Address to ROCA, by Bishop Gregory

Information, news stories, and questions about True Traditionalist Orthodox Churches. This is the place to post encyclicals and any official public communications from True Orthodox jurisdictions.


Moderator: Mark Templet

Post Reply
Gelsky
Newbie
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun 16 November 2003 5:42 pm

Re: "Bishop" Gregory's letter and "Met."

Post by Gelsky »

Dear beloved in Christ,

I cannot in good conscience sign or even agree with such a letter. I believe that it is incredibly small-minded and short-sided to render conclusions long before the meeting even takes place. I believe our bishops (ROCOR) and their (MP) bishops should sit down with one another and talk out their differences. If they refuse to budge then the ROCOR bishops have received their answer.

There are people, who may have good intentions, but have fallen to extreme-ism and condemn those who want to try to heal this terrible schism. I believe the time is now to talk!! If they refuse to hear our side, then we have our answer.

This horrible letter is already suggesting that union will take place!! That is ridiculous, only God knows what will come of it. I hope and pray that "some people" who distribute this material, have not fallen victim to this kind of wanton extreme-ism, God help them if they have. We must pray for our bishops and give them strength, not condemn them or castigate them in public. The faithful must NOT fall victim to Prelest!

I do not agree with the MP, but how are they to truly know our feelings if we don't give them the dignity of sitting down and explaining ourselves.

What did the HOCNA people fall victim to? They left the Church, even condemned blessed Met. Philaret. They proclaimed that communion with the "Soviet Church" was imminent! That was over 20 years ago.

The canons call for the faithful to leave "once" their bishops fall victim to heresy or schism, not before. If we don't give the MP a chance, then we are no better than the Pharisees! By saying that someone can never repent is disgusting and I cannot believe an Orthodox bishop would say such a thing!! I hope and pray that you in the ROAC will not be deceived!

"Lord please give Bishops Kyrill, Hilarion and Mark the strength and courage to keep true the faith given to us, and to guide us with love in Your Divine Spirit."

I have noticed that there are a great many Orthodox "monastics" who spend many a night "gossiping" on the internet. I dont remember reading that part in the Rule of St. Sabbas?

With Love,
George

P.S. Bishop Gregory wrote: ""The true confession of Faith of the much-suffering Russian Church is maintained only by the Synod of Metropolitan Valentine,""

If I remember correctly, isnt this "Met" Valentine of Suzdal, the bishop who was convicted of a crime, child-molestation or something to that effect??

Nevski
Jr Member
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu 6 February 2003 12:39 am

Re: "Bishop" Gregory's letter and "Met."

Post by Nevski »

Good post.

Last edited by Nevski on Sun 16 November 2003 11:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Monk George
Newbie
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun 26 October 2003 12:50 am

Schism?

Post by Monk George »

gelsky wrote:

There are people, who may have good intentions, but have fallen to extreme-ism and condemn those who want to try to heal this terrible schism. I believe the time is now to talk!! If they refuse to hear our side, then we have our answer.

The relationship that exists between the MP and the ROCA is not a schism, it never was. A schism is created when a group of Orthodox Christians breaks away from the Church, forming their own hierarchy separate and in opposition to the true Church.

The Moscow Patriarchate never belonged to the Pre-Revolutionary Russian Church: it is an entity created by the apostate Metropolitan Sergios and his Synod, with the careful control of the Soviet State. It is based not on the canons and teachings of the holy Fathers, it is a an entity completely alien to the Church. All of the New Martyrs and Confessors, whom the Russian Church Abroad glorified in the early 1980s agree with this.

It is a shame that today the ROCA is treading upon the martyric struggle of those it once glorified.

Sitting down at the table with the MP is precisely what Metropolitan Anastassy forbade, when he wrote that we should have no contact with the MP, not even cordial contact.

What the venerable first hierarchs had in mind, should such a time ever come, would be that the MP would submit its rejection of all its heresies, and then in humble repentance ask to be received by the right-believing hierarchs of the ROCA, the successors of those who did not bow the knee to Baal.

But now that door of repentance has been shut against the MP by the ROCA herself. How? By following the teachings of Cyprian of Fili. Cyprian most definitely teaches that those who have fallen into heresy, unless condemned in an Ecumenical Council, still remain in the Church. Thus, the ROCA approaches the MP not as the graceless entity she is, but as a gracefilled Church, attempting to work out their differences, whatever they might be.

Consider the compelling testimony of Hieromartyr Victor, Archbishop of Vyatka (+1934), whose relics were discovered to be incorrupt in 1997. He has been canonised by both the MP and the ROCOR.

