoyance, but you still swat them.

I don't swat flies. When Eldress Gavrielia was a child, she once swatted a fly. Her elder sister asked her: "Can you create a fly?" to which she replied "No". Her sister then said "You should not kill what you cannot create." From that day onward, Eldress Gavrielia never killed anything again, and wouldn't even step on ants. I can't create a schismatic, therefore I will not swat him.

Strange!   Was this comment from her time in India?   I mean she presumably ate fish as do monks and nuns.   Refusing to share what is offered to the brotherhood in the refectory (trapeza) will get a monk or nun an epitimia.   In those parts of the world, fish are often brought home alive to the monastery where the nun thwacks them over the head with a stout cudgel to kill them.    Not many nuns I know can create a fish though.   :laugh:
No, it was not from her time in India, it was in her childhood in Constantinople. Its simply a recollection of her own practice. She would not kill anything. I don't know where you got the idea that fish were brought live to monasteries- must be a Serbian thing. This is simply a fact recorded about her by one of her nuns. It comes from The Ascetic of Love- a bigraphy and collection of Apophthegmata of Eldress Gavrielia. A true monastic.
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
[I don't know where you got the idea that fish were brought live to monasteries- must be a Serbian thing.

It was my obedience to drive the Combi to the market and bring home to the monastery big plastic bags with water and live fish - in Serbia.  The nuns kill them by banging them on the head.  Same on Athos, where I have seen the fish killed by monks in the kitchen.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,576
I did explain in public the use of the term zarist. The revolutionary authorities started calling the Russian True Orthodox Church, and ROCOR, as zarist.

They called the Patriarchate of Moscow Czarist too.  No difference.

Btw, the Catholicos of Georgia is on the Old Calendar (Christ is Born! everyone) and not in the World Council of Churches.  So, do you want to suppress him, an ancient autocephalous Orthodox Church, like the "Zarist" Church did?  He regained his independence during the revolution but not from the revolutionaries, but the Synod of Georgia.  So is he and his flock "True Orthodox?"

Quote
It is not our official title.

So what is your "official" title?

Quote
We can't conduct an accurate detective work to track down an individual on the internet, unless we have the knowledge and the equipment to do so. There are ways for anonymous surfing, in which a specific software can be used to "bounce" the signal, create a "mask" of your IP address, and connect you to several servers worldwide.

That's some paranoia you got.  And megalomania.

Quote
There is persecution in the free world too, ROCOR has been persecuted severely in the west. The Moscow Patriarchate infiltrated people, and created splinter groups that take with them relics, churches, money, etc.  


You mean the ones that realized that the Bolsheviks had fallen and the Romanovs were not coming back?

So you are saying that the gates of Hell have prevailed?  Can't be the True Church then.

Quote
For instance, in 2001, the MP created in the USA its own ROCOR, formed by infiltrated individuals, like Met. Laurus, Met Hilarion and others, who with the unlimited resources provided by the russian government, left ROCOR taking with them Churches, relics, money, and everything they could.

Care to back these groundless accusations with some documented (as in, not from your choir) facts?

So is Russia's anti-Zarist-church budget larger than the defense budget of Russia?  Are they spending more on the ROCOR campaign than on Chechnia?

Quote
The violence of the new ROCOR expanded like fire, to France, USA, Canada, Belgium, South America, Australia, and even inside the former USSR.

Yeah, I hear about the ROCOR suicide bombers all the time. ::)

Why would the Boshelviks need ROCOR to be violent inside the former ("former?" you sound like you think it is still with us) USSR?  Can't they do it themselves?

Quote
The attitude of Irish Hermit is typical of the new ROCOR under the Moscow Patriarchate, you can see how they try by all means to annihilate the True Russian Orthodox Christians, that bare witness of their unchristian deeds and teachings.

I've only seen Irish Hermit call you on your slander and bearing of false witness.

I would think that there would be a more pressing need to infiltrate ROCOR when the Soviet Union existed. Now would seem quite pointless.

Quote
And you say there is no persecution?


Your whinny tone reveals that your "church" wouldn't last a day under real persecution as the Patriarchate of Moscow suffered.  You would have been annihilated.

Quote
Try being in Church with 20 Irish Hermits, be at the trapeza with them, yelling how "good" it is the MP and that we must join it.


No, unlike your role models

you are quite free to go into schism.

I'd take Irish Hermit's "yelling" the considerable merits of the Patriarchate of Moscow over the whinning of cowardly, anonymous detractors anyday.

Quote
Try saying no to them. Try living in the same area with them, having them as work peers, try enjoying a ball with them causing all sort of problems. Have moslems and others done anything to you? Have you been forced to deal with them 24/7?
Actually yes.  THAT's persecusion.
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 ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
THAT's persecusion.
AAAARRRRGGGHHHHH!!!!!!
That is the THIRD time you've spelled it that way! It's "persecution"!
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,576
THAT's persecusion.
AAAARRRRGGGHHHHH!!!!!!
That is the THIRD time you've spelled it that way! It's "persecution"!
Are we feeling persecuted?
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 ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Are we feeling persecuted?
No. But on the subject of persecution, I'm having difficulty understanding this point you try to make:
No, unlike your role models

you are quite free to go into schism.
You do realise this painting depicts an Old Believer woman being arrested in Russia during the persecution of the Old Believers don't you. You also realise that the "Great Synod of Moscow" which introduced the Nikonian reforms that sparked the Old Believer persecutions also deposed Patriarch Nikon whose very reforms it adopted and that this deposing of the Patriarch was later posthumously reversed (whoops, we made a mistake), and that the Raskol is one of the saddest events in Russian history? You also realise that in 1971, the Patriarchcate of Moscow lifted the anathemas against the Old Believers (whoops we made another mistake), and in 1974, ROCOR asked forgiveness from the Old Believers for the wrongs done to them (whoops, we made a mistake).
I really don't think suggesting IPC's Church is like the Old Believer actually supports your argument that his Church is not being persecuted. Nor does it support your idea that "swatting the flies" is a good way to go as far as dealing with dissent.
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Are we feeling persecuted?
No. But on the subject of persecution, I'm having difficulty understanding this point you try to make:
No, unlike your role models

you are quite free to go into schism.
You do realise this painting depicts an Old Believer woman being arrested in Russia during the persecution of the Old Believers don't you. You also realise that the "Great Synod of Moscow" which introduced the Nikonian reforms that sparked the Old Believer persecutions also deposed Patriarch Nikon whose very reforms it adopted and that this deposing of the Patriarch was later posthumously reversed (whoops, we made a mistake), and that the Raskol is one of the saddest events in Russian history? You also realise that in 1971, the Patriarchcate of Moscow lifted the anathemas against the Old Believers (whoops we made another mistake), and in 1974, ROCOR asked forgiveness from the Old Believers for the wrongs done to them (whoops, we made a mistake).
I really don't think suggesting IPC's Church is like the Old Believer actually supports your argument that his Church is not being persecuted. Nor does it support your idea that "swatting the flies" is a good way to go as far as dealing with dissent.

It seems to have worked quite well for the Mother Church in Constantinople which used the secular powers to swat the flies.  Not to be wondered at that the daughter Church in Russia emulated the succesful methods of Constantinople.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,576
Are we feeling persecuted?
No. But on the subject of persecution, I'm having difficulty understanding this point you try to make:
No, unlike your role models

you are quite free to go into schism.
You do realise this painting depicts an Old Believer woman being arrested in Russia during the persecution of the Old Believers don't you. You also realise that the "Great Synod of Moscow" which introduced the Nikonian reforms that sparked the Old Believer persecutions also deposed Patriarch Nikon whose very reforms it adopted and that this deposing of the Patriarch was later posthumously reversed (whoops, we made a mistake), and that the Raskol is one of the saddest events in Russian history? You also realise that in 1971, the Patriarchcate of Moscow lifted the anathemas against the Old Believers (whoops we made another mistake), and in 1974, ROCOR asked forgiveness from the Old Believers for the wrongs done to them (whoops, we made a mistake).

Facts that I am, as my posts on these matters have shown, I am well aware.  God save the Yedionverie!

I would seem that the "Zarist" church wants to claim all these mistakes as their own.

Quote
I really don't think suggesting IPC's Church is like the Old Believer actually supports your argument that his Church is not being persecuted.

It supports that, and my argument that his neo-donatism comes as close as we ever had to Protestantism in the East.  It would seem the "Zarist" church resembles the Old Believers' persecusion, except that the "Zarist" church never had much of a presence in Russia to persecute, and probably has not gotten past parasite status on the Russian communiities, as the Old Believer independent communities have.

