Lydia wrote:Unfortunately, he belonged to the synod of Bishop Raphael. According to Father Siluan and the website of the synod of Archbishop Tikhon, this synod is not considered True Orthodox. They commemorate the new Soviet powers and are involved with occult practices. Bishop Raphael was a high ranking member of the Soviet military, and still maintains close ties to the present ruling party.
He belonged to a what<?>
Father <WHO>?
REALLY?
How shall u prove your TESTIMONY<?>
<!>
et vidi et audivi vocem unius aquilae volantis per medium caelum dicentis voce magna vae vae vae habitantibus in terra de ceteris vocibus tubae trium angelorum qui erant tuba canituri...
With all due respect, and with no desire to stir up controversy or offend anyone, I have to disagree with Fr. Deacon Joseph. I have never met Met. Raphael, but I have met several clergymen of his jurisdiction and I have a copy of his autobiography in Russian. Soon after we (the Lesna Monastery) left the ROCA and joined the RTOC, in May 2007, we were approached by members of his flock from Germany, who insisted that we were now in communion with them. Among other things, they left us this copy of Met. Raphael's autobiography. I don't know what he says now, but that book left no doubt in our minds that he had worked for Soviet military intelligence (the GRU) when he was in Lebanon. In the Russian version of his autobiography that's posted on their website he says quite clearly that he was a military adviser to the commander of a Syrian brigade. That is a GRU position; there were no other kinds of military advisers in Soviet times. That autobiography also made no secret of the fact that he considered himself a "healer", with a special gift. He wrote about much more than alternative medicine; there's a lot there about correcting people's auras, bio-fields, astrology, and numerous other occult practices. I'm referring to the Metropolitan's own writings, not rumors or hearsay. The "center of healing" ("Tselebnyi Tsentr" in Russian) -PROIS- that he founded in 1997, shared the same address as his Church's administrative center, on ulitsa Radio in Moscow for several years, I don't know if it still does.
It is true that Archbishop Lazarus was in the MP for a time and was ordained a priest there, but he did leave and he did repent, and there is no doubt that he was consecrated by the ROCA. I knew him personally and he lived at Lesna for 6 weeks back in 1994. In other words, we observed him closely, and I have no reason to suspect that he had ties with the KGB.
His history with the Serafim-Pozdeev/Gennady-Sekachev group is indeed sad, because there certainly were and still are many sincere people in that branch of the Catacomb Church. One of our monastery's priests started out with that group, so again, my source is someone that has firsthand knowledge of this group. I do think the ROCA could have handled that whole affair differently, and a large part of the blame for that does go to Vl. Lazarus. However, in recent years a lot more information about Serafim Pozdeev has come to light, and I believe all serious scholars of the Catacomb Church now accept that he was never ordained a priest, let alone a bishop, and they therefore do not have apostolic succession. This was discussed at length at an international academic conference about the Catacomb Church, held in Chernigov last year, organized by the Chernigov University, our monastery, Keston College and others.
Again, I do not want to offend anyone, and please forgive me if I have. There is a lot of misinformation and slander being spread, and the history of the Russian Catacombs of the 20th century is a very complicated question, and all the more difficult to sift through for non-Russian speakers. But we have to start somewhere.
Fr. Deacon Joseph's impression from his meeting with Met. Raphael was obviously different and quite positive, and I accept that. But I would ask him to accept that the questions people raise about the Metropolitan are not based merely on hearsay and slander.
Dear Mother Evfrosynia: your blessing!
I apologize for offending you; we have a great deal of respect for your witness and mission in Serbia. Forgive me in that I am responding, but I have a few notes which I hope can clarify. Forgive me for the length of this letter, but I believe that such grave statements and accusations should be addressed seriously and not passed off as fact, particularly in a forum the accused cannot see or read. So let me begin by pointing out why putting this in a private forum is counterproductive.
