OrthodoxChristianity.net
October 23, 2014, 05:48:28 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Russian Orthodox church Not spreading the faith  (Read 7527 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #90 on: March 13, 2012, 01:02:59 PM »

I hope the above is genuinely indicative of a rebirth of piety. Of course, even if true, there would still be the problem of the dubious dogmatic positions of the official Russian Church vis-a-vis their continued membership of the WCC, or their refusal to completely and explicitly repudiate the declaration of Met Sergius and its spiritual legacy of obedience to atheist communism.
Your problem, not the PoM/ROC's.

IIRC, we've gone over this. Atheist communism was sponsored by  the spiritual legacy of obedience to Czar Peter's "Spiritual Regulation."  Have you repudiated that?

After all, one can find evidence of increase in piety and evangelization among heterodox groups: look at the spread of the Catholic and various Protestant churches in Africa. Does that mean those groups possess the truth, because we can see them winning over souls? I interpret all these phenomena as laying the foundations for a potential return to true Orthodoxy on the part of all these people, whether in Russia, Africa or elsewhere. We can't mistake the foundations for the actual return to the truth, but we can hope it will lead there.
and what are we to make that while World Orthodoxy continues to unify, "True Orthodoxy" continues to splinter?
Logged

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
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,239


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #91 on: March 13, 2012, 01:48:54 PM »

I hope the above is genuinely indicative of a rebirth of piety. Of course, even if true, there would still be the problem of the dubious dogmatic positions of the official Russian Church vis-a-vis their continued membership of the WCC, or their refusal to completely and explicitly repudiate the declaration of Met Sergius and its spiritual legacy of obedience to atheist communism.
Your problem, not the PoM/ROC's.

IIRC, we've gone over this. Atheist communism was sponsored by  the spiritual legacy of obedience to Czar Peter's "Spiritual Regulation."  Have you repudiated that?

After all, one can find evidence of increase in piety and evangelization among heterodox groups: look at the spread of the Catholic and various Protestant churches in Africa. Does that mean those groups possess the truth, because we can see them winning over souls? I interpret all these phenomena as laying the foundations for a potential return to true Orthodoxy on the part of all these people, whether in Russia, Africa or elsewhere. We can't mistake the foundations for the actual return to the truth, but we can hope it will lead there.
and what are we to make that while World Orthodoxy continues to unify, "True Orthodoxy" continues to splinter?

Is the MP still a part of the WCC?

Could the formation of a world-wide New Order Church be part of the WCC/MP agenda?
Does the MP still consider itself to be the Third Rome (replacing the EP)?

What about that recently published novel [2011]: Russian Sunrise by Bruce W. Walters, M.D., which urges the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary? This novel is a blueprint for Russia to lead the way toward unity with Rome, and just after that publication, the MP apparently re-established rapport with the Vatican.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,934


« Reply #92 on: March 13, 2012, 02:06:25 PM »

I hope the above is genuinely indicative of a rebirth of piety. Of course, even if true, there would still be the problem of the dubious dogmatic positions of the official Russian Church vis-a-vis their continued membership of the WCC,

Please explain what is dubious about the position of the Russian Orthodox Church on the Non-Orthodox:

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

What is unclear here about this official rejection of the “Branch Theory” by the Russian Orthodox Church?:
Quote
2.3. Nevertheless, while recognizing the need to restore our broken Christian unity, the Orthodox Church asserts that genuine unity is possible only in the bosom of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. All other “models” of unity seem to us to be unacceptable.

2.4. The Orthodox Church cannot accept the assumption that despite the historical divisions, the fundamental and profound unity of Christians has not been broken and that the Church should be understood as coextensive with the entire “Christian world”, that Christian unity exists across denominational barriers and that the disunity of the churches belongs exclusively to the imperfect level of human relations. According to this conception, the Church remains one, but this oneness is not, as it were, sufficiently manifest in visible form. In this model of unity, the task of Christians is understood not as the restoration of a lost unity but as the manifestation of an existing unity. This model repeats the teaching on “the invisible Church” which appeared during the Reformation.

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.

2.6. Orthodoxy cannot accept that Christian divisions are caused by the inevitable imperfections of Christian history and that they exist only on the historical surface and can be healed or overcome by compromises between denominations.

2.7. The Orthodox Church cannot recognize “the equality of the denominations”. Those who have fallen away from the Church cannot re-unite with her in their present state. The existing dogmatic differences should be overcome, not simply bypassed, and this means that the way to unity lies through repentance, conversion and renewal.

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

Above is just a brief excerpt, but please read beyond this and tell us what is dogmatically incorrect about this statement. 

Then tell us what you find objectionable about the ROC’s rejection of joint prayer with the non-Orthodox:
Quote
Moscow, May 12, Interfax - The Russian Church has once again reassured that it thinks impossible for the Orthodox believers to conduct services together with members of other Christian confessions.

"We would like once again to confirm our intention to refrain from participating in communal prayers with unorthodox believers," said a member of the secretary for interchristian relations of the Moscow Patriarchate Department for External Church Relations Priest Alexander Vasyutin to Interfax-Religion.
http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=4661

In 2006, before being elected Patriarch, Met Kirill clearly explained why the ROC believed it necessary to continue as members of the WCC.  Among other things, Met Kirill stated that if Christendom does not hear the voice of the Russian Church ‘it will hear other voices’, and I’m sure you will agree that it is best if Constantinople is not left as the sole voice of Orthodoxy at such a venue.  It is not membership in the WCC that is inherently problematic, but what one does in this capacity.  If there are no joint prayers, and no compromises in matters of faith, then there are no “dubious dogmatic positions”. 

See Met Kirill’s comments here:
http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=1914

See also the comments from Fr. Alexander Lebedeff (ROCOR) acknowledging the ROC’s reasons for continuing their involvement in the WCC:

http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=2971

or their refusal to completely and explicitly repudiate the declaration of Met Sergius and its spiritual legacy of obedience to atheist communism.

Even as early as 1990, the Synod of the Moscow Patriarch stated:
Quote
“We do not at all feel bound by the Declaration of 1927, which remains
for us a marker of that tragic epoch in the history of our Fatherland.
We do not at all idealize this document, recognizing also its coerced
nature. “

Patriarch Alexis II then stated in 1991:
Quote
"The Declaration of Metropolitan Sergius, of course, cannot be
considered voluntary, for, while sustaining terrible pressure, he was
to state things that were far from the truth in order to save people's
lives. Today we can say that there are lies mixed into his
Declaration. The Declaration does not place the Church into a correct
relationship with the state, in fact, the opposite, it destroys the
distance that in a democratic society, must exist between Church and
state."

So, we see that even in 1990, the Moscow Patriarchate spoke of the
1927 Declaration and the period under Communism as “that tragic epoch
in the history of our Fatherland”.  They did not praise Met Sergius
for his Declaration, but recognized it as the result of coercion and
in no way expressing the free and authentic voice of the Russian
Orthodox Church.

Also in 1991, Patriach Alexis II said the following regarding this
“tragic epoch” in an interview published in "Izvestia" (No 137, June
10):
Quote
"Being a person of the Church, I must take on myself responsibility
for all that occurred in the life of my Church: not only for the good,
but also for the difficult, the sorrowful, the erroneous."

"Today we can say that falsehood is interspersed in [Met Sergius']
Declaration, which stated as its goal 'placing the Church into proper
relations with the Soviet government.' But these relations--and in the
Declaration they are clearly defined as the submission of the Church
to the interests of governmental politics--are exactly those which are
incorrect from the point of view of the Church."

In the same interview, regarding the statements and activities of the
Moscow Patriarchate duringthe time of subjection to the atheist regime,
Patriarch Alexis II confessed:
Quote
"Of people, then, to whom these compromises, silence, forced passivity
or expressions of loyalty that were permitted by the Church leadership
in those days, have caused pain -- of these people, not only before
God, but also before them, I ask forgiveness, understanding, and
prayers."


After the enthronement of Patriarch Alexis II, he got down on his
knees at the first Forgiveness Vespers after his enthronement at the
beginning of Great Lent and asked forgiveness for sins committed
during the Soviet period.

In 1995 (as recorded in the periodical “Alive in Christ”) Patriarch
Alexis II announced at the laying of the cornerstone for Christ the
Savior Cathedral, which was built to atone for the sins of the Russian
people in turning away from God:
Quote
"Having rebelled against God, condemned the sacred memory of our
ancestors, and without the least scruples of conscience destroyed the
labors of the best sons and daughters of our people, we have covered
Russian history with the stain of terrible iniquity.  This stain
weighs on our conscience, and casts a pall on the spiritual life of
our society."

At the laying of the cornerstone of the same Cathedral, Moscow's mayor
Yuri Luzhkov added:
Quote
"Let the reconstruction of the main cathedral stand as symbolic proof
of hundreds of destroyed churches and millions of lost lives".

In 2004, Met Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad (now Patriarch
Kirill), who at that time was the chairman of the Dept for External
Relations, stated the following in a formal report to the Holy Synod
of the MP concerning dialogue with ROCOR and the 2000 document “The
Basic Social Concept”:
Quote
“[Our] Church freely and without any coercion has described the norms
of church-state relations, founded upon the word of God and the
witness of many centuries of Church Tradition, including, in part, the
experience of the New Martyrs garnered by the Church in the era of
persecution at the hands of the totalitarian godless regime. Many
spoke of the historical significance of the 'Basic Social Concept of
the Russian Orthodox Church' when this document was first adopted by
the 2000 Millennial Hierarchal Synod. Later it became clear: the
significance of the 'Basic Social Concept' is also in that this
expression of the Church's teachings opened new opportunities for
rapprochement with the Church Abroad. "The Church", states the third
chapter of the document, "preserves loyalty to the state, but above
that requirement of loyalty is the law of God. If the state forces
Orthodox believers to apostasize from Christ and His Church and also
towards sinful acts detrimental to the soul, the Church must refuse
obedience to the state."

“The free voice of the Church, heard especially clearly in this
Conciliar document, gives us the opportunity to see the 'Declaration'
in a new light. While completely understanding that the path of
relations with the state chosen in 1927 was based on the desire to
preserve the possibility of the legal existence of the Church, the
Hierarchal Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church decreed that this
course did not accord with the true norms of church-state relations.
The epoch of the imprisonment of the Church has come to an end. In
this way, the problem in our relations with the Church Abroad—which
lasted for many years— as for all intents and purposes removed. This
was essentially recognized by the Hierarchal Synod of the Russian
Orthodox Church Outside of Russia in 2000. During the recent talks, it
became very clear that the chapter 'Church and State' in the 'Basic
Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church' is seen by both sides
as a faithful reflection of church teachings. Declarations
contradicting these norms, made by the church authorities on both
sides made in the past, under external conditions that were extremely
inhospitable to the Church, cannot in any way be seen by us as actions
having any validity for the Church.

Does the above not repudiate “Sergianism”?  Does the glorification of the New Martyrs and Confessors, the 2000 document on Church and State relations, the declaration of the Soviet period as a “tragic epoch” in the life of the Church, and the dismissal of the 1927 Declaration of Met Sergius not constitute a “repudiation” of Sergianism?


In 2006, prior to the reunification, Fr. Andrew Phillips of ROCOR had
this to say regarding the repentance of the MP:
Quote
"Thirdly, we shall always rejoice when members of the Moscow
Patriarchate venerate icons of the New Martyrs, when they celebrate
our services to the New Martyrs, when they dedicate churches to them.
Our hearts rejoice when we see tears of repentance, running down our
own faces, faces in the Moscow Patriarchate, everywhere. In his last
sermon, like a Testament to the whole of the Russian Diaspora, the
great Metropolitan Antony expressed the thought that: `Only tears of
repentance can return our crucified homeland to us' (Letters of
Metropolitan Antony, Jordanville 1988, p.124). How can we not rejoice,
when Saul becomes Paul, when former persecutors become zealous for the
Faith?"

http://www.orthodoxengland.btinternet.co.uk/atcouncil.htm

Also prior to the reunification of ROCOR and the MP, Fr. Andrew said
the following regarding the work of the joint commissions that were
established to discuss obstacles to reunification:
Quote
"Yesterday's publication of documents detailing the agreements on
former points of discord between the Moscow Patriarchate and the
Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) is a historic event. It
reflects the repentance of those who only ten years ago still rejected
and even scorned the central positions of the Church Outside Russia on
the New Martyrs and Confessors, Sergianism and Ecumenism.  It reflects
the will of the Patriarchate to reunite with the historic path of
Truth of the whole Russian Church, faithfully adhered to by ROCOR, and
the will of ROCOR to recognize this. It now remains for all concerned
to agree on the Act on Canonical Communion in 2006."

http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/triumph.htm

The above quote is taken from Fr. Andrew’s article entitled “The
Triumph of Repentance and the
Vindication of Church Truth".  In an article entitled "THERE IS NO
VICTORY WITHOUT REPENTANCE", Fr. Andrew writes concerning the
reunification:
Quote
"The recent events in Moscow mark the triumph of Orthodoxy. However,
we should not think that they mark the triumph of Orthodox, rather
they mark the triumph of the repentance of Orthodox. For there is no
triumph of Orthodoxy without the repentance of Orthodox, no victory
without repentance. Only the mystery of repentance brings victory over
sin.

"We cannot but help remember the situation of the Russian Orthodox
Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) and the Russian Orthodox Church inside
Russia (MP), even only two or three years ago. Then, as ever, the
Church Outside Russia was a persecuted and despised minority, living
in poverty and isolation.  Further back, when the New Martyrs and
Confessors were canonized in 1981, we recall how we were vilified in
the world media, whether Orthodox or secular.

"All those self-created enemies of ROCOR, if not now passed on, have
now repented or are repenting for their past attitudes towards us.
Even those modernists who, flown in from the West, only last January
were lobbying in Moscow against our common unity, are having to
rethink their positions, as their houses, founded on sand, are washed
away from beneath them by the floodwaters of repentance. Our ROCOR
positions on dying Ecumenism, on dying Renovationism and on dead
Sergianism, have now been adopted all through the Patriarchal Church
and are listened to widely in other Local Churches. Only those who are
prisoners of the past even think about such death-bringing matters."

http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/wrepent.htm

The last sentence above is of particular significance for those who
have rejected the reunification. Fr. Andrew fully accepted the
reunification and sees it for what it is, the fruit of the repentance
of the MP for the compromises of the Soviet era, the most important
expression of which was the glorification of the New Martyrs and
Confessors.

For those who rejected this reunification and continue to speak against the MP,
Fr. Andrew offered the following words in the same article:
Quote
"To those few individuals who could not repent for their
quasi-Protestant, sectarian attitudes, who did not want to see the
unity of the Russian Church and in 2006 left the Patriarchate of
Moscow for the Patriarchate of Constantinople, or in 2007 left ROCOR
for some sect or other, we say, you are welcome to return.  We all
make mistakes. The doors are not shut to you to return. Indeed, we
shall rejoice together with you, if you do so.

"Once past the initial euphoria of your decision to leave, the
euphoria that is always created in little groups when you break away,
you may wish to return.  After the self-congratulatory excitement of
defensive self-justification, you will feel depressed, isolated and
abandoned in your sects. This is the normal psychological process,
created by the evil one, who casts us from one emotional extreme to
another, from euphoria to despondency. When that time comes, remember
these words, and remember that you are welcome to return. Your return
is your act of repentance and, automatically, our act of mutual
forgiveness for anything that was done or said in the past."

The fact is, the Russian Orthodox Church has officially repudiated syncretistic and heretical Ecumenism, has repudiated Sergianism; has glorified the New Martyrs and Confessors; and has dedicated much blood, sweat, money, and tears to the strengthening of the faith in Russia.  It is unfortunate that there are still some who have never experienced church life in Russia under Soviet times, who have never experienced persecution, who have no understanding of what the hierarchs and clergy endured to spread the faith under these circumstances or to what extent there was any “compromise” – it is unfortunate to see such people reject hundreds of bishops in Russia and all who are under their care even while the entire Orthodox world recognizes them as Orthodox and true hierarchs of the Church.       
« Last Edit: March 13, 2012, 02:14:07 PM by jah777 » Logged
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,475


« Reply #93 on: March 13, 2012, 02:26:06 PM »


They declare themselves as "MP parishioners" who stopped commemorating heretical bishops like Patriarch Cyrill". I have no idea what that means and I doubt they know. Such groups ususally do not clearly state their affiliation because they spread info from many, sometimes inconsistent, sources.

OK, well if they are self-avowed MP parishioners, they do not identify with the True Orthodox, so they aren't representative. It sounds like they may be involved with the Diomid schism. Contrast them with the website of the RTOC that I linked to earlier. They are not afraid to be forthcoming about their history and origins.

Quote

Each and every "true Orthodox" (isn't that a tautology?) websites tend to write things about passports, Jews, masons, false greenhouse effect, world government etc.


No more tautologous than "Orthodox Christian". If you are a true Christian, you by definition have the true faith, and therefore the label "Orthodox" is superfluous. Of course, in practicality it's not superfluous, because the existence of heretics who call themselves "Christian" necessitates the label Orthodox to distinguish the right-believing Christians. Likewise, the existence of those who call themselves Orthodox, even if they espouse ecumenism or sergianism, necessitates the label "True" to distinguish those Orthodox who reject ecumenism and sergianism.

And (again) I challenge your assertion that "every" website writes these things. Not that I'm expecting you ever to back up your libels with evidence.

Quote

Don't you find it suspicious?

No. Do you reject the New Calendar Church because Elder Paisios made false prophesies?
Logged
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,475


« Reply #94 on: March 13, 2012, 02:31:25 PM »

I hope the above is genuinely indicative of a rebirth of piety. Of course, even if true, there would still be the problem of the dubious dogmatic positions of the official Russian Church vis-a-vis their continued membership of the WCC, or their refusal to completely and explicitly repudiate the declaration of Met Sergius and its spiritual legacy of obedience to atheist communism.
Your problem, not the PoM/ROC's.

IIRC, we've gone over this. Atheist communism was sponsored by  the spiritual legacy of obedience to Czar Peter's "Spiritual Regulation."  Have you repudiated that?

After all, one can find evidence of increase in piety and evangelization among heterodox groups: look at the spread of the Catholic and various Protestant churches in Africa. Does that mean those groups possess the truth, because we can see them winning over souls? I interpret all these phenomena as laying the foundations for a potential return to true Orthodoxy on the part of all these people, whether in Russia, Africa or elsewhere. We can't mistake the foundations for the actual return to the truth, but we can hope it will lead there.
and what are we to make that while World Orthodoxy continues to unify, "True Orthodoxy" continues to splinter?

Maybe we did go over it. Tsar Peter's spiritual regulation was canonically egregious; it did not touch on matters of faith. The declaration of Sergius did. And yes, the spiritual regulation was abrogated by the restoration of the Patriarchate in 1917.

True Orthodoxy continues to splinter? Hm, well a year ago HOTCA was confined to the eastern US, but now we have bishops across the whole country, owing the unification with Met Moses of Portland. But sure, you can call that splintering.

World Orthodox continues to unify? Last time I checked, the MP and the EP were still bickering over Estonia, and the Serbs still don't recognize Macedonian autocephaly.
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #95 on: March 13, 2012, 02:38:58 PM »

and the Serbs still don't recognize Macedonian autocephaly.

No on e recognises them. Maybe your Church should consider it?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #96 on: March 13, 2012, 02:39:53 PM »

I hope the above is genuinely indicative of a rebirth of piety. Of course, even if true, there would still be the problem of the dubious dogmatic positions of the official Russian Church vis-a-vis their continued membership of the WCC, or their refusal to completely and explicitly repudiate the declaration of Met Sergius and its spiritual legacy of obedience to atheist communism.
Your problem, not the PoM/ROC's.

IIRC, we've gone over this. Atheist communism was sponsored by  the spiritual legacy of obedience to Czar Peter's "Spiritual Regulation."  Have you repudiated that?

After all, one can find evidence of increase in piety and evangelization among heterodox groups: look at the spread of the Catholic and various Protestant churches in Africa. Does that mean those groups possess the truth, because we can see them winning over souls? I interpret all these phenomena as laying the foundations for a potential return to true Orthodoxy on the part of all these people, whether in Russia, Africa or elsewhere. We can't mistake the foundations for the actual return to the truth, but we can hope it will lead there.
and what are we to make that while World Orthodoxy continues to unify, "True Orthodoxy" continues to splinter?

Is the MP still a part of the WCC?
That is relevant to Jonathan Gress's questions, not mine.

Could the formation of a world-wide New Order Church be part of the WCC/MP agenda?
Since the MP does not share an agenda with the WCC, no.
Does the MP still consider itself to be the Third Rome (replacing the EP)?
Probably, but then the EP keeps on calling itself the EP.  What was your point?

What about that recently published novel [2011]: Russian Sunrise by Bruce W. Walters, M.D., which urges the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary? This novel is a blueprint for Russia to lead the way toward unity with Rome, and just after that publication, the MP apparently re-established rapport with the Vatican.
Bruce W. Walters.  Hmmmm.  doesn't sound Russian.

The EP is WAY ahead of the MP in any "re-established rapport."
Logged

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
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,475


« Reply #97 on: March 13, 2012, 02:41:29 PM »

I hope the above is genuinely indicative of a rebirth of piety. Of course, even if true, there would still be the problem of the dubious dogmatic positions of the official Russian Church vis-a-vis their continued membership of the WCC,

Please explain what is dubious about the position of the Russian Orthodox Church on the Non-Orthodox:

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

What is unclear here about this official rejection of the “Branch Theory” by the Russian Orthodox Church?:
Quote
2.3. Nevertheless, while recognizing the need to restore our broken Christian unity, the Orthodox Church asserts that genuine unity is possible only in the bosom of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. All other “models” of unity seem to us to be unacceptable.

2.4. The Orthodox Church cannot accept the assumption that despite the historical divisions, the fundamental and profound unity of Christians has not been broken and that the Church should be understood as coextensive with the entire “Christian world”, that Christian unity exists across denominational barriers and that the disunity of the churches belongs exclusively to the imperfect level of human relations. According to this conception, the Church remains one, but this oneness is not, as it were, sufficiently manifest in visible form. In this model of unity, the task of Christians is understood not as the restoration of a lost unity but as the manifestation of an existing unity. This model repeats the teaching on “the invisible Church” which appeared during the Reformation.

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.

2.6. Orthodoxy cannot accept that Christian divisions are caused by the inevitable imperfections of Christian history and that they exist only on the historical surface and can be healed or overcome by compromises between denominations.

2.7. The Orthodox Church cannot recognize “the equality of the denominations”. Those who have fallen away from the Church cannot re-unite with her in their present state. The existing dogmatic differences should be overcome, not simply bypassed, and this means that the way to unity lies through repentance, conversion and renewal.

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

Above is just a brief excerpt, but please read beyond this and tell us what is dogmatically incorrect about this statement. 

Then tell us what you find objectionable about the ROC’s rejection of joint prayer with the non-Orthodox:
Quote
Moscow, May 12, Interfax - The Russian Church has once again reassured that it thinks impossible for the Orthodox believers to conduct services together with members of other Christian confessions.

"We would like once again to confirm our intention to refrain from participating in communal prayers with unorthodox believers," said a member of the secretary for interchristian relations of the Moscow Patriarchate Department for External Church Relations Priest Alexander Vasyutin to Interfax-Religion.
http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=4661

In 2006, before being elected Patriarch, Met Kirill clearly explained why the ROC believed it necessary to continue as members of the WCC.  Among other things, Met Kirill stated that if Christendom does not hear the voice of the Russian Church ‘it will hear other voices’, and I’m sure you will agree that it is best if Constantinople is not left as the sole voice of Orthodoxy at such a venue.  It is not membership in the WCC that is inherently problematic, but what one does in this capacity.  If there are no joint prayers, and no compromises in matters of faith, then there are no “dubious dogmatic positions”. 

See Met Kirill’s comments here:
http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=1914

See also the comments from Fr. Alexander Lebedeff (ROCOR) acknowledging the ROC’s reasons for continuing their involvement in the WCC:

http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=2971

or their refusal to completely and explicitly repudiate the declaration of Met Sergius and its spiritual legacy of obedience to atheist communism.

Even as early as 1990, the Synod of the Moscow Patriarch stated:
Quote
“We do not at all feel bound by the Declaration of 1927, which remains
for us a marker of that tragic epoch in the history of our Fatherland.
We do not at all idealize this document, recognizing also its coerced
nature. “

Patriarch Alexis II then stated in 1991:
Quote
"The Declaration of Metropolitan Sergius, of course, cannot be
considered voluntary, for, while sustaining terrible pressure, he was
to state things that were far from the truth in order to save people's
lives. Today we can say that there are lies mixed into his
Declaration. The Declaration does not place the Church into a correct
relationship with the state, in fact, the opposite, it destroys the
distance that in a democratic society, must exist between Church and
state."

So, we see that even in 1990, the Moscow Patriarchate spoke of the
1927 Declaration and the period under Communism as “that tragic epoch
in the history of our Fatherland”.  They did not praise Met Sergius
for his Declaration, but recognized it as the result of coercion and
in no way expressing the free and authentic voice of the Russian
Orthodox Church.

Also in 1991, Patriach Alexis II said the following regarding this
“tragic epoch” in an interview published in "Izvestia" (No 137, June
10):
Quote
"Being a person of the Church, I must take on myself responsibility
for all that occurred in the life of my Church: not only for the good,
but also for the difficult, the sorrowful, the erroneous."

"Today we can say that falsehood is interspersed in [Met Sergius']
Declaration, which stated as its goal 'placing the Church into proper
relations with the Soviet government.' But these relations--and in the
Declaration they are clearly defined as the submission of the Church
to the interests of governmental politics--are exactly those which are
incorrect from the point of view of the Church."

In the same interview, regarding the statements and activities of the
Moscow Patriarchate duringthe time of subjection to the atheist regime,
Patriarch Alexis II confessed:
Quote
"Of people, then, to whom these compromises, silence, forced passivity
or expressions of loyalty that were permitted by the Church leadership
in those days, have caused pain -- of these people, not only before
God, but also before them, I ask forgiveness, understanding, and
prayers."


After the enthronement of Patriarch Alexis II, he got down on his
knees at the first Forgiveness Vespers after his enthronement at the
beginning of Great Lent and asked forgiveness for sins committed
during the Soviet period.

In 1995 (as recorded in the periodical “Alive in Christ”) Patriarch
Alexis II announced at the laying of the cornerstone for Christ the
Savior Cathedral, which was built to atone for the sins of the Russian
people in turning away from God:
Quote
"Having rebelled against God, condemned the sacred memory of our
ancestors, and without the least scruples of conscience destroyed the
labors of the best sons and daughters of our people, we have covered
Russian history with the stain of terrible iniquity.  This stain
weighs on our conscience, and casts a pall on the spiritual life of
our society."

At the laying of the cornerstone of the same Cathedral, Moscow's mayor
Yuri Luzhkov added:
Quote
"Let the reconstruction of the main cathedral stand as symbolic proof
of hundreds of destroyed churches and millions of lost lives".

In 2004, Met Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad (now Patriarch
Kirill), who at that time was the chairman of the Dept for External
Relations, stated the following in a formal report to the Holy Synod
of the MP concerning dialogue with ROCOR and the 2000 document “The
Basic Social Concept”:
Quote

Does the above not repudiate “Sergianism”?  Does the glorification of the New Martyrs and Confessors, the 2000 document on Church and State relations, the declaration of the Soviet period as a “tragic epoch” in the life of the Church, and the dismissal of the 1927 Declaration of Met Sergius not constitute a “repudiation” of Sergianism?


In 2006, prior to the reunification, Fr. Andrew Phillips of ROCOR had
this to say regarding the repentance of the MP:
Quote
"Thirdly, we shall always rejoice when members of the Moscow
Patriarchate venerate icons of the New Martyrs, when they celebrate
our services to the New Martyrs, when they dedicate churches to them.
Our hearts rejoice when we see tears of repentance, running down our
own faces, faces in the Moscow Patriarchate, everywhere. In his last
sermon, like a Testament to the whole of the Russian Diaspora, the
great Metropolitan Antony expressed the thought that: `Only tears of
repentance can return our crucified homeland to us' (Letters of
Metropolitan Antony, Jordanville 1988, p.124). How can we not rejoice,
when Saul becomes Paul, when former persecutors become zealous for the
Faith?"

http://www.orthodoxengland.btinternet.co.uk/atcouncil.htm

Also prior to the reunification of ROCOR and the MP, Fr. Andrew said
the following regarding the work of the joint commissions that were
established to discuss obstacles to reunification:
Quote
"Yesterday's publication of documents detailing the agreements on
former points of discord between the Moscow Patriarchate and the
Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) is a historic event. It
reflects the repentance of those who only ten years ago still rejected
and even scorned the central positions of the Church Outside Russia on
the New Martyrs and Confessors, Sergianism and Ecumenism.  It reflects
the will of the Patriarchate to reunite with the historic path of
Truth of the whole Russian Church, faithfully adhered to by ROCOR, and
the will of ROCOR to recognize this. It now remains for all concerned
to agree on the Act on Canonical Communion in 2006."

http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/triumph.htm

The above quote is taken from Fr. Andrew’s article entitled “The
Triumph of Repentance and the
Vindication of Church Truth".  In an article entitled "THERE IS NO
VICTORY WITHOUT REPENTANCE", Fr. Andrew writes concerning the
reunification:
Quote
"The recent events in Moscow mark the triumph of Orthodoxy. However,
we should not think that they mark the triumph of Orthodox, rather
they mark the triumph of the repentance of Orthodox. For there is no
triumph of Orthodoxy without the repentance of Orthodox, no victory
without repentance. Only the mystery of repentance brings victory over
sin.

"We cannot but help remember the situation of the Russian Orthodox
Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) and the Russian Orthodox Church inside
Russia (MP), even only two or three years ago. Then, as ever, the
Church Outside Russia was a persecuted and despised minority, living
in poverty and isolation.  Further back, when the New Martyrs and
Confessors were canonized in 1981, we recall how we were vilified in
the world media, whether Orthodox or secular.

"All those self-created enemies of ROCOR, if not now passed on, have
now repented or are repenting for their past attitudes towards us.
Even those modernists who, flown in from the West, only last January
were lobbying in Moscow against our common unity, are having to
rethink their positions, as their houses, founded on sand, are washed
away from beneath them by the floodwaters of repentance. Our ROCOR
positions on dying Ecumenism, on dying Renovationism and on dead
Sergianism, have now been adopted all through the Patriarchal Church
and are listened to widely in other Local Churches. Only those who are
prisoners of the past even think about such death-bringing matters."

http://www.orthodoxengland.org.uk/wrepent.htm

The last sentence above is of particular significance for those who
have rejected the reunification. Fr. Andrew fully accepted the
reunification and sees it for what it is, the fruit of the repentance
of the MP for the compromises of the Soviet era, the most important
expression of which was the glorification of the New Martyrs and
Confessors.

For those who rejected this reunification and continue to speak against the MP,
Fr. Andrew offered the following words in the same article:
Quote
"To those few individuals who could not repent for their
quasi-Protestant, sectarian attitudes, who did not want to see the
unity of the Russian Church and in 2006 left the Patriarchate of
Moscow for the Patriarchate of Constantinople, or in 2007 left ROCOR
for some sect or other, we say, you are welcome to return.  We all
make mistakes. The doors are not shut to you to return. Indeed, we
shall rejoice together with you, if you do so.

"Once past the initial euphoria of your decision to leave, the
euphoria that is always created in little groups when you break away,
you may wish to return.  After the self-congratulatory excitement of
defensive self-justification, you will feel depressed, isolated and
abandoned in your sects. This is the normal psychological process,
created by the evil one, who casts us from one emotional extreme to
another, from euphoria to despondency. When that time comes, remember
these words, and remember that you are welcome to return. Your return
is your act of repentance and, automatically, our act of mutual
forgiveness for anything that was done or said in the past."

The fact is, the Russian Orthodox Church has officially repudiated syncretistic and heretical Ecumenism, has repudiated Sergianism; has glorified the New Martyrs and Confessors; and has dedicated much blood, sweat, money, and tears to the strengthening of the faith in Russia.  It is unfortunate that there are still some who have never experienced church life in Russia under Soviet times, who have never experienced persecution, who have no understanding of what the hierarchs and clergy endured to spread the faith under these circumstances or to what extent there was any “compromise” – it is unfortunate to see such people reject hundreds of bishops in Russia and all who are under their care even while the entire Orthodox world recognizes them as Orthodox and true hierarchs of the Church.       

Where to begin? Firstly, the force of their "rejection" of ecumenism is blunted by their continued membership of the WCC. If they were serious about rejecting ecumenism, they would leave the WCC (like the Georgians did), it's as simple as that.

As for the lame argument that the MP "needs" to remain in the WCC to provide an "authentic" Christian voice, that's the same argument the EP and other founding members put forward when they first entered the WCC. But the Church for centuries has proclaimed the true faith without the WCC. And what evidence do you have that membership of the WCC has been in any way successful at bringing the heterodox over to Orthodoxy?

And they didn't reject ecumenism completely. They only rejected the "branch theory", which still leaves wiggle room if you want to accept other "theories" of ecumenism (there are a lot of them out there). But the fact is all "theories" of ecumenism are against Orthodoxy.

It's not enough to say half-heartedly that there are "lies" mixed in, or that the MP does not "idealize" the Declaration. Why can't they just say "the Declaration was false, we reject it without equivocation, we recognize the confession of those who rejected the Declaration as Orthodox"? Because that would invalidate their entire raison d'etre. The MP still honors Met Sergius' memory and still considers his actions to have been correct and to have "saved" the Church. That is just not true.

And many experienced persecution in Russia without accepting sergianism. They are called the Catacomb Church.
Logged
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,475


« Reply #98 on: March 13, 2012, 03:10:33 PM »

Just to clarify and support what I stated above about sergianism in the MP, here's a relevant quotation that Pat Kirill made, back when he was still Metropolitan of Kaliningrad, back in January 2005:

“We recognize that the model of Church-State
relations [in the Soviet period] did not correspond to tradition. But we are not
condemning those who realized this model, because there was no other way
of preserving the Church. The Church behaved in the only way she could at
that time. There was another path into the catacombs, but there could be no
catacombs in the Soviet space…”

http://vertograd-eng.blogspot.com/2005_02_01_archive.html

Or here:

“The aim of normalising the relationship with the authorities cannot
be interpreted as a betrayal of Church interests. It was adopted by the holy
Patriarch Tikhon, and was also expressed in the so-called ‘Epistle of the
Solovki Bishops’ in 1926, that is, one year before the publication of ‘The
Epistle of the deputy patriarchal locum tenens and temporary patriarchal
Synod’. The essence of the changes in the position of the hierarchy consisted
in the fact that the Church, having refused to recognise the legitimacy of the
new power established after the October revolution in 1917, as the power
became stronger later, had to recognise it as a state power and establish
bilateral relations with it. This position is not blameworthy; historically, the
Church has more than once found herself in a situation in which it has had to
cooperate with non-orthodox rulers (for instance, in the period of the Golden
Horde or the Muslim Ottoman Empire).”

That last is from Moscow Church Herald, nos 14-15, pp 243-4.

Maybe the MP rejects Sergianism one moment, and justifies it the next. But can such equivocation be mistaken for an unwavering and constant confession of the truth? Not for me at any rate, not if I'm trying to find where Christ's Church actually lies.
Logged
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,475


« Reply #99 on: March 13, 2012, 03:16:52 PM »

And the MP did not glorify all the saints that ROCOR glorified. In particular, Met Joseph of Petrograd was left out of the MP's canonization of the New Martyrs.

“Through the host of
martyrs the Church of Russia bore witness to her faith and sowed the seed of
her future rebirth. Among the confessors of Christ we can in full measure
name… his Holiness Patriarch Sergius."

This is what Pat Alexis said in 1997, according to Fr Peter Perekrestov in Canadian Orthodox Herald, 1999, no. 4. This doesn't really sound like rejection of sergianism to me.
Logged
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,475


« Reply #100 on: March 13, 2012, 03:18:36 PM »

and the Serbs still don't recognize Macedonian autocephaly.

No on e recognises them. Maybe your Church should consider it?

OK, so Macedonia is a red herring. I don't suppose you care to answer my other points, though.
Logged
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,885



« Reply #101 on: March 13, 2012, 04:21:09 PM »

And the MP did not glorify all the saints that ROCOR glorified. In particular, Met Joseph of Petrograd was left out of the MP's canonization of the New Martyrs.

“Through the host of
martyrs the Church of Russia bore witness to her faith and sowed the seed of
her future rebirth. Among the confessors of Christ we can in full measure
name… his Holiness Patriarch Sergius."

This is what Pat Alexis said in 1997, according to Fr Peter Perekrestov in Canadian Orthodox Herald, 1999, no. 4. This doesn't really sound like rejection of sergianism to me.

This reminds of the dispute when the military code of conduct was changed (The code of conduct is the legal guide for the behavior of military members who are captured by hostile forces). The initial position was that nothing could excuse any US serviceman who broke and divulged information to the enemy. Therefore, the code of conduct insisted that a prisoner of war could not give anything more than rank, serial number and date of birth (the minimum information required by the International Red Cross). Then the decision was made to change the code in recognition of the fact that everybody has a breaking point and that it is senseless to make a promise that cannot be kept. You can read about the six articles of the code at http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/a/codeofconduct1.htm The hard-core old timers vehemently opposed the change. To give a fraction of an inch was considered by them to constitute treason. As it turned out most folks recognized the folly of this position and supported the new code of conduct.

Same with Mr Gress and his little band of hard-core super Orthodox. In a nut shell, Donatists of the 20th Century.
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #102 on: March 13, 2012, 05:17:15 PM »

Each and every "true Orthodox" (isn't that a tautology?) websites tend to write things about passports, Jews, masons, false greenhouse effect, world government etc.