Quote
Nor does it support your idea that "swatting the flies" is a good way to go as far as dealing with dissent.
I've had fish in monasteries.  It was dead, so someone killed it.

It seems to have worked quite well for the Mother Church in Constantinople which used the secular powers to swat the flies.  Not to be wondered at that the daughter Church in Russia emulated the succesful methods of Constantinople.
Constantinople won't talk to canonical Churches, let alone amorphous schismatic ones.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2010, 01:53:16 AM 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 ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Quote
Nor does it support your idea that "swatting the flies" is a good way to go as far as dealing with dissent.
I've had fish in monasteries.  It was dead, so someone killed it.
Okay. Whatever that means.

Constantinople won't talk to canonical Churches, let alone amorphous schismatic ones.
Not quite true. She does, and is quite successful:
http://www.stirene.org/

Old Believers' persecusion, except that the "Zarist" church never had much of a presence in Russia to persecute, and probably has not gotten past parasite status
Did you just say "gotten"?

Clealry, you and Irish Hermit have no interest in discussing the topic at hand but want to go on one of your EP bashing escapades, so I'll leave you to your thoughts.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2010, 02:17:36 AM by ozgeorge »
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Clealry, you and Irish Hermit have no interest in discussing the topic at hand but want to go on one of your EP bashing escapades, so I'll leave you to your thoughts.

Good grief, young man, you are way out of line.   I have no interest in an EP bashing escapade.  What's with you?  In a related thread you tried hard to convict me of wanting to call Fr Anastasios a liar... and now this new attempt to blacken me......  Relax, have a nice cold beer and fire up the barbie.  :-)

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
So why this post in response to what I was discussing with ialmisry? What was your point?
And by the way I wish I was young, but I'm not. I'm not quite senile yet, but not young either.

Are we feeling persecuted?
No. But on the subject of persecution, I'm having difficulty understanding this point you try to make:
No, unlike your role models

you are quite free to go into schism.
You do realise this painting depicts an Old Believer woman being arrested in Russia during the persecution of the Old Believers don't you. You also realise that the "Great Synod of Moscow" which introduced the Nikonian reforms that sparked the Old Believer persecutions also deposed Patriarch Nikon whose very reforms it adopted and that this deposing of the Patriarch was later posthumously reversed (whoops, we made a mistake), and that the Raskol is one of the saddest events in Russian history? You also realise that in 1971, the Patriarchcate of Moscow lifted the anathemas against the Old Believers (whoops we made another mistake), and in 1974, ROCOR asked forgiveness from the Old Believers for the wrongs done to them (whoops, we made a mistake).
I really don't think suggesting IPC's Church is like the Old Believer actually supports your argument that his Church is not being persecuted. Nor does it support your idea that "swatting the flies" is a good way to go as far as dealing with dissent.

It seems to have worked quite well for the Mother Church in Constantinople which used the secular powers to swat the flies.  Not to be wondered at that the daughter Church in Russia emulated the succesful methods of Constantinople.

Was it to point out that you agree with me that ialmisry is wrong?
« Last Edit: January 07, 2010, 02:46:21 AM by ozgeorge »
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
RESOLUTIONS OF THE SYNOD OF BISHOPS OF ROCOR (RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH OUTSIDE RUSSIA) CONCERNING THE ELECTION OF THE NEW PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW.

SEPTEMBER 22/OCTOBER 5 2009

The Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, after analyzing and discussing the meeting of the self proclaimed "Synod of the positional Russian Orthodox Church" that took place in Moscow on January14/22 2009, and the appointment by this meeting of "metropolitan" Cyril (Gundyaev) to the patriarchal throne, it has been determined:

1.- The election of Metropolitan Cyril as Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia is not only an uncanonical act, but also antiecclesiastical political act. All the elections of the patriarchs of Moscow, since 1943, are ineffective, on the basis 30th apostolic canon and 3rd canon of the seventh Ecumenical Council.

2. The declaration of metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodski) of 1927, which is an oath of loyalty to the Soviet regime marked the beginning of separation of the Moscow Patriarchate from the Russian Orthodox Church in Russia and abroad. After taking this new path, the Moscow Patriarchate became completely dependent on the godless authority. Its hierarchy became the obedient instruments of the persecutors of Church.

3. In 2004, the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthoox Church Outside Russia carried out the following solemn proclamation: "To the Christians who in full conscience worship the godless authority, allegedly by the command of God, and serve it not out of fear, but in full conscience, blessing all its lawlessness and justifying the persecutions of the True Church of Christ by the theomachists, thinking that by this they serve god, but in reality are the ones who continue  the heresy of the disgraceful metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodskiy), and to all his followers - ANATHEMA!”.

Taking into account all the above mentioned, the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia Resolved the following:

Based on facts given at the present resolution, the election of Cyril (Gundyaev) as Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia, is recognized as uncanonical and void, and all its acts,  resolutions, and orders remain without authority and force.


Source : http://www.roca-sobor.org/ru/node/391 (In Russian)

I was browsing this Statement which seems to originate from some Church group based in California and thinking....  no doubt IPC is bringing this to our attention in all sincerity just as he did with the allegation and 'evidence' that Metropolitan Hilarion Kapral is an accessory to the murder of Metropolitan Philaret, his accusation that the blessings of the universally loved Patriarch Pavel are curses and his many writings, as above, against Patriarch Kirill of the Russians.

I imagine that all of the messages from IPC originate in a genuine desire to pull us back from the precipice of hell, since he believes our Churches are the unChurch, preparing the coming of the Antichrist. Members of our Churches risk a loss of salvation.  We accept that IPC has no obligation to see our Churches as canonical.   Fr Anastasios has stated Forum policy on this in the thread "Question for EO members"

"To be clear, this site exists as an Orthodox Forum where people
who identify themselves as Orthodox are given a place to discuss
things pertinent to the Orthodox Faith.  In practicality, this means
that there is a broad approach to allowing people from the Eastern
Orthodox "Majority", the Eastern Orthodox "Traditionalists", and the
Oriental Orthodox "Non-Chalcedonians" to post on topics relating
to Orthodoxy.  It should be emphasized that it is the policy of
this site that no one is required to affirm that any of the other
groups are canonical or Orthodox.."


From our side, the canonical Orthodox Churches (as the 1998 Thessaloniki Statement refers to us) we have a similar concern for the loss of salvation of those who have united themselves to the autogenic Churches of the last few decades which have cut all communion with the Orthodox world and denounce us.

So, what I want to say (the point of this message) is that I do appreciate IPC's sincerity but I think it is misplaced.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2010, 03:56:49 AM by Irish Hermit »

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
From our side, the canonical Orthodox Churches (as the 1998 Thessaloniki Statement refers to us) we have a similar concern for the loss of salvation of those who have united themselves to the autogenic Churches of the last few decades which have cut all communion with the Orthodox world and denounce us.

The Thessaloniki Statement 1998 was a statement of Orthodox Churches regarding participation in the World Council of Churches (WCC). While indeed it refers to the "canonical Orthodox Churches", it specifically refers to those canonical Orthodox Churches which have delegations to the World Council of Churches, since the Communique opens with the words:
 "We delegates of all the canonical Orthodox Churches"
The implication is either that the Communique speaks to the WCC through the Orthodox Delegates to the World Council of Churches on behalf of all Canonical Churches, or that the statement only refers to all the Canonical Orthodox Churches with delegations to the WCC. So if a Church has withdrawn from or has always refused to be a member of the WCC and has not signed the Thessaloniki Statement, does the Statement automatically include them as speaking on behalf of them? That is, can ROCOR claim that the term "Canonical Orthodox Churches" in the Thessaloniki Statement refers to them since ROCOR did not hold that the Orthodox delegates to the WCC represented them and ROCOR did not sign the Thessaloniki Statement? ROCOR cannot on the one hand reject participation in the WCC and then on the other hand claim that statements by Orthodox delegates to the WCC are made on behalf of them.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2010, 05:22:38 AM by ozgeorge »
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
From our side, the canonical Orthodox Churches (as the 1998 Thessaloniki Statement refers to us) we have a similar concern for the loss of salvation of those who have united themselves to the autogenic Churches of the last few decades which have cut all communion with the Orthodox world and denounce us.

The Thessaloniki Statement 1998 was a statement of Orthodox Churches regarding participation in the World Council of Churches (WCC). While indeed it refers to the "canonical Orthodox Churches", it specifically refers to those canonical Orthodox Churches which have delegations to the World Council of Churches, since the Communique opens with the words:
 "We delegates of all the canonical Orthodox Churches"
The implication is either that the Communique speaks to the WCC through the Orthodox Delegates to the World Council of Churches on behalf of all Canonical Churches, or that the statement only refers to all the Canonical Orthodox Churches with delegations to the WCC. .