My Synod, as well as my Bishop, are quite zealous to correct canonical deficiencies, and expect the same of the Churches with whom we are in communion. Rather than view such discussions-- when they are public-- as slander or an attack, we generally see it as an opportunity to either explain or correct ourselves (and in my experience, we have done both on multiple occasions.) When such matters are reverted to a private location, there is no longer any way in a situation like this where we can respond to a verifiable claim without copying private messages, et cetera, and frankly irritating people who are assigned to take care of these matters. In other words, without a verifiable public claim, we look like the ones making an accusation, which doesn't generally go over well with our Bishops, who like your own, are usually pretty busy people.
Also I'd like to point out that the original writer claimed that "Unfortunately, he belonged to the synod of Bishop Raphael. According to Father Siluan and the website of the synod of Archbishop Tikhon, this synod is not considered True Orthodox. They [being his Synod] commemorate the new Soviet powers and are involved with occult practices. Bishop Raphael was a high ranking member of the Soviet military, and still maintains close ties to the present ruling party." You ask me not to assume that what is written is hearsay-- but the problem is that by definition, the post is in fact hearsay. Putting that aside the real question is whether or not the hearsay is true. So let's get to that.
You are absolutely correct in saying that in reference to Leonid Prokofiev's military service (I will have to emphasize this, as his military service was years before he was ever made clergy): "That is a GRU position; there were no other kinds of military advisers in Soviet times." Yes, but some things are missing from the explanation. ALL foreign special forces at the time of Leonid Prokofiev were, in fact, GRU Spetsnaz (which at its height comprised 350,000 troops). While missions in the Middle East were partially done to improve Russia's foreign image, they also involved payment-- which is why I referred to him as a military contractor. Further, he was injured in the rank of Podpolkovnik (Lt. Colonel), which, while field-grade, is not somebody with the weight as originally described and raised to colonel after the injury and made disabled, after which he became an instructor in a military academy until he retired from the military. It is worth noting for those who don't know, that in the Soviet Union-- and Russia today-- military service is compulsory.
To me, the real issue in the letter must be the issue of occultism, because such activity places a person outside the Church altogether. Thus, the particular concern, and particularly distressing, was the following: "That autobiography also made no secret of the fact that he considered himself a "healer", with a special gift. He wrote about much more than alternative medicine; there's a lot there about correcting people's auras, bio-fields, astrology, and numerous other occult practices. I'm referring to the Metropolitan's own writings, not rumors or hearsay. The "center of healing" ("Tselebnyi Tsentr" in Russian) -PROIS- that he founded in 1997, shared the same address as his Church's administrative center, on ulitsa Radio in Moscow for several years, I don't know if it still does."
I have spent something in the range of three to four hours looking up as much as I can in reference to what you are discussing-- in Russian. I have never seen his autobiography. If I had a title for it, I would reference it. I have been digging through literally dozens of articles to find the proof of what you are discussing. I have found apparently over 25 references to one book he has written, called Стяжатели Духа Святаго, in which he states his grandmother was a healer who used herbs, and that he himself saw an idea of spiritual healing, but the quotes aren't even complete sentences.
If that is the book, I would expect that the dozens of Moscow Patriarchate apologists writing on the matter would have picked up on some of the references you mention. If this is not the book, I beg your indulgence in asking for some scans of the pages as well as the title, so that I may look them up.
The PROIS center has actually been closed as I understand it since 1999. That said, the accusation among many MP people since is that the Church is a front for an occult center. Virtually all sources making these claims-- including one on the official site of the RTOC-- refer to a purported interview conducted by a monk of the MP in the book “Orthodox Witches-- Who are They”? ("Православные колдуны" – кто они?) which, admittedly, if a real interview, is horrifying. In reading it, had I not met Metropolitan Raphael and a number of his other Bishops, I’d be convinced he’s a raving occultist lunatic. The problem is that I am not convinced it is a real interview. If someone is so obviously advertising this occultist behavior, it would have been blatantly obvious on any of their dozens of sources. So-called True Orthodox groups that have bizarre divergences of belief (I have in mind the “Marian center” of John of Bereslavl and the Ukrainians under Moisei of Kyiv, as well as the Imyabozhists under Gregory Lurye) usually not only state their divergences of belief from Orthodoxy, but actively promote them as Orthodoxy.