"Mixing together into one, despite the word of God, the 'faithul with the unfaithful' (II Corinthians6.14-18), the Holy Church and those fighting to the death against her, in the great and most holy mystery of the Eucharist, the metropolitan [Sergios] by this blasphemy of his destroys the prayerful meaning of the great mystery and its grace-filled significance for the eternal salvation of the souls of Orthodox believers.

Hence the service becomes not only graceless because of the gracelessness of the celebrant, [Metropolitan Sergios] but an abomination in the eyes of God, and for that reason both the celebrant and he who participates in it subject themselves to severe condemnation.

He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Fr. George

"Obedience is Life and the Opposite is also True."

mwoerl

The "Address to ROCA"

Post by mwoerl »

The author of the "Address to ROCA" states:


Code: Select all

"The MP has not repented, and I believe cannot repent of its irreversible course. They do not believe in repentance; otherwise, they would have done so long ago."
 
This statement is rather odd, I would think. That "the MP cannot repent"-apparently the author means the leading hierarchs of the MP here-is quite an amazing statement. First of all, while those in charge in the MP now may not have repented, I do not think the author of this statement can speak for waht will happen in the future, or those hierarchs who will come in the future-unless perhpas he claims clairvoyance? Perhaps the author of the "Address" feels he has a vested interest in such an eventuality, and simply HOPES the leadership of the MP will never "repent." Or, perhaps he means here that no matter what future hierarchs of the MP would do or say, he would never accept any actions on their part as "repentance." 

Also, we are warned against judging others. I was under the impression that "judgment" is solely the perogative of God. While we can utilize our rational faculties and say someting such as, "the leading hierarchs of the MP have not repented of sergianism," or "are still practitioners of ecumenism," to say that THEY CANNOT REPENT is an anouncement that they are doomed to hell, damned for eternity; and, also possibly denies that "the MP" even possesses free will! Such a statement would seem to me to transgress the bounds of Orthodox belief regarding repentance.
I would counter this statement with the fact that anyone can repent, even up until the last minute of their life. The likelihood of such an event may be in the realm of oddsmakers or others who speculate on such issues for their amusement or profit, but not a worthwhile activity for an Orthodox Christian, and certainly not a fit subject for someone who should know better to "pronounce" upon.

The pronouncement of the author of this statement that "the MP cannot repent," however is also rather odd in that it does not really bolster his "argument" one way or the other, except perhaps as an added justification to himself for his own opinions. It does not seem to me that the author's opinions on the impossibility of repentance on the part of the MP would be of any interest whatsoever to anyone else.

The discussion about the "division" of Orthodoxy here mentions that the new calendarists & ecumenists have originated that "division." I would wholeheartedly agree with that statement. However, the seemingly ever increasing appearance of "True Orthodox Churches" like mushrooms popping up after a rain do not add any clarity for inquirers, nor afford any solace to those who have been Orthodox for some time. Especially when it is next to impossible to sift through literally volumes worth of claims and counter claims as to the validity or non-validity of each of these new "True Churches"-and not in regard to "World Orthodoxy," but in regard to OTHER "True Orthodox Churches." With each new mushroom that pops up, and each new statement that "WE are the only True Orthodox Church left in existence, WE have the only True Orthodox Bishops left in existence, and if you don't join us your salvation becomes impossible," it seems the tolerance level for such statements decreases exponentially. Especially, I might add, when we see the same people repeatedly touting new "True Churches" on a sort of regular basis, according to which way the wind blows, or whatever it is that spurs them on.

