ROCOR position towards the MP.

[bogoliubtsy]

Justin,

There is an official opinion of the Russian Church Abroad towards the Moscow Patriarchate. That position has been spelled out in the official synod statements I have provided, not just in personal opinion which is open to interpretation. The official documents of the Russian Church Abroad consistently state that the Church Abroad does not consider the Moscow Patriarchate to be graceless. That's all there is to it. Continuing this dialogue is useless if no one here will address that simple fact. The official documents say this, without question! It is grlaringly obvious:

Quick examples of these types of documents:

We believe and confess that in those churches of the Patriarchate of Moscow where the priest fervently believes and sincerely prays, showing himself to be not only a "minister of the cult", but also a good shepherd who loves his sheep, to those who approach him with faith, the grace of salvation is accessible in the mysteries.

And:

"The situation of the Church in Russia is without precedent, and no norms can be prescribed by any one of us separately."Despite the uncompromisingness of our stand against the betrayal of "Sergianism," we make no "definitions" about it; in particular, our bishops have refused to make any statement that the Moscow Patriarchate is "without grace" and "fallen away" from Orthodoxy."

There is no room for interpreting these documents in any other way than what their very clearly articulated point is. You can provide quotes from private letters not intended from you, and the opinion of one bishop, but these do nothing to override the consistent official position.

[Justin Kissel]

There is no room for interpreting these documents in any other way...

Then we are talking past each other. Odd that the more "moderate" person is the one being rigid.

[bogoliubtsy]

There is no room for interpreting these documents in any other way...

Then we are talking past each other. Odd that the more "moderate" person is the one being rigid.

Well, if you can give me another interpretation of the official Synod statements, I'd be quite amazed. It's kind of like saying- "This dog is red". Is there any other way to interpret that? Of course not. The clarity of these documents makes it easy to speak about them with some certainty.

[Justin Kissel]

Bogo,

Yes, I can give you another interpretation: read it in the context in which it was said. It was not said in a context in which every other statement said exactly the same thing; rather, many different people were saying many different things. To say that ROCOR had one position (other than one of agnosticism) is, IMO, completely anachronistic, and I might dare to say insincere if I didn't think better of you.

You seek to dismiss things because they were "private" letters: as though that makes them less valid!? Is St. Photius' Bibliotheca worthless because it was private? What about the Letters of Saints Cyprian, Basil, Gregory, et al.? Should we instead say "well we can't go by what they said in personal letters, we can only go by public statements". What!? Do you think Met. Philaret expressed different opinions in private, and when speaking in public had a totally different view? When the ROCOR concelebrated with the Serbs in the late 70's, and Fr. Seraphim wrote about it, there was an uproar. Why? Because everyone was like you: they all thought that their position was the real ROCOR position, and that those who opposed them were innovators. The same thing happened 20 years later. The same thing is happening on this thread. You can pile up quote after quote--but that doesn't prove anything more than you've done a lot of copying and pasting.

I could go to Protestant fora and watch them write hundreds of threads in which they link together hundreds of scriptural passages. And they can make it seem so convincing... unless, you know differently. You will think me arrogant and presumptuous for saying it, Bogo, but in this case I believe that I know differently. If this brings me under the (light) condemnation you voiced over at OC.net, then what can I possibly say to change your mind? I've already said all that I can say--anything more would simply be adding in quantity to the content I've already given.

[尼古拉前执事]

Okay time for one more rebuttal before work ...

The sins of the hierarch do not invalidate the sacraments, as the Donatists argued.

Actually they argued priests, but we are talking of the heresy of a synod, which does make them heretics and thus graceless. Show me your bishops' faith and I show you your faith.

[CGW]

Show me your bishops' faith and I show you your faith.

I think you presume if you say that; at any rate, I see no precedent for the statement.

[John the Russian]

First of all, the ROCOR attitude toward the MP was always predicated on the basis of communism being abolished. Anyone who thinks that it has simply disappeaared is sadly misled. The people in power at the time of perestroika did not just vanish. They are still the ones in control but have merely changed clothes to appear different and gather support for a failing system form the US and other countries that rushed to the rescue when they thought the iron curtain was finally falling.
It was a well planned strategy by the communists to lull the world into thinking there is no more threat from them. Had they had the capital, they never would have done such a thing. Or possibly it is the plan for the new world order that has been in the works for centuries and our wonderful leaders in the US and other so called free countires have been planning all along. Keep in mind organizations such as Skull and Bones, the Bilderburgs etc.. that have been secretly working for the comming of antichrist and their new world. Therefore the current MP is not what ROCOR had in mind when they said they were merely a separate part of the church, it was more like they had in mind the Catacomb shurch then anything else.
Unfortunately ROCOR was also infiltrated by these organizations many years ago and has brainwashed many of the faithfull into following along to the path of destruction. the proof is in their actions.
Any hope the true ROCOR had of reuniting with the part of the RUssian church that was left in RUssia was to be united with those of the unfaltering truth, the Catacomb church. The MP is involved in vodka trade, tobacco etc.. not very orthodox if you ask me.

Just my 2 cents