By contrast the only such mention on the site is an explicit denial that healing at the Church involves anything other than typical Orthodox prayers, as was implied by an NTV special, such as here. http://ipckatakomb.ru/pages/428/
So in fact I would have to believe that not only is Metropolitan Raphael an occultist-- and that he and his Bishops are working really hard to cover up a belief which is not documented anywhere publicly on their websites--but that he is apparently willing to speak to people about freely in person, even though my Metropolitan has visited with him over the past few years, for almost as long as Archbishop Lazar lived at your monastery, and that over a space of two years. Surely, the translator could have been “leaving out” occult parts of conversation, but to hold this position after review requires a serious suspension of belief on my part. I would have to believe that this is a long-term coverup that no one among our Greeks and Americans has even spotted. The time I spent with the Russian Bishops in Greece, I didn’t actually need a translator (much), as I can speak Russian conversationally due to my living in Russia a decade ago when I was in ROAC, though it has gotten worse over the years since.
On this matter, then, I really do need to see the autobiography to which you refer. The name would be helpful. If I can verify what you are saying is true, we will not hesitate to get an answer concerning the matter.
On the matter of Abp Lazar, I was not trying to be offensive, but make a point. In the first place, he was not only an MP priest, but his candidacy was put forward to the ROCOR by Fr Dmitri Dudko-- himself a dissident MP priest who eventually capitulated. As most of us know well, whole swaths of the Catacombniks-- not simply the Seraphimo-Gennadites, but others, such as the passportless under Archimandrite (later Bishop) Gury of Kazan, were firmly convinced he was a KGB agent, and had nothing to do with him. The things that he did (largely based on an unfounded claim that the new confessor, Bp Seraphim, was not a Bishop) destroyed parishes and harmed countless souls. He has to answer to that as an Archpastor before God. I am not so willing to dismiss it as a minor lapse in judgment but his general policy since being made Bishop, which was extremely destructive.
I am somewhat distrustful of ‘modern scholarship’ when it comes to the New Martyrs and Confessors, because the MP always seems to have its hand in it. Like my own name saint (St Joseph of Petrograd), for example, for whom a book was recently published claiming he was suicidal. Thus appealing to "scholars" means nothing to me unless real evidence has been unearthed to make the point. If more people have just become cynical about the confession of a saintly prelate of the Catacomb Church, we must do better. For his part I do know Abp Lazar, after remaining in communion with Metr Vitaly in 2001, did a great deal for True Orthodoxy in Russia. But he was also the primary promoter of the belief of the "invalidity" of the Seraphimo-Gennadites due to a lack of consecration certificates, and his refusal to apply economia threw many catacomb parishes into chaos. I believe very strongly in accountability in the Church and until we stop “covering our own”, and start convicting ourselves, our ecclesial situation will only become worse, as we are not doing Our Lord’s will.
I hope that the somewhat long response I have given is evidence that I am not looking to win an argument, but discuss things in a truthful spirit, and I pray you will forgive its length and my disagreement. Again, if you can show scans of these disgusting heresies in the book as well as the name of the book, I promise it will be presented immediately to our Bishops for review.
Pray for myself, my wife and family during this Great Lent! Forgive me, a sinner.
Edit: P.S. I am saddened that this was originally a memorial for Metr Andrei (Tregub). He was a good man and a conscientious pastor. We met and talked in Greece, and I communicated with him for some months after that. He had a good heart and did a lot of good for the Church. Memory Eternal.