It also dealt with the damage which is being wrought upon the world of Orthodoxy by the GOCs and TOCs and WOCs (Greek Old Calendarists, True Orthodox Churches and Walled Off Churches.)   In  a sense they form the other extreme pole of Orthodox ecumenism.  They are mentioned only briefly though in the final Statement as the major concern of the Meeting was participation in the ecumemism of the WCC.  It would be interesting to study which is having a more negative impact upon the Church - the excessive ecumenism of some bishops or the excesive anti-ecumenism of others.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
That is, can ROCOR claim that the term "Canonical Orthodox Churches" in the Thessaloniki Statement refers to them since ROCOR did not hold that the Orthodox delegates to the WCC represented them and ROCOR did not sign the Thessaloniki Statement? ROCOR cannot on the one hand reject participation in the WCC and then on the other hand claim that statements by Orthodox delegates to the WCC are made on behalf of them.

Participation is the WCC is limited in the world of Orthodoxy to autocephalous Churches.  ROCA at the time was only a "Temporary Higher Ecclesiastical Administration"* and has been called a "Church" only by popular usage.  

* Refer to UKase 362 issued by Patriarch Tikhon and the Holy Synod of the Russian Church, and also to the founding document of ROCA.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2010, 05:57:55 AM by Irish Hermit »

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
ROCOR cannot on the one hand reject participation in the WCC and then on the other hand claim that statements by Orthodox delegates to the WCC are made on behalf of them.

Since the Act of Canonical Communion between Moscow and the Church Abroad in 2007, the Russian Orthodox Church (Abroad) has been constituted as a self-governing Church within the Patriarchate of Moscow (as is Estonia, Latvia and Moldova.)   So the Russian representatives at the WCC now represent also the Russian Orthodox Church (Abroad.)  If they so desired bishops from the Church Abroad could ask the Holy Synod in Moscow to include them in the Russian delegation to the WCC.  This is unlikely since most of our bishops would prefer that we are out of the WCC.

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
It also dealt with the damage which is being wrought upon the world of Orthodoxy by the GOCs and TOCs and WOCs (Greek Old Calendarists, True Orthodox Churches and Walled Off Churches.)  
Not quite. I think your attempts to claim thet the Thessaloniki somehow speaks on behalf of ROCOR are a bit anachronistic. I apologize for the length of this reply, but I think its necessary to explain what I mean. The Thessaloniki Statement of the "delegates of all Canonical Orthodox Churches" condemned ROCOR as well since it actually says:
"The delegates unanimously denounced those groups of schismatics, as well as certain extremist groups within the local Orthodox Churches themselves, that are using the theme of ecumenism in order to criticize the Church leadership and undermine its authority, thus attempting to create divisions and schisms within the Church. They also use non-factual material and misinformation in order to support their unjust criticism."
In other words, the statement of these Orthodox delegates of all the Canonical Orthodox Churches condemns those who use "the theme of ecumenism to criticize the Church leadership and undermine it's authority".  Who is this referring to and who does it include? In 1983, ROCOR pronounced it's "Anathema against Ecumenism" and in 1987, Fr. Alexander Lebedeff (ROCOR) made the following statements:
Quote
"How then can we even think of sentencing to excommunication say the entire Serbian Orthodox church with all its faithful, or any other local Orthodox Church, no matter how wrong their leaders are in tolerating ecumenical activity?
"the Synod [of ROCOR] deplores all ecumenical activity, and in its publications openly criticizes those who participate in such activities"
"The Synod fervently hopes that the leaders of these Churches will recognize their errors, and that they will take steps to correct them."
From Orthodox Life, Vol. 37, No. 2, March-April 1987, pp. 12-17
This sounds very much to me as though the Synod of ROCOR was understood within ROCOR as using Ecumenism to criticize the leadership of other Orthodox Churches (INCLUDING THE PATRIARCH OF SERBIA)- the very thing which the Thessaloniki Statement condemns.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2010, 06:25:20 AM by ozgeorge »
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
I think your attempts to claim thet the Thessaloniki somehow speaks on behalf of ROCOR are a bit anachronistic.

But I would agree with you!   Thessaloniki did not speak for ROCA in 1998.  I have never suggested that it did.


Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
But I would agree with you!   Thessaloniki did not speak for ROCA in 1998.  I have never suggested that it did.
And what about Protopriest Alexander Lebedeff's criticism of the leadership of the Serbian Orthodox Church I quoted above?
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

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
I think your attempts to claim thet the Thessaloniki somehow speaks on behalf of ROCOR are a bit anachronistic.

But I would agree with you!   Thessaloniki did not speak for ROCA in 1998.  I have never suggested that it did.


But don't you think it anachronistic that you, a priest in a jurisdiction that was never a party to the original drafting of the Thessaloniki Statement and even stood condemned by the statement's language, would now claim it as representing you?  Kinda reminds me of a scolding my grandma gave me once over something she offered me for dinner.  "You didn't accept it when I offered it to you, so now that you want some, you aren't getting any."
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Who is this referring to and who does it include? In 1983, ROCOR pronounced it's "Anathema against Ecumenism"

The 1983 Anathema against Ecumenism issued by the Russian Church Abroad is consonant with the 2000 Statement issued by the Synod of the Church of Russian on "Relationships with the Heterodox."  See that document here
http://www.mospat.ru/en/documents/attitude-to-the-non-orthodox/


Quote
This sounds very much to me as though the Synod of ROCOR was understood within ROCOR as using Ecumenism to criticize the leadership of other Orthodox Churches- the very thing which the Thessaloniki Statement condemns.

All the bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church (Abroad) are now full participatory and voting members of the Russian Synod in Moscow.    It is their hope to move the Russian Church to move out of the WCC.    In this, they are not alone since the Russian Church is not monolithically in favour of WCC involvement; there are many Russian bishops who want to see it get out of the WCC.

The same pro-WCC and anti-WCC tug of war is happening in the Serbian Church, quite intensely, and so it is seen as very important as to which of the three candidates will win the "Divine Lot" on 22nd January and have his name pulled out of the Book of the Gospels and become the new Patriarch.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
But don't you think it anachronistic that you, a priest in a jurisdiction that was never a party to the original drafting of the Thessaloniki Statement and even stood condemned by the statement's language, would now claim it as representing you? 

No.  I have not looked at the 2007 Act of Canonical Communion lately but I think it includes a clause requiring the Russian Orthodox Church (Abroad) to accept the acts of Moscow.  That makes sense, doesn't it, since we are now a subsidiary Church of the Church of Russia (Moscow) and our bishops are full members of the Moscow Synod. 

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
But I would agree with you!   Thessaloniki did not speak for ROCA in 1998.  I have never suggested that it did.
And what about Protopriest Alexander Lebedeff's criticism of the leadership of the Serbian Orthodox Church I quoted above?

You are probably not aware of it but for many years there has been an active battle in the Serbian Church between pro-ecumenical and anti-ecumenical bishops.

The bishops have themselves written much stronger statements against brother bishops.  It is a very emotional issue as well as a theological one.

This is why the election by lot of the new Patriarch on 22nd January is going to be crucial for the Church of Serbia, for its clergy and, in a big way, for its monastics.  I am praying that God will send a conservative Patriarch who possesses the diplomatic skills to hold the Synod in unity.

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
You are probably not aware of it but for many years there has been an active battle in the Serbian Church between pro-ecumenical and anti-ecumenical bishops.
I'm quite aware of it. In fact Patriarch Pavle himself was a great pro-Ecumenical Bishop since he was instrumental in bringing schismatics back into the Serbian Orthodox Church. The issue here is the Synod of ROCOR's criticism of ecumenical Church leaders, and the subsequent condemnation of those who use the theme of ecumenism to cricicize leaders of the local Orthodox Churches by the Thessaloniki Statement.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2010, 07:04:38 AM by ozgeorge »
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
You are probably not aware of it but for many years there has been an active battle in the Serbian Church between pro-ecumenical and anti-ecumenical bishops.
I'm quote aware of it. In fact Patriarch Pavle himself was a great Ecumenist since he was instrumental in bringing schismatics back into the Serbian Orthodox Church.

God bless him for that, dear wonderful holy man.   

But I have not thought of reconciliation between Orthodox bodies as acts of ecumenism, whether the Sertrbian Patriarchate and the Free Serbs or the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Church Abroad.  I don't think I have ever seen this referred to by Church writers as ecumenical actions.

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
But I have not thought of reconciliation between Orthodox bodies as acts of ecumenism, whether the Sertrbian Patriarchate and the Free Serbs or the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Church Abroad.  I don't think I have ever seen this referred to by Church writers as ecumenical actions.