This is exactly what I have been trying to say.  I'm not sure why it led to such an outburst of anger.  I don't understand how someone who lives in the US and speaks no Russian can claim to really know anything about obscure and splintering groups in Russia.  There are limits to the ability of the internet when it comes to conducting research. 
Logged
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,475


« Reply #103 on: March 13, 2012, 05:32:38 PM »

And the MP did not glorify all the saints that ROCOR glorified. In particular, Met Joseph of Petrograd was left out of the MP's canonization of the New Martyrs.

“Through the host of
martyrs the Church of Russia bore witness to her faith and sowed the seed of
her future rebirth. Among the confessors of Christ we can in full measure
name… his Holiness Patriarch Sergius."

This is what Pat Alexis said in 1997, according to Fr Peter Perekrestov in Canadian Orthodox Herald, 1999, no. 4. This doesn't really sound like rejection of sergianism to me.

This reminds of the dispute when the military code of conduct was changed (The code of conduct is the legal guide for the behavior of military members who are captured by hostile forces). The initial position was that nothing could excuse any US serviceman who broke and divulged information to the enemy. Therefore, the code of conduct insisted that a prisoner of war could not give anything more than rank, serial number and date of birth (the minimum information required by the International Red Cross). Then the decision was made to change the code in recognition of the fact that everybody has a breaking point and that it is senseless to make a promise that cannot be kept. You can read about the six articles of the code at http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/a/codeofconduct1.htm The hard-core old timers vehemently opposed the change. To give a fraction of an inch was considered by them to constitute treason. As it turned out most folks recognized the folly of this position and supported the new code of conduct.

Same with Mr Gress and his little band of hard-core super Orthodox. In a nut shell, Donatists of the 20th Century.

Donatists taught that those who apostasized could never be forgiven, even if they sincerely repent. Where do I or any True Orthodox teach that? I'm saying that the MP is inconsistent: sometimes, yes, they appear to repudiate what Met Sergius did, but then they'll turn around and justify it. And it's not justifiable. Therefore the MP needs to unambiguously declare Met Sergius' declaration as un-Orthodox, which also involves recognizing that those who resisted the declaration, at the cost of their lives and freedom, were in the right.

Not that you'll actually listen to or consider what I'm saying. It obviously suits your narrow mind to keep repeating "Donatism" and not engage with the actual substance of what's being said.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2012, 05:37:01 PM by Jonathan Gress » Logged
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,475


« Reply #104 on: March 13, 2012, 05:34:10 PM »

Each and every "true Orthodox" (isn't that a tautology?) websites tend to write things about passports, Jews, masons, false greenhouse effect, world government etc.

This is exactly what I have been trying to say.  I'm not sure why it led to such an outburst of anger.  I don't understand how someone who lives in the US and speaks no Russian can claim to really know anything about obscure and splintering groups in Russia.  There are limits to the ability of the internet when it comes to conducting research.  

Because "each and every" is a completely baseless assertion. And, Nectarios, if we're talking about websites, doesn't that kind of entail that we're limiting our research to the internet alone?

Not that I'm expecting you to engage my arguments either. Didn't they teach you how to construct a coherent argument in school?
« Last Edit: March 13, 2012, 05:34:31 PM by Jonathan Gress » Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #105 on: March 13, 2012, 05:45:54 PM »

Each and every "true Orthodox" (isn't that a tautology?) websites tend to write things about passports, Jews, masons, false greenhouse effect, world government etc.

This is exactly what I have been trying to say.  I'm not sure why it led to such an outburst of anger.  I don't understand how someone who lives in the US and speaks no Russian can claim to really know anything about obscure and splintering groups in Russia.  There are limits to the ability of the internet when it comes to conducting research.  

Because "each and every" is a completely baseless assertion. And, Nectarios, if we're talking about websites, doesn't that kind of entail that we're limiting our research to the internet alone?

Not that I'm expecting you to engage my arguments either. Didn't they teach you how to construct a coherent argument in school?

Why do you continue to personally insult me?   

As I've mentioned previously, it is simply my experience of actually living here in addition to the internet.  I have said from the beginning that a high percentage of true Orthodox groups are on the extreme fringe across the board.  It is ultimately a qualitative assessment.  Also this thread has been about larger, societal issues.  Sorry to be blunt, but the true Orthodox aren't even on the radar and have no real impact on society at large - since we are talking about the role of the Church in society size does matter.   So I'm not really sure how to prove or disprove what is a personal observation, that conspiracy theories are common among "true believer" types.  And the second assertion that I've made is not controversial, that these groups are tiny.  So other than insulting my ability to reason or my intelligence, what do you actually want from me?   
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #106 on: March 13, 2012, 06:00:15 PM »

and the Serbs still don't recognize Macedonian autocephaly.

No on e recognises them. Maybe your Church should consider it?

OK, so Macedonia is a red herring. I don't suppose you care to answer my other points, though.
You are not a communion, if you are in communion with nobody.
Logged

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
Nigula Qian Zishi
Administrator Emeritus, Retired Deacon, Inactive Poster, Active Orthodox Christian, Father, and Husband
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 1,836


我美丽的妻子和我。

nstanosheck
WWW
« Reply #107 on: March 14, 2012, 12:02:32 AM »

So apparently, only 26% of Orthodox in America attend services regularly too, and the bigger a parish it is, the bigger percentage of people who do not attend regularly. Good information to review before we judge Russia too harshly.

http://assemblyofbishops.org/files/news/FiveFacts.pdf

It looks like Oklahoma is shining in almost every aspect of this survey of Orthodoxy in America!
Logged

在基督         My Original Blog
尼古拉         My Facebook Profile
前执事         My Twitter Page
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #108 on: March 14, 2012, 01:11:59 AM »

So apparently, only 26% of Orthodox in America attend services regularly too, and the bigger a parish it is, the bigger percentage of people who do not attend regularly. Good information to review before we judge Russia too harshly.

http://assemblyofbishops.org/files/news/FiveFacts.pdf

It looks like Oklahoma is shining in almost every aspect of this survey of Orthodoxy in America!

Boomer Sooners!  Cool
Logged
ThePilgrim
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Patriarchate of Antioch
Posts: 106


« Reply #109 on: March 14, 2012, 01:20:35 AM »

Not that I'm expecting you to engage my arguments either. Didn't they teach you how to construct a coherent argument in school?

Jonathan, this disrespectful manner of speaking discredits what you are trying to proclaim as the truth.  The truth of Orthodoxy does not exist in a vacuum, apart from the virtues of humility, respect, kindness, charity, and self control, among others.

Since the moment that you've joined this thread, you have not ceased being sarcastic, rude, and condescending.  Where is Christ in that?  Where in that is the Lord who was silent even while He was being condemned to death?

I'm not saying that you should not stand up for and defend what you believe in.  Of course you should.  But thinking yourself to be "right" in an academic sense will not excuse bad behavior and it will not save anyone's soul, yours, or those of us in this thread that you consider to be heretics.

If you came to Orthodoxy to be "right," then you are no better in Orthodoxy than in whatever group you grew up in -- perhaps worse.  The only proper reason to come to the Church is learn to repent of and weep for your own sins.

Forgive me if I offend you.  May God guide you and protect you.

-Fr. John
Logged
Vladik
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 990


From the CIS with love


« Reply #110 on: March 14, 2012, 01:38:03 AM »

Young Russians can meet the boredom and poverty of their lives with drugs, alcohol, promiscuous sex and crime, and all too often do so.

Here we go again. What a paranoid rubbish this Economist is?
Apparently the "Democratic" West has no both free speech and opinion, since the pathetic cliches are everywhere. Cheesy
Logged
filipinopilgrim
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 130


« Reply #111 on: March 14, 2012, 03:03:47 AM »

Quote
Even leaving that aside, what is the point that the Economist article was making? From their purely secular point of view, they nevertheless reasonably noted that, given the vast amount of resources the MP had from the State, they should have been able to expand membership much faster by that point (2000) than they actually did.

Those "vast resources" hardly match the vast amounts of tax money that the German, Austrian and Swiss governments collect from their citizens (the "Church Tax") to distribute to the Protestant and Catholic Churches, not to speak of the numerous tax breaks given to the Catholic Church in Italy. Has the Catholic Church in these areas been successful in re-evangelizing their people? No.... and the established Protestant communities are in even worse shape.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2012, 03:04:32 AM by filipinopilgrim » Logged
filipinopilgrim
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 130


« Reply #112 on: March 14, 2012, 03:13:39 AM »


What about that recently published novel [2011]: Russian Sunrise by Bruce W. Walters, M.D., which urges the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary? This novel is a blueprint for Russia to lead the way toward unity with Rome, and just after that publication, the MP apparently re-established rapport with the Vatican.


Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

Consider the following as well:

1) The official position of the Vatican is that the Consecration of Russia was already accomplished by John Paul II in 1984. This position was officially reiterated in 2000 by a certain Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, who is now the Pope.

2) The novel "Russian Sunrise" is being promoted under the auspices of 'Fatima Crusader', the publications of which regularly attack the Vatican for being too liberal and for "disobeying Fatima" and whose leader, Fr. Nicolas Gruner, has been suspended by the Vatican from the priesthood for many years now.

3) The current "rapport" that now exists between the Vatican and the Russian Orthodox Church began about 2005, upon the election of Joseph Card. Ratzinger to the papacy, and is still a pale shadow of the level of such rapport that existed in the 1970's, in the time of Met. Nikodim.