Fr Joseph Suaidan (Suaiden, same guy)
Dear Fr. Deacon Joseph, congratulations on the Sunday of Orthodoxy! Thank you for your serious, conscientious and extremely polite reply. I would very much like to reply in the same manner, but I will ask you to be patient, as it's Great Lent, and I'm extremely busy here at the Monastery, as I'm sure you understand. I will try to find the autobiography, and send you the scans. I'm not sure that we kept it though, because we did find it extremely upsetting. I don't believe the book was "Stiazhateli Dukha Sviatago", but I could be mistaken. The woman that visited us back in 2007 insisted that the Metropolitan was a "spiritual healer"; he had healed her daughter and other people she knew, and what she described was definitely occult, not Orthodox prayers, and not herbs, homeopathy, or acupuncture. It included hypnotism, laying on of hands and correcting her aura. I did look at Met. Raphael's site then, and it confirmed our suspicions. When I look at it now I see that it has become a lot more "mainstream Orthodox", for lack of a better term. But even so, in his autobiography on his official site it does say "Отношение к целительству у служителей церкви неоднозначно. Сами они этим даром не обладают и подозревают всех в шарлатанстве. Но нужно судить не по словам, а по делам, конечному результату." I translate roughly: "The attitude towards healing among clergymen is ambiguous. They themselves do not possess this gift and suspect everyone of trickery (or deceit). But one must judge not words, but actions, and by the end result" To my mind, he doesn't at all deny that he's a healer, but he believes he's an Orthodox one. The PROIS center is closed, but it did exist in conjunction with the Church, and there is a lot of testimony that there were occult practices there. But again, I will try to find the autobiography.
I will respond a bit later about Vl. Lazarus and about Seraphim Pozdeev. Sorry, but my time is very limited. But I do believe that serious, sober discussion on these matters is of profit.
Wishing you and your family a blessed feast.
Dear Fr. Deacon Joseph,
I’m very sorry to say that at this point neither I nor our librarian has been able to find the book that Met. Raphael’s parishioner from Germany left us, which contained his autobiography. I therefore have to ask you, for now at least, to accept that what I wrote was my sincere impression and subsequent horror at what I read there. I’ve tried to find more information, and since you know some Russian, I would ask you to read the interview that the Metropolitan has posted on his official website: http://ipckatakomb.ru/pages/380/ . It’s “stennogramma ot 16 ianvaria 2008”. I find many disturbing passages there:
Here he says that Russian Orthodox parishes used to have “healers” and “excorcists” on their staff, who weren’t necessarily clergymen, but had special gifts. I really don’t think this is true.
“Мы обязаны в этом общему невежеству и незнанию истории Православия, истории Церкви, истории взаимоотношения человека с Богом. Однако, нужно знать, что в древнейших источниках церковного Предания и, в частности, в упомянутом вами труде о. Цыпина, его «Церковном праве» была упомянута должность целителя, как сейчас говорим, духовного целителя, а он тогда назывался заклинатель, экзорцист. И более того, был штатной единицей в приходских храмах. Были определены его обязанности, чем именно он должен был заниматься. Экзорцистом мог быть не только священнослужитель, но и мирянин. В последующем посчитали, что экзорцизмом могут заниматься только священнослужители.”
Here he says that priests are granted the gift of healing when they’re ordained, but can’t perform healings, because they don’t have the gift:
“в последующем посчитали, с развитием церковной практики, что только священство имеет дар и апостольское преемство через рукоположение, только оно может заниматься практикой целительства и экзорцизма. Однако пресвитеры, которые по праву, по долгу, по обязанностям должны были заниматься целительной практикой, не могли этого делать, потому что не имели от Бога дара такого. И получилось так, что одних людей благословили этим заниматься, а они этого делать не могут, а другие люди, которые имеют харизму и дар Божий на целение, им запретили.”
And some people with this special charisma continue healing, because such is the will of God:
“ священство в массе своей потеряло дар целительства, а люди, которые были с харизмой, несмотря на всякие запреты, продолжали заниматься им. И сколько бы их не гнали, они были, есть и будут, так как на это есть воля Божия, и благословление Его. “
This is really a bit strange:
“ И я утверждаю, что священнослужитель, который непричастен к целительству, не имеет полноты благодати Божьей. Если он не занимается целительством, то это говорит о том, что священник этот возможный Дар, который ему наверняка даден через рукоположение, не использует, и значит, пребывает в состоянии хулы на Духа Святого.”
Specifically about his center, and that now they only have Orthodox molebens and “Orthodox healing”, that includes elements of physical therapy, “profound massage”, including “vacuum massage’ (?) with honey and with herbal additives”:
“Вопрос: Но у вас существует медицинский центр?
Святейший Рафаил: У нас медицинский центр не существует. У нас существует храм Архангела Рафаила, в котором идут Богослужения. Проводятся таинства церковные: те, которые предусмотрены практикой нашей Православной церкви. Проводятся молебны, которые раньше у нас не проводились, а сейчас проводятся. Раньше, я имею в виду лет 15 назад. Сейчас от тех практик, которые ранее применялись, не осталось ничего. Теперь у нас православное целительство, основанное на осознании своего греха, покаянии, православных молитвах. И плюс к этому еще элементы мануальной терапии, глубокого массажа, в том числе, вакуумного, медового с растительными добавками.”
In another place on the site there are pictures and descriptions of exorcisms and molebens using the Trebnik of Peter Mogila, which is already unusual, to say the least. That is not the Trebnik commonly in use in the Russian Orthodox Church.
Here he speaks about special sessions with non-Orthodox, who are specifically told not to attend the Church services:
“Святейший Рафаил: Кто приходит, тот и верующий. Приходит и иудей, и мусульманин приходит, и православный, и католик, и некрещеный. Ибо есть места и обстоятельства, где все – верующие! Как на передовой, перед смертью, тяжко болеющие… Кого Господь приведет, того и принимаем, т.к. мы все пред Ним равны. Однако, если не православный приходит, мы говорим: «На службу не ходи, служба православная». Мы не отказываем ему, но и не причащаем, и не исповедуем. Мы только говорим: «Не приходите на Богослужение», на службу приходят только христиане, православные люди.”
And here he speaks about individual, private sessions that are not molebens:
“Вопрос: Вы один на один ведете приём?
Святейший Рафаил: Только.
Вопрос: Свидетели мешают?
Святейший Рафаил: А это не нужно. Это не нужно никому. Да, и ни к чему это. Я исполнитель воли Божьей. Поэтому, все эти дела делаются без свидетелей. Но приходят иногда люди и просят: а можно ли нам тоже присутствовать? Ну, ради Бога. Пусть присутствуют. Но это, быстрее, исключение из правил.”
So just what’s up on the official site already raises a lot of questions. From my observation Met. Raphael has become more Orthodox over the years, but I still am not at all sure that I could call his beliefs and his group True Orthodox. I don’t know how or why he and his synod might be deceiving your bishops, but I feel you should be asking a lot of questions.
I also took the time to watch the Metropolitan’s television appearance last January. The link is also posted on the official site: http://ipckatakomb.ru/?s=news&newsgroup=2&nid=1221 and http://www.1tv.ru/promoovideo/57310
I have to admit I was shocked. The program, “Dobrogo Zdorovitsa!” (“Good Health to you!”) speaks mostly about alternative and folk medicine, a lot of which borders on the occult, (it starts with a presentation of excercises appropriate for that day’s particular phase of the moon…) and in my opinion it is inappropriate and unacceptable for an Orthodox clergyman to participate in such a program, and especially in a discussion of the Holy Agiasma from Theophany that borders on blasphemy, treating it as some sort of magic potion available to anyone, regardless of their beliefs, for improving their mental, spiritual or physical health.
Surely Met. Raphael is aware of the accusations that he is an occultist faith healer. Why then would he participate in a program that only serves to confirm people’s suspicions?