I wonder why not? Isn't it an outreaching in brotherly love to schismatics who are outside of the Church (something ROCOR condemned in 1983)?
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
But I have not thought of reconciliation between Orthodox bodies as acts of ecumenism, whether the Serrbian Patriarchate and the Free Serbs or the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Church Abroad.  I don't think I have ever seen this referred to by Church writers as ecumenical actions.

I wonder why not? Isn't it an outreaching in brotherly love to schismatics who are outside of the Church (something ROCOR condemned in 1983)?

I would say that this understanding of 'ecumenical' is outside the usual definition... but I suppose it is possible.

Btw, ROCA  NEVER condemned charitable outreach to schismatics or to heterodox Churches with the 1983 Anathema.  That would be a gross distortion of its intention.   It was intent on condemning the Branch Theory, something the 2000 Statement from Moscow also strenuously condemns.

ROCA Anathema:
"Those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christ's Church
is divided into so-called "branches" which differ in doctrine and way of life,
or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future
when all "branches" or sects or denominations, and even religions will be
 united into one body; and who do not distinguish the priesthood and
mysteries of the Church from those of the heretics, but say that the
baptism and eucharist of heretics is effectual for salvation;
therefore, to those who knowingly have communion with these
aforementioned heretics or who advocate, disseminate, or defend their
new heresy of Ecumenism under the pretext of brotherly love or the s
upposed unification of separated Christians, Anathema!"

Moscow's Statement:
2.5. The so-called “branch theory”, which is connected with the conception
referred to above and asserts the normal and even providential nature of
Christianity existing in the form of particular “branches”, is also totally unacceptable.

http://www.mospat.ru/en/documents/attitude-to-the-non-orthodox/ii/
« Last Edit: January 09, 2010, 07:30:15 AM by Irish Hermit »

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
"Those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christ's Church
is divided into so-called "branches" which differ in doctrine and way of life, or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future
when all "branches" or sects or denominations,..... Anathema!"
"For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread." 1 Corinthians 10:17
The One Body of Christ (the Church) is defined by those who "partake of that one bread". It is the visible sign of the Church. When a body breaks Communion with another body, they literally do not "partake of that one bread".  Therefore, ecclessiologically speaking, one would have to hold the "Branch Theory" to say that both of the seperated bodies constitute the Church. It's no different to saying that the Roman Catholics are just another "branch" of the Church. Therefore schismatic groups, no matter how "Orthodox" they look, cannot be considered to be part of the Church.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2010, 07:35:30 AM by ozgeorge »
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
"Those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christ's Church
is divided into so-called "branches" which differ in doctrine and way of life, or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future
when all "branches" or sects or denominations,..... Anathema!"
"For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread." 1 Corinthians 10:17
The One Body of Christ (the Church) is defined by those who "partake of that one bread". When a body breaks Communion with another body, they literally do not "partake of that one bread".  Therefore, ecclessiologically speaking, one would have to hold the "Branch Theory" to say that both of the seperated bodies constitute the Church. It's no different to saying that the Roman Catholics are just another "branch" of the Church. Therefore schismatic groups, no matter how "Orthodox" they look, cannot be considered to be part of the Church.

I would agree, but with a proviso:  in charity and in the love of church unity the ecclesiastical parent body from which schismatics have separated will frequently hold off declaring the Mysteries of schismatics as null and void, in the holy hope that this loving leniency will assist the break-away body to return.  To assist this reintegration they will often avoid using the term 'schismatic.' 

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
"Those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christ's Church
is divided into so-called "branches" which differ in doctrine and way of life, or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future
when all "branches" or sects or denominations,..... Anathema!"
"For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread." 1 Corinthians 10:17
The One Body of Christ (the Church) is defined by those who "partake of that one bread". When a body breaks Communion with another body, they literally do not "partake of that one bread".  Therefore, ecclessiologically speaking, one would have to hold the "Branch Theory" to say that both of the seperated bodies constitute the Church. It's no different to saying that the Roman Catholics are just another "branch" of the Church. Therefore schismatic groups, no matter how "Orthodox" they look, cannot be considered to be part of the Church.

I would agree, but with a proviso:  in charity and in the love of church unity the ecclesiastical parent body from which schismatics have separated will frequently hold off declaring the Mysteries of schismatics as null and void, in the holy hope that this loving leniency will assist the break-away body to return.  To assist this reintegration they will often avoid using the term 'schismatic.' 
"The Ecclessiological Situation Formerly Known as Schism" :D
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
"Those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christ's Church
is divided into so-called "branches" which differ in doctrine and way of life, or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future
when all "branches" or sects or denominations,..... Anathema!"
"For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread." 1 Corinthians 10:17
The One Body of Christ (the Church) is defined by those who "partake of that one bread". When a body breaks Communion with another body, they literally do not "partake of that one bread".  Therefore, ecclessiologically speaking, one would have to hold the "Branch Theory" to say that both of the seperated bodies constitute the Church. It's no different to saying that the Roman Catholics are just another "branch" of the Church. Therefore schismatic groups, no matter how "Orthodox" they look, cannot be considered to be part of the Church.

I would agree, but with a proviso:  in charity and in the love of church unity the ecclesiastical parent body from which schismatics have separated will frequently hold off declaring the Mysteries of schismatics as null and void, in the holy hope that this loving leniency will assist the break-away body to return.  To assist this reintegration they will often avoid using the term 'schismatic.'  
"The Ecclessiological Situation Formerly Known as Schism" :D

Make fun of the patience and long-suffering of the Church if you like, but has your Church never shown such leniency?

You have schismatic Greek groups in Australia.  Has Archbishop Stylianos issued a denial of their Baptism and other Mysteries?
« Last Edit: January 09, 2010, 08:42:17 AM by Irish Hermit »

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
"Those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christ's Church
is divided into so-called "branches" which differ in doctrine and way of life, or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future
when all "branches" or sects or denominations,..... Anathema!"
"For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread." 1 Corinthians 10:17
The One Body of Christ (the Church) is defined by those who "partake of that one bread". When a body breaks Communion with another body, they literally do not "partake of that one bread".  Therefore, ecclessiologically speaking, one would have to hold the "Branch Theory" to say that both of the seperated bodies constitute the Church. It's no different to saying that the Roman Catholics are just another "branch" of the Church. Therefore schismatic groups, no matter how "Orthodox" they look, cannot be considered to be part of the Church.

I would agree, but with a proviso:  in charity and in the love of church unity the ecclesiastical parent body from which schismatics have separated will frequently hold off declaring the Mysteries of schismatics as null and void, in the holy hope that this loving leniency will assist the break-away body to return.  To assist this reintegration they will often avoid using the term 'schismatic.' 
"The Ecclessiological Situation Formerly Known as Schism" :D

Make fun of the patience and long-suffering of the Church if you like, but has your Church never shown such leniency?
I was not making fun of the patience and long suffering of my Church, I was making fun of extremists who anathemise "Ecumenism" and then practice it themselves according to the way they've defined it.
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
I was not making fun of the patience and long suffering of my Church, I was making fun of extremists who anathemise "Ecumenism" and then practice it themselves according to the way they've defined it.

The Russian Orthodox Church (Abroad) has anathematized the heresy of the Branch Theory of the Church.

The Russian Orthodox Church (Moscow) has issued a synodal statement condemning the Branch Theory of the Church.

Neither has either anathematized or condemned ecumenism per se, since there are both aceptable and unacceptable forms of ecumenism.  You are painting with too broad a brush with your statement above.

What of Constantinople?  Do you accept the Branch Theory?

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,576
But I would agree with you!   Thessaloniki did not speak for ROCA in 1998.  I have never suggested that it did.
And what about Protopriest Alexander Lebedeff's criticism of the leadership of the Serbian Orthodox Church I quoted above?

You are probably not aware of it but for many years there has been an active battle in the Serbian Church between pro-ecumenical and anti-ecumenical bishops.

The bishops have themselves written much stronger statements against brother bishops.  It is a very emotional issue as well as a theological one.

This is why the election by lot of the new Patriarch on 22nd January is going to be crucial for the Church of Serbia, for its clergy and, in a big way, for its monastics.  I am praying that God will send a conservative Patriarch who possesses the diplomatic skills to hold the Synod in unity.

Since when does a priest have the authority to make binding statements for his Church?  So what of Fr. Lebedeff's criticism?  What has his bishops signed off on?
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 ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
The Russian Orthodox Church (Abroad) has anathematized the heresy of the Branch Theory of the Church.