If anything, the Roman Catholic media and blogosphere (especially in the USA and Italy) are relentlessly negative towards the Russian Orthodox Church (unless Russian liturgy and iconography are the topics of discussion).
« Last Edit: March 14, 2012, 03:20:24 AM by filipinopilgrim » Logged
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,620



« Reply #113 on: March 14, 2012, 03:44:57 AM »

Each and every "true Orthodox" (isn't that a tautology?) websites tend to write things about passports, Jews, masons, false greenhouse effect, world government etc.

This is exactly what I have been trying to say.  I'm not sure why it led to such an outburst of anger.  I don't understand how someone who lives in the US and speaks no Russian can claim to really know anything about obscure and splintering groups in Russia.  There are limits to the ability of the internet when it comes to conducting research. 

Because "each and every" is a completely baseless assertion. And, Nectarios, if we're talking about websites, doesn't that kind of entail that we're limiting our research to the internet alone?

Not that I'm expecting you to engage my arguments either. Didn't they teach you how to construct a coherent argument in school?

Hello, allow me to pontificate in the most insulting manner possible so that I can justify for myself the existence of my small sect. Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: March 14, 2012, 03:45:54 AM by Cavaradossi » Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
katherine 2001
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 889


Eastern Orthodox Church--Established in 33 A.D.


« Reply #114 on: March 14, 2012, 06:46:30 AM »

It's kind of funny you would quote something from over ten years ago.

How about something from 2012?

That's his point, biro. After a decade has past, what has changed from 2000 to 2012 with the Russian Orthodox Church reaching out to young Russians.

Indeed. Has much changed at all in Russia? Or does the Russian Church still remain a meaningless cultural relic of Russia's past with no meaning for today?

Couldn't the same be asked in the Middle Eastern countries?  They are mainly Muslim. 
Logged
katherine 2001
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 889


Eastern Orthodox Church--Established in 33 A.D.


« Reply #115 on: March 14, 2012, 06:57:24 AM »

Young Russians can meet the boredom and poverty of their lives with drugs, alcohol, promiscuous sex and crime, and all too often do so.

Here we go again. What a paranoid rubbish this Economist is?
Apparently the "Democratic" West has no both free speech and opinion, since the pathetic cliches are everywhere. Cheesy

Not to mention that the same thing said about the Russian youth happens in just about every country in the West as well, and in most of the countries in the Middle East, the Christians are clearly in the minority--so why are we singling out the Russian Church while not talking about the others? 
Logged
searn77
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Old Calendarist
Jurisdiction: Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of the Americas & the British Isles
Posts: 240


St. Philaret (Voznesensky) of New York


« Reply #116 on: March 14, 2012, 07:30:46 AM »

Not that I'm expecting you to engage my arguments either. Didn't they teach you how to construct a coherent argument in school?

I'm not saying that you should not stand up for and defend what you believe in.  Of course you should.  But thinking yourself to be "right" in an academic sense will not excuse bad behavior and it will not save anyone's soul, yours, or those of us in this thread that you consider to be heretics.

-Fr. John

While what you say here is true Father, this thread is loaded with insults from numerous people, not just Jonathan. I think Jonathan got angry as a certain posters have stated false facts regarding our Church and tried to use the internet to back up their claims, and when Jonathan showed that their sources were faulty, they either ignored what he said or tried to say they don't need the internet to back up their claims.

Again, I'm not trying to justify any sort of bad behavior; I just think all people should read and consider what you have stated in your post in regards to themselves before posting again on this thread, especially since we are in the Great Fast and more of our attention should be focused on love, charity, and humility.
Logged

Let us the faithful now come together to praise our father, protector and teacher the pillar of the Orthodox faith and firm defender of piety even the wondrous hierarch Philaret and let us glorify our Saviour Who has granted us his incorrupt relics as a manifest sign of his sanctity.
jah777
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Posts: 1,934


« Reply #117 on: March 14, 2012, 08:34:51 AM »

I realize that we have departed significantly from the subject of this thread, but I will leave it to the mods if they want to move the discussion on Ecumenism and Sergianism to a new thread.

Where to begin? Firstly, the force of their "rejection" of ecumenism is blunted by their continued membership of the WCC. If they were serious about rejecting ecumenism, they would leave the WCC (like the Georgians did), it's as simple as that.

As for the lame argument that the MP "needs" to remain in the WCC to provide an "authentic" Christian voice, that's the same argument the EP and other founding members put forward when they first entered the WCC. But the Church for centuries has proclaimed the true faith without the WCC. And what evidence do you have that membership of the WCC has been in any way successful at bringing the heterodox over to Orthodoxy?

I too would prefer for the MP to withdraw completely from the WCC, as would ROCOR and many others in the Church.  If the Patriarchate of Constantinople would be willing to withdraw from the WCC, I’m sure the MP would consider doing likewise.  Unfortunately, the Patriarchate of Constantinople is committed to remaining in the WCC, and within the Ecumenical Movement the words and actions of the Patriarchate of Constantinople have often misrepresented the Orthodox faith and been a cause of scandal for Orthodox Christians.  While the MP could simply withdraw from the WCC and condemn such involvement, they have instead chosen to be involved in such dialogues to at least ensure that the Orthodox Church is properly represented.  As we have seen, Orthodox ecclesiology has been more clearly expressed and defended in these dialogues and venues since the MP became more involved than was the case when the Patriarchate of Constantinople was left to represent the Orthodox Church on its own.  This is particularly evident when one looks at the Ravenna document on Primacy that was crafted without the MP, the subsequent rejection of this document by the MP, and the inability of the discussions with the Roman Catholics on Primacy to “progress” since the MP has resumed their involvement.  The MP may not have high hopes for the conversion of entire Christian bodies to Orthodoxy through such ecumenical involvement, but I do agree that their involvement has been effective in that true Orthodox ecclesiology has been more accurately expressed and more faithfully defended in such venues through their participation.  I also see that since the MP has stood up to the Patriarch of Constantinople regarding the latter’s questionable role in Ecumenism, the Church of Greece and other local churches have raised their voices in protest against EP compromises and have vowed to defend traditional Orthodox faith and ecclesiology in such venues. 

And they didn't reject ecumenism completely. They only rejected the "branch theory", which still leaves wiggle room if you want to accept other "theories" of ecumenism (there are a lot of them out there). But the fact is all "theories" of ecumenism are against Orthodoxy.

You must not have read the official document from the Holy Synod on the Non-Orthodox which I quoted from and provided a link to.  The MP did not simply reject the branch theory.  The MP clearly stated that only the Orthodox Church is the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and that unity with the Non-Orthodox cannot occur without agreement in matters of faith.  The MP also rejected many erroneous ideas about Christian disunity and Ecumenism such as the belief that historical divisions occurred from misunderstandings or human failings, and the belief that the Church unity can exist despite actual divisions.  These last two heretical beliefs are confessed by your own “TOC” with respect to other self-proclaimed “TOC” groups that you are not in communion with but which you consider to be part of the one Church nevertheless.

What is important is that in 2000 the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church officially rejected false and heretical beliefs regarding ecclesiology and clearly expressed the Church’s historical and traditional ecclesiology which they have continued to defend since.  While it would be better for all of the Orthodox churches to withdraw from the WCC, membership in such a body is not heretical but only the denial that the Orthodox Church is the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. 

It's not enough to say half-heartedly that there are "lies" mixed in, or that the MP does not "idealize" the Declaration. Why can't they just say "the Declaration was false, we reject it without equivocation, we recognize the confession of those who rejected the Declaration as Orthodox"? Because that would invalidate their entire raison d'etre. The MP still honors Met Sergius' memory and still considers his actions to have been correct and to have "saved" the Church. That is just not true.

The 1927 Declaration was unacceptable because it placed the entire Russian Orthodox Church in subjection to an atheist regime that was intent on destroying the Church.  I agree that the MP could have more clearly and unequivocally renounced the 1927 Declaration.  However, ROCOR’s historic position was that it could not reunite with the MP until the MP was free and no longer under Soviet control.  The MP is no longer under Soviet control, and the Holy Synod in 2000 published their official position on Church-State relations which unequivocally rejected the false understanding expressed in the 1927 Declaration and defended the traditional Orthodox understanding of Church-State relations.   If you have quotes from individual hierarchs since 2000 which claim that Patriarch Sergius “saved the Church”, while such private opinions are a cause of concern, such opinions are not more authoritative than the officially expressed position of the Holy Synod in 2000, and neither do such private opinions regarding Patriarch Sergius constitute some kind of heresy. 

And many experienced persecution in Russia without accepting sergianism. They are called the Catacomb Church.

-SNIP-

And the MP did not glorify all the saints that ROCOR glorified. In particular, Met Joseph of Petrograd was left out of the MP's canonization of the New Martyrs.

“Through the host of
martyrs the Church of Russia bore witness to her faith and sowed the seed of
her future rebirth. Among the confessors of Christ we can in full measure
name… his Holiness Patriarch Sergius."

This is what Pat Alexis said in 1997, according to Fr Peter Perekrestov in Canadian Orthodox Herald, 1999, no. 4. This doesn't really sound like rejection of sergianism to me.

In 2000, the Russian Orthodox Church glorified a multitude of New Martyrs and Confessors, among whom were listed those who remained with Metropolitan Sergius after the 1927 Declaration, and those such as Met Cyril of Kazan who rejected the path of Metropolitan Sergius.  At this time, the MP was not able to provide a final and definitive list of New Martyrs and Confessors because at that time they had not had the opportunity to study the archives to understand exactly who each person was and how their lives ended.  When ROCOR glorified the New Martyrs and Confessors years before, this was also done without having access to the archival materials and without extensive knowledge of individual New Martyrs and Confessors.  As it turned out, some of those whose names were initially listed among the New Martyrs and Confessors were not even Orthodox Christians.  As for Met Joseph of Petrograd, I do not have any information regarding what the MP decided about him, whether or not he is now on their list of New Martyrs, or why he is not on the calendar if he in fact still is not on the calendar.  If you claim that he is still not on their list of New Martyrs, do you have any documentation or statements from the MP regarding their decision not to include him? 