As for the question that you raised as regards scholarship and historical research on the Catacomb Church, in reference to my comments on Seraphim Pozdeev and Gennady Sekach, one does indeed have to be very careful in discerning who is doing the research and for what purpose. The MP has indeed published several “academic” works that set out to prove that the Catacomb Church as such never existed, or that it very quickly, at best, by the end of World War II, disintegrated into all sorts of priestless sects, and that the only “valid” Catacomb Church was the body of clandestine activity carried out within the MP: all the illegal, unregistered baptisms, monastic tonsures for “secret” monastics that remained in the world, funerals and other rites that were performed at people’s homes, etc. The best known of these works is “V Poiskah Bezgreshnykh Katakomb” (In search of the Purest Catacombs) by A. L. Beglov. Nevertheless, there are serious historians doing serious research on the Catacomb Church, especially in Ukraine, where there isn’t a “state” Church in the same sense as the MP is the state Church of the Russian Federation, and where the Catacomb Church was very prevalent. These are the sort of academics and historians that attended the conference I mentioned. A. L. Beglov turned down an invitation to attend, but M. Shkarovsky, a well-known and respected historian specializing in the Catacomb Church who works with the MP, did attend and was one of the key speakers. Several scholars from the MP that wanted to attend were in fact not allowed to do so, or “something came up at the last moment”, and they didn’t show. Lydia Sikorskaya, who was a sprirtual daughter of Bishop Guriy of Kazan was present. She has been collecting material on the Catacomb Church for many years and has published several volumes on the confessors of the Catacomb Church.
M. Nechaeva, a historian from Ekaterinburg presented the lecture about Seraphim Pozdeev that I referred to. Her area of research is the phenomenon of the various Romanov pretenders that appeared in Siberia after the slaughter of the Royal Martyrs and their relatives. I think this is an important point, as she does not belong to any Catacomb or True Orthodox group; she had no axe to grind, and didn’t set out to prove that Seraphim Pozdeev was an imposter. She was researching the story of his claim to be Grand Duke Michael Aleksandrovitch, the brother of the Tsar Martyr, the one that he abdicated in favor of. Seraphim Pozdeev claimed that he had miraculously escaped execution by the Bolsheviks, and after hiding out for some time, had been tonsured a monk, ordained and subsequently consecrated a bishop secretly by Patriarch Tikhon shortly before his death. As proof he would show a photograph of himself with Patriarch Tikhon. He was imprisoned by the Bolsheviks for this claim, as well as for his clandestine preaching and services, and under interrogation he denied both being the Grand Duke (which is pretty obvious; one only need look at photographs) and having been ordained. One can quibble about the validity of using testimony from interrogations, a lot of, if not most of which was acquired by torture, but there are other sources: Catacomb clergy (including the last Catacomb Bishop recognized by everybody, the Confessor Peter (Ladygin) and spiritual children of Seraphim Pozdeev who did not recognize or expressed doubts about Pozdeev’s episcopacy. Our priest, Hieromonk Evfimy, who was a priest with the Sekachev group, under Bishop Isaaky in Moscow in the late 80’s and 90’s confirms that he was told that their founder, Pozdeev had actually been the Grand Duke Michael and shown the photograph of Pozdeev with Patriarch Tikhon to prove that this was the genuine Catacomb Church.
Equally suspicious was Bishop Gennady Sekach’s avowal that he had been consecrated by Pozdeev 3 days before his repose as his successor. There is the testimony of the families that Seraphim Pozdeev was living with, stating that there was a meeting but no con celebration, let alone Liturgy; Pozdeev was semi-paralyzed and almost blind by this time. Gennady Sekach also never denied the validity of the MP, and there is testimony that he continued to celebrate in MP churches and to receive a pension from them while posing as a bishop of the Catacombs.
Nevertheless, I do believe that there were and are many sincere clergy and laypeople in the Pozdeev-Sekach group, who believed in these bishops and the validity of their consecrations, and who wanted, above all, to be in the True Orthodox Church. Both Archbishop Lazar and the ROCA should have and could have done much to bring these people to canonical True Orthodoxy.
It’s hard to understand why people like Pozdeev and Sekach, who I don’t doubt were believing Orthodox Christians in their own way, would have intentionally deceived people. Some think they were KGB agents, but I find that hard to believe. Perhaps the KGB broke them during interrogations and used them for their own purposes, but I don’t think they were conscious, willing agents. I’ve often thought that perhaps over time they came to believe their own lies. Torture and imprisonment, may years of hiding and exile, constant fear and suspiscion can do all sorts of things to a person’s mind. I’ve known victims of the Gulag, and that experience marks people forever. You never really get over it.
I will get to Archbishop Lazarus in the next post.