The Russian Orthodox Church (Moscow) has issued a synodal statement condemning the Branch Theory of the Church.
I know. And as I point out above, this begs the ecclessiological question of whether when ROCOR and the MP were not in Communion did they constitute two branches of the Orthodox Church? Or were they somehow both "invisibly" within the Orthodox Church?
« Last Edit: January 09, 2010, 02:01:12 PM by ozgeorge »
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
But I would agree with you!   Thessaloniki did not speak for ROCA in 1998.  I have never suggested that it did.
And what about Protopriest Alexander Lebedeff's criticism of the leadership of the Serbian Orthodox Church I quoted above?

You are probably not aware of it but for many years there has been an active battle in the Serbian Church between pro-ecumenical and anti-ecumenical bishops.

The bishops have themselves written much stronger statements against brother bishops.  It is a very emotional issue as well as a theological one.

This is why the election by lot of the new Patriarch on 22nd January is going to be crucial for the Church of Serbia, for its clergy and, in a big way, for its monastics.  I am praying that God will send a conservative Patriarch who possesses the diplomatic skills to hold the Synod in unity.

Since when does a priest have the authority to make binding statements for his Church?
 

Never did of course.  If that is what George is thinking he is a bit mistaken.

Quote


  So what of Fr. Lebedeff's criticism?  What has his bishops signed off on?

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
I know. And as I point out above, this begs the ecclessiological question of whether when ROCOR and the MP were not in Communion did they constitute two branches of the Orthodox Church? Or were they somehow both "invisibly" within the Orthodox Church?

1.  From the time of the Revolution until 1968 the Russian Church Abroad was in full communion and concelebration with ALL Orthodox Churches but NOT with Moscow. As you would know the Russian Church Abroad was headquartered in Constantinople, with the blessing of the Ecumenical Patriarch, from the Revolution until 1924 after which it shifted to Serbia.   So I suppose it had a "second-hand" communion with Moscow through the other Churches.

2.  After 1968 concelebration with the other Churches gradually stopped.  But communion continued.   But ~ both communion and concelebration continued with Serbia and Jerusalem and in fact was never broken between 1920 and 2007 (when the union occured between Moscow and the Church Abroad.)  

« Last Edit: January 09, 2010, 04:21:01 PM by Irish Hermit »

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
RESOLUTIONS OF THE SYNOD OF BISHOPS OF ROCOR (RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH OUTSIDE RUSSIA) CONCERNING THE ELECTION OF THE NEW PATRIARCH OF MOSCOW.

SEPTEMBER 22/OCTOBER 5 2009

The opening document for this thread attacking the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church was kindly provided for us by IPC and emanates from a San Francisco based church group.   Is anybody aware of this group?   Who are they?  What are their numbers?  What is their credibiltiy?  How long have they been in existence?  What are their antecedents?

Offline IPC

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 308
Dear ialmisry,

No, not me, the Moscow Patriarchate is taking care of the Catholicos of Georgia, by creating  dependencies in that area.

Sadly, the Catholicos is not true orthodox, he is monophytisist, and our Church is older than his. The monophysitists were introduced in Georgia and Armenia centuries after we settled the Church in that region.

Our official title is Russian True-Orthodox Church, in Russia, and Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, (ROCOR) in other countries.

It's not paranoia nor megalomania, you can do it yourself, look, here is a popular basic site for people who don't know much about computers and want to surf anonymously: www.torproject.org. There are many ways for anonymous surfing. Sounds unreal Right? But everything on the net can be virtual. Oh by the way, this site is used for a technique called "onion" where you connect yourself to network yourself to connect to a specific server using a rout with several "lairs" on different servers.

By the infiltrates, I mean dishonest persons who sold themselves to the government of Moscow, knowing that nothing has changed, and they remain the same revolutionary tyrant.

The gates of hell won't prevail ever, God has shown great mercy on the Church, recently, the wolves in sheep skin that were attacking the Church from within left us, most of them joined their masters in Moscow, and once more the Truth is preached openly, without their howling interfering.

There are no groundless accusations, the information about the attrocities done against Met. Vitaly and ROCOR by Met. Laurus and his new "ROCOR" under Moscow's control is here: www.listok.com and www.rocor-v.com.

As amazing as it sounds, the Russian Government, in the course of years, have been spending more money on its campaign against ROCOR, than on Cheniya, and other national security priorities.

Inside the former USSR, the new ROCOR under the MP had to give to the MP their parishes, and bishops, they don't need it there.

If the governments are openly violent, they must face the consequences of other governments, and organizations, so, what they do is use their State churches and religions to do the dirty work, in all impunity.   

Yet, the slander, false witness, and lies of Irish Hermit have been exposed as I always back up what I say about others.

Before, the tyrants were contained by the "Wall of Iron" but now that it has been removed, they are being freed, and more than ever, then needed to infiltrate ROCOR in order to gain total control on the russian emigration, Church property, and other valuable assets, and spread their global positioning.

You've also seen that I back up all my allegations always.

The Moscow Patriarchate was always protected by one of the most powerful governments in the world, it has not suffered any persecution at all. The only thing that it's founders and leaders saved, is their own skin.

You complain about persecution of your church in the arab world, and I honour your sentiments on this respect, I do not call them whining, nor cowardly.

You are also anonymous, but I know you are a real person, not only do I respect you, but I believe you. If you say the moslems persecute you, I take your word as good as gold

I have offered detailed testimony on how we are being persecuted, I never say me, I say us, the Church, etc.



THIS USER USED THE SCREEN NAME PRAVOSLAV09 BEFORE.

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
Yet, the slander, false witness, and lies of Irish Hermit have been exposed as I always back up what I say about others.
How is Irish Hermit slandering anyone, bearing false witness, or lying?

Before, the tyrants were contained by the "Wall of Iron" but now that it has been removed, they are being freed, and more than ever, then needed to infiltrate ROCOR in order to gain total control on the russian emigration, Church property, and other valuable assets, and spread their global positioning.

You've also seen that I back up all my allegations always.
You might back up your allegations with the minimum amount of support necessary to show the moderators that you aren't just drumming up these possibly phony charges yourself, but that doesn't mean we believe your sources believable or worthy of respect.  ISTM that if you're using untrustworthy sources to back up your accusations, you're still very likely engaging in slander.  Before you post such incendiary stuff as this online, you do bear some responsibility to verify the credibility of your sources yourself so that you're not just passing off someone else's lies as truth.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 12:19:03 AM by PeterTheAleut »
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us

Our official title is Russian True-Orthodox Church, in Russia, and Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia, (ROCOR) in other countries.


Dear IPC,

ARe you saying that the San Francisco based Church which issued the OP Statement which started this thread is actually the Zarist Church?

If that is the case, why do you say that an American Church is older than the ancient Church of Georgia?

And if you are an American Church, why are you existing in the catacombs, afraid to name your bishops and speaking of persecution?   What causes such fear in the United States?

Does your Church believe as you do that our Churches of the Orthodox world (Jerusalem, Greece, Russia, Serbia, Romania, etc.) are the womb of the Antichrist?

There are many questions which arise from your last message, at least one per each of your sentences, but I hope you will find time to answer these important ones.

Today we prayed for you at the Divine Liturgy, in fact I used one whole Prosphora to commemorate your name.   May God bless you.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


Inside the former USSR, the new ROCOR under the MP had to give to the MP their parishes, and bishops, they don't need it there.


In the somewhat heady halcyon days after Perestroika in 1991, some of the bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad made the mistake of taking advantage of Russia's new freedom and they founded new parishes inside Russia.   The majority of ROCA bishops did NOT agree with this action. 

When the time came for the union of ROCA and the Moscow Patriatrchate in 2007 these parishes inside Russia naturally had to be integrated into the Russian dioceses within which they geographically exist.    After all, it is uncanonical to have two competing sytems of parishes and bishops within one geographical territory.

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
No, not me, the Moscow Patriarchate is taking care of the Catholicos of Georgia, by creating  dependencies in that area.

Sadly, the Catholicos is not true orthodox, he is monophytisist, and our Church is older than his. The monophysitists were introduced in Georgia and Armenia centuries after we settled the Church in that region.

That is not correct. The Church of Georgia was never monophysite and is much older than the Church of Russia. The Holy Monastery of Iveron on the Holy Mountain was originally a Georgian monastery which was founded in the ninth century and is named for Georgia ("Iveron" was the ancient name of Georgia). It was founded by St. John the Georgian. I doubt a monophysite monastery would have been established on the holy mountain. The whole myth about the ancient Church of Georgia being monophysite was an historical lie to justify Russia's annexing of Georgia and subsequent removal by the Russian Church of the autocephaly of the Church of Georgia by the Patriarchate of Moscow in 1811. Georgia was evangelized in the end of the third century by St. Nina Equal-to-the-Apostles and her tomb is still in Georgia in the Monastery of St. George in Bodbe. Althopugh there was some sympathy for the non-Chalcedonian cause in Georgia in the sixth century, the Chruch of Georgia officially rejected the non-Chalcedonian position in the seventh century by Catholicos Kyrion, and this was a full three hundred years before the baptism of Russia.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 07:10:27 AM by ozgeorge »
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
No, not me, the Moscow Patriarchate is taking care of the Catholicos of Georgia, by creating  dependencies in that area.

Sadly, the Catholicos is not true orthodox, he is monophytisist, and our Church is older than his. The monophysitists were introduced in Georgia and Armenia centuries after we settled the Church in that region.

That is not correct. The Church of Georgia was never monophysite .

Sadly this is not correct.  In 1998 His Holiness Catholicos Karekin II of the Armenians visited the Patriarch of Georgia and brought him into the ancient Armenian faith.    The Catholicos also visited Moscow in 2000 and Constantinople in 2005 and brought both these Patriarchs to an acceptance of Myaphysitism.  Scholars are still debating if the visit of the missionary-minded Armenian Catholicos to the Vatican in 2000 was succesful in bringing Pope John Paul to a Myaphysite belief.   Pope Benedict made his submission only recently, in 2008..

IPC,  I don't know if these photographs would be useful in backing up your allegations but they're convincing enough for me.


« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 07:25:48 AM by Irish Hermit »

Offline mike

  • A sexual pervert with limited English reading comprehension
  • Protostrator
  • ***************
  • Posts: 24,872
  • Polish Laser Jesus shooting down schismatics
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Diocese of Białystok and Gdańsk
Irish Hermit, I've really appreciated the joke.
Hyperdox Herman, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - fb, Eastern Orthodox Christian News - tt

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?
"No one is paying attention to your post reports"
Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us

Sadly, the Catholicos is not true orthodox, he is monophytisist, and our Church is older than his. The monophysitists were introduced in Georgia and Armenia centuries after we settled the Church in that region.


I have conducted some strenuous research hoping to back up your claim on this point.   So far it has been disappointing and there is nothing at all about the existence of a proto-Zarist church or community in either the Ukraine or Russia in the early centuries of Christianity.   

Could you refer me to the scholarly works on the early Zarist Church.

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
No, not me, the Moscow Patriarchate is taking care of the Catholicos of Georgia, by creating  dependencies in that area.

Sadly, the Catholicos is not true orthodox, he is monophytisist, and our Church is older than his. The monophysitists were introduced in Georgia and Armenia centuries after we settled the Church in that region.

That is not correct. The Church of Georgia was never monophysite .

Sadly this is not correct.  In 1998 His Holiness Catholicos Karekin II of the Armenians visited the Patriarch of Georgia and brought him into the ancient Armenian faith.    The Catholicos also visited Moscow in 2000 and Constantinople in 2005 and brought both these Patriarchs to an acceptance of Myaphysitism.  Scholars are still debating if the visit of the missionary-minded Armenian Catholicos to the Vatican in 2000 was succesful in bringing Pope John Paul to a Myaphysite belief.   Pope Benedict made his submission only recently, in 2008..

IPC,  I don't know if these photographs would be useful in backing up your allegations but they're convincing enough for me.

Miaphysitism isn't monophysitism, but anyway, it seems we "World Orthodox" are all under ROCOR's Anathema again for reaching out to seperated brethren.... Sigh....
But of course, it's OK for ROCOR to do it with the MP.....
« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 10:03:31 AM by ozgeorge »
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
No, not me, the Moscow Patriarchate is taking care of the Catholicos of Georgia, by creating  dependencies in that area.

Sadly, the Catholicos is not true orthodox, he is monophytisist, and our Church is older than his. The monophysitists were introduced in Georgia and Armenia centuries after we settled the Church in that region.

That is not correct. The Church of Georgia was never monophysite .

Sadly this is not correct.  In 1998 His Holiness Catholicos Karekin II of the Armenians visited the Patriarch of Georgia and brought him into the ancient Armenian faith.    The Catholicos also visited Moscow in 2000 and Constantinople in 2005 and brought both these Patriarchs to an acceptance of Myaphysitism.  Scholars are still debating if the visit of the missionary-minded Armenian Catholicos to the Vatican in 2000 was succesful in bringing Pope John Paul to a Myaphysite belief.   Pope Benedict made his submission only recently, in 2008..

IPC,  I don't know if these photographs would be useful in backing up your allegations but they're convincing enough for me.

Miaphysitism isn't monophysitism,

Bravo!   Not everybody realises that.   After a very careful study the Pope and the Vatican have issued statements that Diophysitism and Miaphysitism are identical Christology.   And of course Monophysitism is not identical to either.

Quote

 but anyway, it seems we "World Orthodox" are all under ROCOR's Anathema again for reaching out to seperated brethren.... Sigh....


Poor laddie!   You can stop quaking in your boots.  :laugh:  You have not been anathematized!   Here is the Anathema and you can see that your fears are unfounded.  It mentions no condemnation of reaching out to separated brethren.  It's only about anathematizing the Branch Theory (From your words I assume that Constantinople holds this Theory or the related Lung Theory?)

Btw, did you know the the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad had a delegation at Vatican II, only observers but I suppose that is tantamount to reaching out?

The Anathema of 1983:

"Those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christ's Church
is divided into so-called "branches" which differ in doctrine and way of life,
or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future
when all "branches" or sects or denominations, and even religions will be
 united into one body; and who do not distinguish the priesthood and
mysteries of the Church from those of the heretics, but say that the
baptism and eucharist of heretics is effectual for salvation;
therefore, to those who knowingly have communion with these
aforementioned heretics or who advocate, disseminate, or defend their
new heresy of Ecumenism under the pretext of brotherly love or the s
upposed unification of separated Christians, Anathema!"

And here on this Moscow site you may read that ther 2000 Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church issued a statement consonant with ROCA's.

Moscow's Statement 2000:

2.5. The so-called “branch theory”, which is connected with the conception
referred to above and asserts the normal and even providential nature of
Christianity existing in the form of particular “branches”, is also totally unacceptable.

http://www.mospat.ru/en/documents/attitude-to-the-non-orthodox/ii/
« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 03:25:02 PM by Irish Hermit »

Offline IPC

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 308
Dear Peter,

Irish Hermit slanders me and bears false witness when he says I do things I don't and deliberately twists my words, like the time when he accuse me of being a proselyte. He is also deliberately lying in some posts, like that in this thread where he said ROCOR is based in california, when he perfectly knows that is a lie. I tell you this because you asked. :)

The reason why I pack up my allegations with the minimum support, it's not just for the authorities in this room, it is also to protect this forum, for the sake of all of us. I was brought up with a very strong sense of community, and consideration for others, it's part of my nature.

I speak in this forum of what I know, and the resources I select are those which talk about these things accurately, I verify what is written with real facts I know firsthand, I don't pay attention much about the sources, I know some persons like PhD Vladimir Moss are very unreliable persons, and I'm careful.

I do mistakes, but unlike IH I welcome corrections, and admit my own faults. When I'm right, I do not accept corrections, and I protest against unfair treatment, but when I see I'll be treated unfairly anyways, and protesting just makes things worst and cause trouble, I let it go. Just like the time when I was set on moderated status because I posted something, but my post was not deleted. I dealt with it, even though I considered that measure as an absurd senseless punishment, I accepted it.

I appreciate your input, and I'll take it into consideration, lying, slandering, and any sort of falsehood has no excuse, if I do it because I got the wrong information, I am guilty.


THIS USER USED THE SCREEN NAME PRAVOSLAV09 BEFORE.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Irish Hermit ..... is also deliberately lying in some posts, like that in this thread where he said ROCOR is based in california, when he perfectly knows that is a lie.

Well, of course the genuine ROCOR under Metropolitan Hilarion (Kapral) (the same man you have publicly accused of being an accessory to the New York murder of another bishop!) has its centre in New York.  But besides the real ROCOR there are now 8 small groups using the name and probably more will spring up as they continue quarrelling and dividing.

But the mysterious ROCOR which issued the statement you used to start this thread, attacking Patriarch Kirill of the Russians, has a presiding bishop who lives in San Francisco.  Last time I looked at an American map San Francisco is in California.  Maybe you don't read Russian?  The information about the bishop and San Francisco is given in Russian.

So no, I am not lying.   I guess you don't understand Russian.  Here is the information you need and I can translate it for you if you want:

http://www.roca-sobor.org/ru/node/391

« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 04:13:08 PM by Irish Hermit »

Offline IPC

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 308
Dear Ozgeorgie.

There is the Church of Georgia that was never "oriental orthodox" but there is also an Georgian "oriental Orthodox church", of more recent creation. Just like in armenia there is the Armenian Orthodox Church, and the oriental orthodox Armenian Apostolic church.

The origings of "oriental orthodox" in the causasus dates from the times when the region was taken under the control of the Byzantine Empire, which was ruled by "oriental orthodox" rulers, who established the Armenian and Georgian oriental churches. Of course, they have no relationship with the enlighteners of Georgia, nor Iveron, nor the Apostles, but still, they have a presence there.

Thank you for the fascinating and sad information about the Georgian Orthodox Church, I agree with you.

I know it is confusing, to add to the confusion, there are also georgian and armenian catholics, sadly.

In my opinion, I think Georgia has the right for its own national church, and the Moscow Patriarchate should let it free.






THIS USER USED THE SCREEN NAME PRAVOSLAV09 BEFORE.

Offline IPC

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 308
Irish Hermit, please click on the link in the first post of this address, and read. If you don't know russian:

Собора Епископов Русской Православной Церкви Заграницей 21 сентября / 4 октября 2009 г.
г. Монреаль, Канада = Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad September 21st/October 4th. City Montreal, Canada.

The Synodical Temple of Saint Seraphim of Savov in Montreal, where the activities of the Council of Bishops of ROCOR took place, caught fire during the time when the Bishops were arranging the council and preparing for the Glorification of Metropolitan Filaret of New York (St Filaret, Confessor of ROCOR). The fact that the temple mysteriously got in fire right then, when the Bishops were working on crucial resolutions concerning Pat. Kirill and the MP, gives me reasons to suspect it was arsoned, and I'm not alone. But well, I'll leave this question in the air, until God unveils the truth.



« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 04:21:52 PM by IPC »
THIS USER USED THE SCREEN NAME PRAVOSLAV09 BEFORE.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Irish Hermit, please click on the link in the first post of this address, and read. If you don't know russian:


Присутствуют:
 
Епископ Сан-Францисский и Западно-Американский Владимир – Председатель Собора

http://www.roca-sobor.org/ru/node/391

The fact as shown on the website is that this Council was held in Montreal, in what it calls an episcopal podvorie, but the centre where the presiding bishop resides is San Francisco.  The closest bishop to Montreal is the presiding bishop of this mysterious ROCOR group and he lives 3,000 miles from Montreal.

Offline Asteriktos

  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 38,080
Quote
The fact that the temple mysteriously got in fire right then, when the Bishops were working on crucial resolutions concerning Pat. Kirill and the MP, gives me reasons to suspect it was arsoned, and I'm not alone.

You're only saying that because it happened to you. ;) When similar bad things have happened in the past, I have seen traditionalist people claim that it was a sign from God.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Irish Hermit, please click on the link in the first post of this address, and read. If you don't know russian:

Собора Епископов Русской Православной Церкви Заграницей 21 сентября / 4 октября 2009 г.
г. Монреаль, Канада = Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad September 21st/October 4th. City Montreal, Canada.

I see that the official website gives the headquarters of this ROCOR group, not as Montreal, but Moss Beach, California.

P. O. Box 778
Moss Beach, CA 94038
Телефон (845) 348-0277

http://www.roca-sobor.org/ru/parishes
 

Offline GregoryLA

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 377
No, not me, the Moscow Patriarchate is taking care of the Catholicos of Georgia, by creating  dependencies in that area.

Sadly, the Catholicos is not true orthodox, he is monophytisist, and our Church is older than his. The monophysitists were introduced in Georgia and Armenia centuries after we settled the Church in that region.

That is not correct. The Church of Georgia was never monophysite .

Sadly this is not correct.  In 1998 His Holiness Catholicos Karekin II of the Armenians visited the Patriarch of Georgia and brought him into the ancient Armenian faith.    The Catholicos also visited Moscow in 2000 and Constantinople in 2005 and brought both these Patriarchs to an acceptance of Myaphysitism.  Scholars are still debating if the visit of the missionary-minded Armenian Catholicos to the Vatican in 2000 was succesful in bringing Pope John Paul to a Myaphysite belief.   Pope Benedict made his submission only recently, in 2008..

IPC,  I don't know if these photographs would be useful in backing up your allegations but they're convincing enough for me.




Just to clarify, this is a joke is it not, Father?

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
[Just to clarify, this is a joke is it not, Father?

Yes, for the majority of people this would be a joke but there are groups of people among such as the Greek Old Calendarists who take such events and meetings as a sign of the betrayal of Orthodoxy and a harbinger of the Antichrist.

Offline GregoryLA

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 377
[Just to clarify, this is a joke is it not, Father?

Yes, for the majority of people this would be a joke but there are groups of people among such as the Greek Old Calendarists who take such events and meetings as a sign of the betrayal of Orthodoxy and a harbinger of the Antichrist.

Completely unrelated to anything and quite tangentually- I, being in Japan, and you, being in New Zealand- I believe we're on the same time, are we not? I thought I was over my jetlag until I went to sleep last yesterday evening at 5 and woke up at 2 this morning.

I have a question though, Father. After all your years living in Serbia and now being in New Zealnd, how much of an Irish accent do you have? Also, do you speak any Erse?

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
[Just to clarify, this is a joke is it not, Father?

Yes, for the majority of people this would be a joke but there are groups of people among such as the Greek Old Calendarists who take such events and meetings as a sign of the betrayal of Orthodoxy and a harbinger of the Antichrist.

Completely unrelated to anything and quite tangentually- I, being in Japan, and you, being in New Zealand- I believe we're on the same time, are we not?

I think Tokyo is four hours behind us.  Right now it is 11 am Monday in New Zealand.

Quote
? Also, do you speak any Erse?

None at all, it does my head in.  :-)

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,576
Irish Hermit, please click on the link in the first post of this address, and read. If you don't know russian:

Собора Епископов Русской Православной Церкви Заграницей 21 сентября / 4 октября 2009 г.
г. Монреаль, Канада = Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad September 21st/October 4th. City Montreal, Canada.

I see that the official website gives the headquarters of this ROCOR group, not as Montreal, but Moss Beach, California.

P. O. Box 778
Moss Beach, CA 94038
Телефон (845) 348-0277

http://www.roca-sobor.org/ru/parishes
 

Moss Beach?  As in Vladimir Moss? LOL.
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 IPC

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 308
Dear ialmisry ,

One of ROCOR monasteries is located in Moss Beach, California, there we have 5 miracle working icons, relics of St Seraphim of Sarov, and other holy objects, but it is not the headquarters of ROCOR.

Moss Beach is located in Northern California, and its one most expensive places in the USA.

There is an Icon of the Mother of God called "Icon of the Akhatist", which became very dark. According to a divine revelation, this happened because of the unbelief and the general impiety in the Motherland, Russia, and it will be restored when a spiritual regeneration in Russia occurs. So far, the Icon is still dark, there is no spiritual regeneration in Russia, the state propaganda of the "Resurrection of Russia" is just one of its many lies and falsehood, to allure people and control them.

The headquarters of ROCOR presided now by Ab Vladimir, are in Quebec, Canada.



« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 08:33:46 PM by IPC »
THIS USER USED THE SCREEN NAME PRAVOSLAV09 BEFORE.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Dear ialmisry ,

One of ROCOR monasteries is located in Moss Beach, California, there we have 5 miracle working icons, relics of St Seraphim of Sarov, and other holy objects, but it is not the headquarters of ROCOR.

Moss Beach is located in Northern California, and its one most expensive places in the USA.

......................

The headquarters of ROCOR presided now by Ab Vladimir, are in Quebec, Canada.


Archbishop Vladimir who is the President of the Episcopal Synod of this Church has his episcopal palace in Moss Beach, California.

That is 3000 miles from Montreal.   There is not a single bishop of this small Church within thousands of miles of Montreal.

Архиепископ Сан-Францисский и Западно-Американский Владимир,
Председатель Архиерейского Синода

P. O. Box 778
Moss Beach, CA 94038
Телефон: +1 (917) 828-0476
Электронная почта: bishopvlad@gmail.com

See
http://www.roca-sobor.org/ru/parishes
« Last Edit: January 10, 2010, 08:57:44 PM by Irish Hermit »

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,576
Dear ialmisry ,

One of ROCOR monasteries is located in Moss Beach, California, there we have 5 miracle working icons, relics of St Seraphim of Sarov, and other holy objects, but it is not the headquarters of ROCOR.

Moss Beach is located in Northern California, and its one most expensive places in the USA.