In any case, it is important to see that the list of New Martyrs and Confessors contains Met Cyril of Kazan and many others who did not follow Met Sergius.  It is also important to note that the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church has not finalized the list and has still not had the opportunity to study all of the relevant archival material regarding those who suffered under the Soviets.  Just last year the bishops of the ROC made the following statement regarding the need for further study of the archival materials to properly honor and glorify those who suffered:

Quote
http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=8162

03 February 2011, 16:48
Russian Orthodox Church wants easier access to archives to identify
persecution victims

Moscow, February 3, Interfax - The Bishops Council of the Moscow
Patriarchate has asked for easier access to state archives for
identifying all people oppressed by the Bolsheviks for their beliefs.

"The Church calls on statesmen and public figures to support its
study and commemoration of repression victims. In particular, the
Church appeals to the heads of institutions controlling archive
documents for assisting the soonest identification of everyone who
suffered in the years of persecution," the Council said.

"It is necessary to continue the dialog with the state on possible
legislative and administrative measures in the provision of access of
Church representatives to the archives with respect for the lawful
demand for secrecy of private life," the Council said.

Regarding Patriarch Alexis’ remarks about Patriarch Sergius in 1997, since I can only find your quote in the incomplete form in which you have presented it, I do not know if the quote is provided accurately, nor can I determine the context of the quote.  Nevertheless, regardless of what Patriarch Alexis stated, Patriarch Sergius is not listed on the MP’s calendar of saints.
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #118 on: March 14, 2012, 08:44:31 AM »

I think Jonathan got angry as a certain posters have stated false facts regarding our Church and tried to use the internet to back up their claims, and when Jonathan showed that their sources were faulty, they either ignored what he said or tried to say they don't need the internet to back up their claims.

Your and Jonathan's Church? Aren't you members of separate groups? Aren't there any excommunications, anathemas and jurisdictional jumping among your Churches?

The problem is that Jonathan, who has no clue about the "true Orthodox" in Russia (he wrote that) and no knowledge about Russia at all tries to convince me or Νεκτάριος (who read Russian, have been to Russia and have contact with such groups) that his American "true Orthodox" experience has something in common with the "true Orthodox" in Russia.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
searn77
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Old Calendarist
Jurisdiction: Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of the Americas & the British Isles
Posts: 240


St. Philaret (Voznesensky) of New York


« Reply #119 on: March 14, 2012, 09:25:37 AM »

I think Jonathan got angry as a certain posters have stated false facts regarding our Church and tried to use the internet to back up their claims, and when Jonathan showed that their sources were faulty, they either ignored what he said or tried to say they don't need the internet to back up their claims.

Your and Jonathan's Church? Aren't you members of separate groups? Aren't there any excommunications, anathemas and jurisdictional jumping among your Churches?
Which of the two Church's in Antioch were Orthodox during the fourth century? Was it St. Meletius' Church or the Church that was responsible for ordaining St. Jerome? Who is part of the Orthodox Church, the Patriarchate of Jerusalem or the Church of Romania? What is the status of OCA Archbishop Lazar (Puhalo) who is a deposed deacon of ROCOR?

The problem is that Jonathan, who has no clue about the "true Orthodox" in Russia (he wrote that) and no knowledge about Russia at all tries to convince me or Νεκτάριος (who read Russian, have been to Russia and have contact with such groups) that his American "true Orthodox" experience has something in common with the "true Orthodox" in Russia.

You have claimed that:
"Each and every 'true Orthodox' (isn't that a tautology?) websites tend to write things about passports, Jews, masons, false greenhouse effect, world government etc."

But when Jonathan questioned you on this, you have yet to show an example of any TOC websites writing such things.

And while I have not been to Russia and don't speak Russian, I have met with people who have had contact with the TOC Church in Russia, one of whom is Russian and was ordained to a clerical rank in Russia. So why should I take Nektarios' word over theirs? Now if Nektarios had some proof of what he was saying coming from a reliable source (ex. quotes from TOC clergymen, statements from a TOC website, etc.), then I would look at and consider what he wrote.
Logged

Let us the faithful now come together to praise our father, protector and teacher the pillar of the Orthodox faith and firm defender of piety even the wondrous hierarch Philaret and let us glorify our Saviour Who has granted us his incorrupt relics as a manifest sign of his sanctity.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #120 on: March 14, 2012, 10:29:29 AM »

But when Jonathan questioned you on this, you have yet to show an example of any TOC websites writing such things.

You are being stubborn.

Here you are. Pity, you wouldn't be allowed to read it. You would become smarter.

http://rpczmoskva.org.ru/stati/svyashhennik-andrej-atlantida-ili-dopotopnaya-civilizaciya-o-dopotopnom-sataninskom-proekte-i-ego-sataninskom-remejke.html
http://rpczmoskva.org.ru/stati/igor-druz-pederasty-i-novyj-mirovoj-poryadok.html
http://rpczmoskva.org.ru/stati/igor-kols-pejsax-na-krovi.html
http://rpczmoskva.org.ru/stati/falshivoe-zoloto.html
http://rpczmoskva.org.ru/sejchas-v-rossii/oni-budut-zhit-u-vas.html
http://rpczmoskva.org.ru/stati/v-kogo-strelyal-brejvik.html
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #121 on: March 14, 2012, 10:30:51 AM »

It's kind of funny you would quote something from over ten years ago.

How about something from 2012?

That's his point, biro. After a decade has past, what has changed from 2000 to 2012 with the Russian Orthodox Church reaching out to young Russians.

Indeed. Has much changed at all in Russia? Or does the Russian Church still remain a meaningless cultural relic of Russia's past with no meaning for today?

Couldn't the same be asked in the Middle Eastern countries?  They are mainly Muslim. 
They have also mainly undergone for 14 centuries what Russia only went through for less than 85 years, and have no facade to erect.  Just to be Christian in the Middle East is to go against the flow of society.
Logged

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
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #122 on: March 14, 2012, 11:51:12 AM »

Can we get back to the MP's evangelization efforts please? The discussion Canonical Orthodox vs. "True Orthodox" (sic) should get its on thread.

Apart from that, anyone who complains about the lack of missionary efforts in Muslim countries, has never lived there! You should do it, even for a few weeks, before judging the Christians living there. I have just spent a few months in Egypt, and you can't imagine how extreme it is. The Christians are spending their lives in fear, and their churches can be burnt any time or their daughters kidnapped and forced to be married to a Muslim man...
Logged
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,239


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #123 on: March 14, 2012, 01:34:46 PM »

Re: Father Nicholas Gruner:

Please quote the definitive document concerning Father Nicholas Gruner's final degree of suspension and/or defrocking.

Father Nicholas Gruner has admitted that he is under a Catholic Bishop and is not suspended despite the Vatican Bureaucracy's attempt to do so. As long as he is under a recognized Catholic Bishop, there is really nothing that those bureaucrats can do. However, those Vatican bureaucrats have attempted to force other Catholic Bishops not to incardinate Father Gruner, but when this happens, Father has found another bishop who is willing to accommodate him. Politics in church affairs is always ugly.

Back on topic:  Dr. Walters, who supports the ministry of Father Nicholas Gruner, has been in contact with the MP as he makes frequent trips to Russia. A lot goes on which is not published in the controlled media.

The Father Gruner's Fatima Crusader ministry and the SSPX are making inroads into Russia where they claim to have converted thousands of Russian Orthodox and Roman Catholics to their position.  Make no doubt about this: the Fatima Crusader ministry in Russia is putting heavy pressure on the MP and other Russians for the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary since Father Gruner's ministry and the SSPX do not recognize the fraudulent way in which the so-called 1984 consecration was done since Russia was not mentioned by name.

Have you even bothered to read Russian Sunrise? I have, and it does raise concerns.

These two groups (Fatima Crusader and SSPX) are evangelizing the Russian People with no apparent opposition from the MP.
If the MP is actively spreading the Holy Orthodox Faith, why the silence? Why are they giving approval to these two "Catholic" groups by their silence.


What about that recently published novel [2011]: Russian Sunrise by Bruce W. Walters, M.D., which urges the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary? This novel is a blueprint for Russia to lead the way toward unity with Rome, and just after that publication, the MP apparently re-established rapport with the Vatican.


Consider the following as well:

1) The official position of the Vatican is that the Consecration of Russia was already accomplished by John Paul II in 1984. This position was officially reiterated in 2000 by a certain Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, who is now the Pope.

2) The novel "Russian Sunrise" is being promoted under the auspices of 'Fatima Crusader', the publications of which regularly attack the Vatican for being too liberal and for "disobeying Fatima" and whose leader, Fr. Nicolas Gruner, has been suspended by the Vatican from the priesthood for many years now.

3) The current "rapport" that now exists between the Vatican and the Russian Orthodox Church began about 2005, upon the election of Joseph Card. Ratzinger to the papacy, and is still a pale shadow of the level of such rapport that existed in the 1970's, in the time of Met. Nikodim.

If anything, the Roman Catholic media and blogosphere (especially in the USA and Italy) are relentlessly negative towards the Russian Orthodox Church (unless Russian liturgy and iconography are the topics of discussion).
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
searn77
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Old Calendarist
Jurisdiction: Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of the Americas & the British Isles
Posts: 240


St. Philaret (Voznesensky) of New York


« Reply #124 on: March 14, 2012, 02:25:57 PM »


Okay, you have shown two websites so far, one which I couldn't find if they were even affiliated with a TOC synod, and the other is from the Moscow parishes of the ROCOR under Met. Agafangal. I have yet to see where:
Each and every ''true Orthodox'' (isn't that a tautology?) websites tend to write things about passports, Jews, masons, false greenhouse effect, world government etc.

You have cited one, possibly two websites associated with the TOC. I personally know of one more that could be used in regards to passports and world governments. Other than that, I don't believe that "each and every TOC website tends to write things about passports, Jews, masons, false greenhouse effect, world government etc."  You can call me stubborn if you wish too as well, but I am not in the TOC because of certain members of the faithful's opinions in regards to passports, masons, etc; I joined the TOC because I believe it to be the Church that our Lord established.

I hope I have said everything in a non-snarky kind of way, but as it's sometimes hard to hear someone's tone of voice when they post on here, I apologize in advance in case I am coming across as that way.
Logged

Let us the faithful now come together to praise our father, protector and teacher the pillar of the Orthodox faith and firm defender of piety even the wondrous hierarch Philaret and let us glorify our Saviour Who has granted us his incorrupt relics as a manifest sign of his sanctity.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,239


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #125 on: March 14, 2012, 02:47:25 PM »

I had looked into the MP and the ROCOR jurisdiction affiliated with the MP, but I was losing my faith there.

Because I tired of the ecumenism present in Worldwide Orthodoxy and in the statements of the MP (gestures toward Rome), I too joined the TOC (the GOC/HOTCA Synod) during the Nativity Fast in 2011.

Not only that, I have heard about the MP making money promoting the smoking and selling of cigarettes.
When priests in the ROCOR compare smoking with slow suicide, I cannot see why the MP has not divested itself of the tobacco industry.  

Honestly, the MP would give a much better representation of Orthodox Christianity if they would stop promoting ecumenism and start spreading genuine Orthodox Christianity.



« Last Edit: March 14, 2012, 02:53:22 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Gorazd
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Istanbul and Chambésy
Posts: 1,955



« Reply #126 on: March 14, 2012, 03:31:13 PM »

Honestly, the MP would give a much better representation of Orthodox Christianity if they would stop promoting ecumenism and start spreading genuine Orthodox Christianity.

I couldn't disagree more with your statement. If we want to give a good representation of Orthodoxy, we must show the LOVE of Christ, not concentrate on putting down others.
Logged
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,239


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #127 on: March 14, 2012, 03:52:24 PM »

Honestly, the MP would give a much better representation of Orthodox Christianity if they would stop promoting ecumenism and start spreading genuine Orthodox Christianity.

I couldn't disagree more with your statement. If we want to give a good representation of Orthodoxy, we must show the LOVE of Christ, not concentrate on putting down others.

Thomas Aquinas (a saint in the Roman Catholic Church) had a saying :

Lord, in preaching the love of Truth, let us not forget the truth of Love.

It is possible to preach the Truth in love without offending God.

That is what the GOC/HOTCA tries to do.
Would that the MP do likewise! Ojala (Spanish from the Arabic: would that God would allow this to happen).

Read the declaration of the Sunday of Orthodoxy.
If the Russian Orthodox Church were to preach the Truth at all times, then it would be a powerful spiritual force, and Orthodoxy would be what it was meant to be. Then the faith would be spread to all the world.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2012, 03:56:04 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #128 on: March 14, 2012, 05:25:13 PM »

Re: Father Nicholas Gruner:

Please quote the definitive document concerning Father Nicholas Gruner's final degree of suspension and/or defrocking.

Father Nicholas Gruner has admitted that he is under a Catholic Bishop and is not suspended despite the Vatican Bureaucracy's attempt to do so. As long as he is under a recognized Catholic Bishop, there is really nothing that those bureaucrats can do. However, those Vatican bureaucrats have attempted to force other Catholic Bishops not to incardinate Father Gruner, but when this happens, Father has found another bishop who is willing to accommodate him. Politics in church affairs is always ugly.

Back on topic:  Dr. Walters, who supports the ministry of Father Nicholas Gruner, has been in contact with the MP as he makes frequent trips to Russia. A lot goes on which is not published in the controlled media.

The Father Gruner's Fatima Crusader ministry and the SSPX are making inroads into Russia where they claim to have converted thousands of Russian Orthodox and Roman Catholics to their position.  Make no doubt about this: the Fatima Crusader ministry in Russia is putting heavy pressure on the MP and other Russians for the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary since Father Gruner's ministry and the SSPX do not recognize the fraudulent way in which the so-called 1984 consecration was done since Russia was not mentioned by name.

Have you even bothered to read Russian Sunrise? I have, and it does raise concerns.

These two groups (Fatima Crusader and SSPX) are evangelizing the Russian People with no apparent opposition from the MP.
If the MP is actively spreading the Holy Orthodox Faith, why the silence? Why are they giving approval to these two "Catholic" groups by their silence.
Why should the elephant obsess on gnats?

Given the well known opposition of the MP to the Vatican and its UGCC, the blocking of the Vatican and its minions' ability to operate in Russia, etc., you have just lost all credibility in my book.

As for Russian Sunrise, why would I waste time reading every obscure kook's book when there are more good books (not to mention, the Good Book) than I can ever read?
Logged

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
Ansgar
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: More than an inquirer, less than a catechumen
Jurisdiction: Exarchate of orthodox churches of russian tradition in western Europe
Posts: 2,988


Keep your mind in hell and do not despair


« Reply #129 on: March 14, 2012, 05:33:18 PM »

Honestly, the MP would give a much better representation of Orthodox Christianity if they would stop promoting ecumenism and start spreading genuine Orthodox Christianity.

I couldn't disagree more with your statement. If we want to give a good representation of Orthodoxy, we must show the LOVE of Christ, not concentrate on putting down others.

Thomas Aquinas (a saint in the Roman Catholic Church) had a saying :

Lord, in preaching the love of Truth, let us not forget the truth of Love.

It is possible to preach the Truth in love without offending God.

That is what the GOC/HOTCA tries to do.
Would that the MP do likewise! Ojala (Spanish from the Arabic: would that God would allow this to happen).

Read the declaration of the Sunday of Orthodoxy.
If the Russian Orthodox Church were to preach the Truth at all times, then it would be a powerful spiritual force, and Orthodoxy would be what it was meant to be. Then the faith would be spread to all the world.
I would like to give my humble opinion and say that, by looking at the recent activities of the russian church, I would say they are doing a pretty good job, especially in Asia. So far I have heard of russian missions in Pakistan, Indoensia, Vietnam, Cambodja, Thailand(a monastery was consecrated a few weeks ago) and the russian church is currently talking with the chinese government about sending missionaries and priests into China. Of course, there is always room for improvement but I wouldn't dismiss the russian church totally.

Concerning the thing about the cigarettes, I think that was meant as a joke, which the russian church criticized (I hope we are talking about the same incident)
Logged

Do not be cast down over the struggle - the Lord loves a brave warrior. The Lord loves the soul that is valiant.

-St Silouan the athonite
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,973


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #130 on: March 14, 2012, 05:51:24 PM »

Its not going to be easy to undo the damage of the communist wretches and their mindF$!@ing of the Russian population.

This, in my view, is part of the problem.  All ills of Russian society are blamed on "communism" by outsiders.  Lately that is becoming more and more of fashionable excuse domestically.   This is branded about as if "communism" were some tiny element of society that wreaked havoc on the rest.  The reality is that a very large percentage of society supported the early Bolsheviks because of their political agenda.  Thousands upon thousands gleefully destroyed their churches.   To this day the Orthodox Church has no real comprehension of its own culpability in this. 

This is true. It was a collective sin. (Collectivism, FTW!)
Logged

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.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,973


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #131 on: March 14, 2012, 05:55:27 PM »

You are asking people to feel sorry for the MP.

The MP doesn't need anyone to feel sorry for it, and I'm not asking anyone to do so either. What I AM trying to do is to understand why it is where it is nowadays. And I can see you're from HOTCA: no need to lecture me on what you think of "World Orthodoxy", or of Latin "papists" such as myself.

I think you're being disingenuous. You ended your post by an appeal to others not to "judge" the MP, which you preceded by a list of the ways in which the MP suffered, which were obviously intended to elicit sympathy from the reader. I'm saying that's all very fine, but I'm still not sympathetic to the MP, since MP hierarchs themselves did just fine, earning their salaries and dachas by kowtowing to atheism in public. And I don't see anything miraculous in the MP having built lots of churches, given that they're all paid for by the state. What's more miraculous is e.g. True Orthodox groups like those under the late Met Valentine of Suzdal repairing dilapidated church buildings out of their own pockets, only to see the refurbished churches seized by the MP later on.

Given how much state support the MP has gotten since the end of communism (if it really ended), I think the slow, if not stagnant, growth of church attendance speaks of the indifference of the MP hierarchs towards their evangelical mission.

Do you realize how tiny such anti-MP groups are?  They are also pretty far out there on pretty much every issue. 

And that many of their leaders have questionable pasts.
Logged

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.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,973


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #132 on: March 14, 2012, 06:06:35 PM »

Elder Paisios made false prophesies

You will back this up.
Logged

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.
Jonathan Gress
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Posts: 3,475


« Reply #133 on: March 14, 2012, 07:46:36 PM »

Elder Paisios made false prophesies

You will back this up.

Is that in the indicative or imperative mood?

http://hotca.org/orthodoxy/orthodox-awareness/331-the-reading-is-from-the-false-prophecy-of-paisios
Logged
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,121


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #134 on: March 15, 2012, 01:22:04 AM »


Can you back it up with anything reliable.
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.254 seconds with 72 queries.