I also find that I must remark on Hegumen George's comment that "Bishop Gregory is the most feared clergyman in America" (probably closer to a praphrase than a quote-I don't have the original in front of me, but, I think what I have mentioned captures the "flavor" and "drift" of the original): I have no idea whatsoever what basis Fr. George has for making such an original and extremely amazing statement. Is this supposed to be some sort of "advertisement" for ROAC in America that will make people want to sign on? "Hey-everybody is scared of my Bishop! They are more scared of my Bishop than they are of your Bishop! My Bishop is a baaaaaaaaaaadddddddd -shut yo mouf!" Ah yes, I can hear the strains of "Shaft" resonate in the opening credits for "The Most Feared Bishop in America," a new film opening on Christmas! (Uh-New Calendar or Old Calendar? Hmmmmmm.....) Who is it, exactly, that experiences tremors of fear when the name "Bishop Gregory" is invoked? I sincerely hope that Fr. George does not mean to imply here that "the powers that be" in the ROCOR are those who have such a great fear of his ecclesiastical superior. I know quite a few priests in the ROCOR, and while I have certainly heard a plethora of remarks concerning Fr. George's ecclesiastical superior, I have NEVER heard one that can be construed in any way, shape, or form as even coming within 50 miles of "fearful." I have never seen Archbishop Alypy shaking in his boots at the mention of his former priest either! I sincerely doubt that ANY HIERARCH in the ROCOR fears that their flock will decamp momentarily for the vicinity of Buena Vista, Colorado! And, to be honest, I would think that outside of the ROCOR and those who have left the ROCOR in the recent past for the "OTHER True Orthodox Church"-HOCNA-Fr. George's ecclesiastical superior is simply, for the most part, widely unknown. And, yes, I am aware that people sometimes show a great deal of fear of the unknown, but, somehow, I would not think that particular circumstance applies here. So, I would have to say that any claim that "Bishop Gregory is the most feared clergyman in America" is ludicrous, which the dictionary I have here in front of me defines as: "so absurd, ridiculous, or exaggerated as to cause or merit laughter." And, I must admit, that was exactly my reaction when I saw the statement! Thanks for a good chuckle! I would heartily press Fr. George for some proofs to back up his statement, but, gee, that is just the kind of thing nobody would ever be able to actually prove now, isn't it? Hmmmmmmmm-how very convenient!

Code: Select all

Michael Woerl
fserafim
Jr Member
Posts: 57
Joined: Sun 22 December 2002 6:53 pm
Location: Seattle, WA
Contact:

Post by fserafim »

I have always found it rather curious that those who claim that the MP is without grace, were received as MP clergy into ROCOR. Why were they not ordained into true Orthodoxy? On my recent visit to the holy places in Russia, I was often asked by junior clergy whether I was a ROCOR priest and was always invited to concelebrate as a matter of course. In fact I did not concelebrate although we are in communion with the MP. I also believe union by ROCOR with MP is most likely. I don't know what Putin said to the Bishop of SF! But seriously, it would probably be beneficial to ROCOR to rub shoulders with those who have borne the brunt during Soviet times. I am not referring to the KGB hierarchy but those priests like Fr Vasily of St Serafim's Church in St Petersburg who has served for 50 yrs, without prviliges and often under threat from the KGB for not complying with their wishes. I met many of these stalwart "graceless" Orthodox. Some of our western clergy (myself included) could benefit from their experience. From the comfort of the west, especially in the USA, we should be cautious in our criticism and often superior attitude towards our brethren in the former Soviet Union. My parish in Seattle is made up of these "graceless" Soviets as some ROCOR clergy call them. But then I'm biased!

The future of Orthodoxy according to St Serafim of Vyritsa and Blessed Nila of Voskresenk (1997) lies in Russia. Of course some of the fringe groups on this list will claim that it applies to them. Time will tell.

Yours in Christ,

Fr Serafim
Holy Protection of the Theotokos Orthodox Church, Seattle.
Patriarchate of Jerusalem, the Holy City.

Monk George
Newbie
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun 26 October 2003 12:50 am

Re: The "Address to ROCA"

Post by Monk George »

Perhaps the best defense for the concept of "no return" is found here in a quote from New Hieromartyr Victor, Archbishop of Vyatka:

“What of the future? In the future I would beseech God, and not only I,
but the whole of the Orthodox Church, that he not harden your heart as He once hardened the heart of Pharaoh, but that He give you the grace to understand the sin you have committed and repent for the rest of your life. Then all the believers would thank God in joy and tears, and would again come to you as to a father and pastor – as to the first pastor, and the whole of the Russian Church as to her sacred head.

The enemy has lured and deceived you for a second time with the idea of an organization of the Church. But if this organization is bought for the price of the Church of Christ Herself no longer remaining the house of Grace-giving salvation for men, and he who received the organization
ceases to be what he was - for it is written,'Let his habitation be made
desolate, and his bishopric let another take' (Acts1.20) - then it were better for us never to have any kind of organization.

Code: Select all

 “What is the benefit if we, having become by God's Grace temples of the Holy Spirit, become ourselves suddenly worthless,while at the same time receiving an organization for ourselves? No. Let the whole visible material world perish; let there be more important in our eyes the certain perdition of the soul to which he who presents such external pretexts for sin will be subjected.


“But if the hardening of your heart has gone so far, and there remains
no hope of repentance, then in this case we have a word to enlighten us: ‘Come out from among them and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and do not touch their impurity, and I will receive you, and I will be to you and a Father and you will be to as sons and daughters’ (II Corinthians6.17-18)."

Note the context of my post about Bishop Gregory being the most feared: he is feared not because he is a tyrant, but because he holds to the truth and expresses it in a way anyone can understand. He is feared by ROCA because Bishop Gregory does not cower from pointing out their heresies.