There is an Icon of the Mother of God called "Icon of the Akhatist", which became very dark. According to a divine revelation, this happened because of the unbelief and the general impiety in the Motherland, Russia, and it will be restored when a spiritual regeneration in Russia occurs. So far, the Icon is still dark, there is no spiritual regeneration in Russia, the state propaganda of the "Resurrection of Russia" is just one of its many lies and falsehood, to allure people and control them.

The headquarters of ROCOR presided now by Ab Vladimir, are in Quebec, Canada.

When exactly did the Icon become black?
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 LBK

  • No Reporting Allowed
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,602
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!
  • Faith: Orthodox
Probably about a century after the icon was painted. Olifa varnish naturally darkens with age.
Am I posting? Or is it Schroedinger's Cat?

Offline ms.hoorah

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 866
This site below states that Archbishop Vladimir (ROCiE) was tossed from his cathedral/diocese on the West Coast and now must live on the East Coast. (?) 

http://www.trueorthodoxy.org/schismatics_rocor_v_why_uncanonical.shtml

Offline IPC

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 308
Dear ialmisry,

This happened in Great Lent, 1925. The dark Icon of the Mother of God "of the Akathist" was renewed by the power of God, and became as if it was a new icon in the hands of Igumenya Rufina, she held it and told everyone "look, look, a miracle is taking place, right now". Father N... was asked to serve a special service (moleben) before the renewed icon, but he as many persons, did not believe in the miracle, he couldn't believe the icon had been all dark before, and the icon became dark again in front of many. Igumenya Rufina told everyone that the icon darkened again because of the sudden emergence of unbelief in their mist, and that it will be once again renewed when a spiritual renovation happened in Russia.




« Last Edit: January 11, 2010, 08:57:01 PM by IPC »
THIS USER USED THE SCREEN NAME PRAVOSLAV09 BEFORE.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Dear ialmisry,

This happened in Great Lent, 1925. The dark Icon of the Mother of God "of the Akathist" was renewed by the power of God, and became as if it was a new icon in the hands of Igumenya Rufina, she held it and told everyone "look, look, a miracle is taking place, right now". Father N... was asked to serve a special service (moleben) before the renewed icon, but he as many persons, did not believe in the miracle, he couldn't believe the icon had been all dark before, and the icon became dark again in front of many. Igumenya Rufina told everyone that the icon darkened again because of the sudden emergence of unbelief in their mist, and that it will be once again renewed when a spiritual renovation happened in Russia.

The above is plagiarised from

http://www.stvladimirs.ca/library/abbess-rufina.html


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
Dear ialmisry,

This happened in Great Lent, 1925. The dark Icon of the Mother of God "of the Akathist" was renewed by the power of God, and became as if it was a new icon in the hands of Igumenya Rufina, she held it and told everyone "look, look, a miracle is taking place, right now". Father N... was asked to serve a special service (moleben) before the renewed icon, but he as many persons, did not believe in the miracle, he couldn't believe the icon had been all dark before, and the icon became dark again in front of many. Igumenya Rufina told everyone that the icon darkened again because of the sudden emergence of unbelief in their mist, and that it will be once again renewed when a spiritual renovation happened in Russia.

The above is plagiarised from

http://www.stvladimirs.ca/library/abbess-rufina.html
IPC,

Irish Hermit is correct that what you posted, if you borrowed it from another source, is indeed plagiarism.  Changing the words and sentence structures to make the work look like your own is not enough.  If the information you post is information you gleaned from another source, you must give credit to your source.


A Formal Definition of Plagiarism from http://www.plagiarism.org/plag_article_what_is_plagiarism.html:
Quote
All of the following are considered plagiarism:

    * turning in someone else's work as your own
    * copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
    * failing to put a quotation in quotation marks
    * giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation
    * changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
    * copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not (see our section on "fair use" rules)

Since Irish Hermit already confronted your action and posted a link to the most likely source of your material, I don't suppose it's possible anymore to ask you for this information, unless, of course, you copied your ideas from somewhere else.  This is also quite likely the first time you may have seen this definition of plagiarism--it's the first time I have--so I'll grant you the benefit of the doubt that you may have been acting in ignorance.  However, you will no longer be able to cite ignorance as an excuse on this matter, since you are now being warned of your responsibility to credit your sources.  Whenever you copy words or ideas from another source, the admins and moderators at OC.net require you to give credit to your source--most often by posting a link to it.  Failure to comply with this directive in the future will result in steep sanctions (i.e., public warnings, post moderation, muting, or banning) for plagiarism.

If you have any questions about our plagiarism policy and/or what counts as plagiarism, please feel free to PM them at any time to me, Fr. George, Veniamin, or Fr. Chris.  Thank you.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2010, 05:06:20 PM by PeterTheAleut »
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline IPC

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 308
Dear Peter,

This is a very notorious event of public domain, and no one has the right to copyright it and claim it as its own.

The kiprianists who publish that information on the above quoted site, do not have the right to copyright the story and post it as their own intellectual property.

I did not copy anything, I told the story as I know it, as it was told to me in real life, in the Monastery, when it was located in San Francisco, California USA.

I could also tell the story of many things happening in the Church, like the miracle working icon of Iveron of Montreal, as was told to me, and just because it appears published by someone on the net, it does not mean anything.

Don't let IH mislead and fool you. I'm well versed in copyright law, and I assure you there is no violation in my posts. So both me, and the forum are legally protected in this respect. None of my posts have legal consequences.

If anyone for some reason received any text that has copyright by e-mail, it's sufficient to say he received it via viral e-mail.

What constitutes plagiarism is when someone deliberately takes a text, and puts it under his name, and makes money with it. How can this occur in an anonymous net communication?

We're all safe here in this respect, don't worry.




« Last Edit: January 12, 2010, 06:34:58 PM by IPC »
THIS USER USED THE SCREEN NAME PRAVOSLAV09 BEFORE.

Offline Irish Hermit

  • Kibernetski Kaludjer
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 10,980
  • Holy Father Patrick, pray for us
Poor laddie!   You can stop quaking in your boots.  :laugh:  You have not been anathematized!   Here is the Anathema and you can see that your fears are unfounded.  It mentions no condemnation of reaching out to separated brethren.  It's only about anathematizing the Branch Theory (From your words I assume that Constantinople holds this Theory or the related Lung Theory?)


Dear George, I was greatly heartened to come upon your message on "Branchism" as a heresy and to see that you hold the same position as the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church (Abroad.)

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,9862.msg133377.html#msg133377

-oOo-
Quote
The Anathema of 1983:

"Those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christ's Church
is divided into so-called "branches" which differ in doctrine and way of life,
or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future
when all "branches" or sects or denominations, and even religions will be
 united into one body; and who do not distinguish the priesthood and
mysteries of the Church from those of the heretics, but say that the
baptism and eucharist of heretics is effectual for salvation;
therefore, to those who knowingly have communion with these
aforementioned heretics or who advocate, disseminate, or defend their
new heresy of Ecumenism under the pretext of brotherly love or the s
upposed unification of separated Christians, Anathema!"

And here on this Moscow site you may read that ther 2000 Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church issued a statement consonant with ROCA's.

Moscow's Statement 2000:

2.5. The so-called “branch theory”, which is connected with the conception
referred to above and asserts the normal and even providential nature of
Christianity existing in the form of particular “branches”, is also totally unacceptable.

http://www.mospat.ru/en/documents/attitude-to-the-non-orthodox/ii/


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
Dear Peter,

This is a very notorious event of public domain, and no one has the right to copyright it and claim it as its own.

The kiprianists who publish that information on the above quoted site, do not have the right to copyright the story and post it as their own intellectual property.

I did not copy anything, I told the story as I know it, as it was told to me in real life, in the Monastery, when it was located in San Francisco, California USA.

I could also tell the story of many things happening in the Church, like the miracle working icon of Iveron of Montreal, as was told to me, and just because it appears published by someone on the net, it does not mean anything.

Don't let IH mislead and fool you. I'm well versed in copyright law, and I assure you there is no violation in my posts. So both me, and the forum are legally protected in this respect. None of my posts have legal consequences.

If anyone for some reason received any text that has copyright by e-mail, it's sufficient to say he received it via viral e-mail.

What constitutes plagiarism is when someone deliberately takes a text, and puts it under his name, and makes money with it. How can this occur in an anonymous net communication?

We're all safe here in this respect, don't worry.
Regardless of what you may think about my understanding of plagiarism, you do realize that you are arguing publicly with a moderatorial directive, something for which you have received very strict sanctions in the recent past?  So, why did you not take this up with me in a private message as I asked?  (Don't answer me here on this thread.)
« Last Edit: January 13, 2010, 03:53:20 PM by PeterTheAleut »
Not all who wander are lost.