Fr. George

"Obedience is Life and the Opposite is also True."

Bogatyr
Member
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat 15 November 2003 6:22 pm

Schism & Extremism

Post by Bogatyr »

:ohvey: I recall when I first visited the Monastery of St. Antony's in Florence, AZ, how one November morning during Matins, a monk came up to me and whispered in my ear, "They opened the crypts at Jordanville today in the morning and the relics of +Metropolitan Anastassy & +Metropolitan Philaret were found to be incorrupt". And at once it was as if a tremendous consolation was granted to me. In my heart I felt such love and contrition, such a depth of sorrow for my sinfulness and my unworthiness of the miracle, but at the same time the hope that holiness still persists despite our earthly afflictions and our loss of our true selves in sin. I was granted the gift of tears for a short time thereafter. The ephiphany allowed me to understand in a way words cannot express the dictum of St. Silouan, "Keep thy mind in hell, but despair not". I felt at that time that a great outpouring of grace would come, would validate our podvig and provide us with the strength to fuel the last flowering of Orthodoxy before the end...
Then, I encountered the positions of people like the Fr. Lebedeffs and Fr. Shaws of the world, who no longer consider ecumenism heresy, who feel the calendar schism is "no biggie", who see in renovationism and sergianism a partner for not just dialogue but submission and I understand a new course has been undertaken. Our Blessed Vladyka +Metropolitan Philaret was unequivocal in stressing his confession of Orthodoxy despite the politics of men and God has sent a message to us through his relics that his is the path of Blessedness and Truth. This is the podvig we all must bear, not compromise. This is the "extremism" the other party is alluding to. Those who know me, know I have been a voice supporting dialogue without compromise and have harboured loyalty to the wishes of St. Tikhon, but the interlocutors controlling the dialogue do not share this perspective. They have made it clear that ecumenism is not an issue which makes or breaks the dialogue, the spurious "autocephalies" they welcome as partners. They wish to offer legitimacy to those who have broken the Eucharistic unity of the Church with the calendar schism. They seek accomodation of the VERY renovationism St. Tikhon anathemized and they now wish amnesties to be issued to the sergianists, the institutions the sergianists have established and their active links now to organized crime and ecumenical money for doctrinal and ecclesiastical compromise. This spits in the face of the Holy New Martyrs and CONDONES the rape of Russia. Holy Martyrs such as +Joseph of Petrograd, +Kyrill of Kazan, +Peter of Krutitsk and +Agathangel of Yaroslavl by these actions are now the "extremists" and the "schismatics", whilst the followers of +sergius, +alexis I, +pimen, and +alexis II are now the "orthodox". Indeed, the whole of ROCOR and its history is branded schismatic by this camp, the Holy legacies of such spiritual giants as St. John of San Francisco. +Archbishop Andrew of Novo Diveevo, +Bishop Nektary of Seattle, bl. +Metropolitan Antony, +Archbishop Vitaly of Jordanville, +Archbishop Averky of Jordanville, +Archbishop Leonty of Chile, +Bishop Sava of Edmonton, +Archbishop Antony of San Francisco, Fr. Seraphim of Platina, Fr. Panteleimon of Jordanville, Fr. Constantine of Jordanville, Fr. Vladimir of Jordanville, Fr. Kiprian of Jordanville et al. I recall as a seminarian a conversation I had with the saintly monk, Fr. Luke (Smith), concerning the "flowering of Orthodoxy before the end". He related to me, "Rostislav, you must be careful not to be deceived as all that glitters will not be gold. The confessors may not survive into the next generation and what may be left to receive the consolation of the last flowering will be small, fractured cells whom our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ will unite to prosper and even give increase to." So it is today.
I can affirm as a moderate that the agenda being framed is being framed in such a way as to surrender the legacy of ROCOR and trample it underfoot. Indeed, when one hears on the lips of clerics such phrases as "ending isolation" and the time of "+Metropolitan Philaret has come and gone", that, indeed, all alarms must be sounded and opposition must be raised. The reception my tentative statements receive affirm to me that a new polarism is in place. I placed myself and my wife in fidelity to +Metropolitan Kiprianos and his Synodeia while maintaining a relationship with the Serbian Church, bodies with which ROCOR still shares communion and I am greated with the catcalls of "schismatic" and "extremist". Sic transit gloria mundi.
The issue is not that ROCOR has openly condoned ecumenism, what matters is that it no longer openly speaks against it, that it is prepared to forego the CONFESSION OF BLESSED +Metropolitan Philaret to approach a union with the sergianists who have not diappeared but rather have mutated and now collaborate with those bodies robbing and pimping Russia. They, the sergianists, live in largesse, chauffered in limousines while the old babushki and djedushki sleep in cardboard boxes and die of starvation and exposure. I recall a conversation I had with a recent immigrant, a former spetnatz soldier in Afganistan, how he came to America and why he is not Orthodox, but Christian. He told me, "his friend" to survive had to join the maffia. The maffia demanded that he commit an act of loyalty to them. They asked him to kill his mother. His mother was terminally ill, suffering from cancer. In he went to her about it in tears. She told him, "Son, do what is necessary for your future and its prosperity. My life is over and I will be dead soon." She gave him a pillow and he did the deed. He hated himself for this deed and he saw the apparat of the maffia, with whom it made table. That is why he could not stomach the Russia he once loved and that is why he renounced the Holy Orthodoxy of his people, BECAUSE OF ITS CORRUPT REPRESENTATIVES. Would any of you have anything to do with people who had such a role in the death of any of your loved ones? Russia should be more beloved to you. They, the sergianists, eat caviar at ecumenical banquets and build institutions with ecumenical and vatican money, while in cities across Russia laws are passed prohibiting the eating of cat and dog flesh. They turn a blind eye whilst the last icons the soviets did not steal or desecrate or destroy are stolen from the last remaining churches of Russia and sold in the west, even appearing on ebay. They, to this day bestow upon the latin heretics THE PRECIOUS BODY AND BLOOD of our Lord & Master Jesus Christ, while condemning those who uphold the preciousness and purity of our Holy Faith as "schismatics". What has happened to you all? This monstrous counter-confession to the path blessed by the holy podvig of Blessed +Metropolitan Philaret is not the CONFESSION OF ROCOR. I am ashamed of you who now reach at compromise as a panacea with both hands while denying the crowns of suffering in Christ. The ROCOR I was formed in was a confessing church and not a Russian political maneuver. I leave because ROCOR has left me and has abandoned the legacy of St. Tikhon by pardoning the criminals responisble for his death and by entering into a dialogue without scruple, empowering voices who wish to tear down the temple we have built. St. Tikhon anathemized and threatened excommunication to these agents of the soviet order.
A clear head and a clean heart. Making this decision gives one more of an appreciation of the need for its permanence. HOCNA is mentioned by the poster, but HOCNA rightly indicted Fr. Lebedeff for ecumenism as it is now clear. TO HIM IT IS NOT HERESY AND IS NOT A STUMBLING BLOCK FOR UNION AND HE IS FRAMING THE AGENDA FOR ROCOR--NO GOOD CAN COME OF THE COMPROMISE OF FAITH HE AND THOSE OF HIS SCHOOL OF THOUGHT ENGINEER. Then a parallel between HOCNA and the Synodeia of +Metropolitan Kiprianos is drawn. When has the Synod in Resistance ruminated on the gracelessness of others, rebaptized new calendarists, and declared itself the sole messenger of authentic Orthodoxy? When has the Synod in Resistance denied fellowship to anyone who would share the Orthodox Faith?! When has the Synod in Resistance brought slander, calumny and lies down upon ROCOR?! More importantly, how is the ecclesiology of the Synod in Resistance even comparable to HOCNA?! Indeed, to call those with whom one is in Communion with "schismatics" and "extremists" whilst ones Bishops still share the kiss of peace is the act of an extremist and schismatic...
What has changed since the holy podvig of Blessed +Metropolitan Philaret? Has the mp become anymore Orthodox? No. What has changed is that a new generation has arisen to compromise and corrupt his message. No good can come of it.
I was baptized in Jordanville and revere its holy memory and its legacy. But the ROCOR arising has no time and no place for it... That is the schism and extremism I cannot abide.
When the MP is ready to anathemize ecumenism, renovationism, sergianism and campaign to undo the calendar schism, when it is ready to abolish its soviet autocephalies which were engineered to deflect criticism from the religious persecution of the Russian Orthodox people, when it is ready to lead the Russian Orthodox diasporan mission in Truth Without Compromise and provide succour to those confessors confessing the Orthodox Faith in light of the apostasy of our time, when it is ready to do combat with the forces of antichrist, then we know the All-Russian Sobor of 1918 can be reconvened. Until then the legacy of St. Tikhon, who was bitterly condemned by the sergianists, can never be fulfilled and his instructions can not be brought to fruition for the impediments of the last great apostasy have intruded and prevent it.
ORTHODOXIA I THANATOS!
Rostislav Mikhailovich Malleev-Pokrovksy

Last edited by Bogatyr on Mon 17 November 2003 7:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply