Moderator: Mark Templet
+
DEAR FRIEND OF EUPHROSYNOS CAFE AND DEAR BROTHER SILOUAN,
I wish that you read this message SINE IRA ET STUDIO. There are nothing personal or offensive in my words and I beg your perdon if anyone are blesed for me. But I must answer.
1) I know very well the thinking of the russian clergy in South America, as I had say in my previous message. But precisely this is the reason because I cannot understand wich is the veritable motivation behind the nomination of a pseudo-bishop for a pseudo-church, whose origin is the manipulation of an venerable old metropolitan voluntarily retired (and incapable to officiate) by the hands of an previously deposed bishop. You agree with this? You are member of the ROAC… Have you read the statements of Gregorios "of Colorado and the Entire World" about this move?
2)You don’t believe that those (pseudo) clerics or (pseudo) bishops are “ usurpers” because they have ( auto- start) their Jurisdiction (the ROCiE).
Indeed you think that this cariocinetic groups of parasynagogals are verily part of THE CHURCH? Or worst, as some can say about his own group, that this is the ONLY, TRUE, REMNANT, GENUINE, AUTHENTIC,VERILY ORTHODOX, BTW CHURCH?
3) You say now that the Bishop Alexander’s personal reasons are not of your incumbency. But you have read your previous messages?
4) The Bishops of several jurisdictions in the same territory are, as you must know, a uncanonical situation not reglated in the orthodox “diaspora”. One can considerate his dioceses as different national levels, and say that this jurisdiction are personal but not territorial, saying for ex. that Vladika Alexander is the Bishop for the russians, and so on.
Besides,from what time the members of the Rocie recognize as Bishops “Kyr Tarasios (EP), Metropolita Platon (MP) or Vladyka Jeremias (EP-UOC)”?
Rocie, Roac, Dormition Skete Church, the Milan Synod, the Catholic Orthodox French,are perhaps plenty of good people with the very best intentions, nobody denies it( but, as you say, see the fruits).
Do you think that this ecclesiastical groups in the lunatic fringe of canonicity, compromised by association whit the Old Catholics, with the Gnostics and with the Masonry, are not the Church, BUT PART OF THE CHURCH?
5) Yes, Brother Silouan, why this attack ad hominem?
You has co-worked with Bishop Alexander, translating and spellchecking for him. You know well Vladyka, as you had recognized, and now because he is working and ill out of his diocese you punish him. When you collaborate with him you are unaware that he was living in California?
Or here are smelling a personal matter?
6) As I had previously explained to you in a personal mail I am
a member of the Greek Church, baptized in the Greek Church, that is in a ROCOR parish. Is true that both jurisdictions are not in communion and is for this that I not communes in the EP, as you suggest. I am not also in the EP, but there are many friends and family members of me. Are he heretics for you ? Am I heretic for this?
I am not a fervent ROCOR faithful, I AM A FERVENT ORTHODOX FAITHFUL, with all my sins, spiritually infirm as I am.
Which is the new class of ROCOR’s faithful, that also accepted the new calendarist? Or perhaps you mean, that also is accepted by the new calendarist?
Which is your problem with the new calendarist? Are they Heterodox? Are they Heretical?
What is your “last solution” for the new calendarist? The Gulag?
I don’t know if you are argentinian and how many old are you. But I can say to you that here the Russian Church- ROCOR in the years from1900 to the 70’s has provided russian priest for the greek parishes of the new calendar (I can testify this for the Berisso parish), that the first greek church (n.c.) was blessed by the remembered and revered Archpriest Konstantin Isratzoff in 1936,
and that Priest and bishops of Ecclesiastical and new Calendar concelebrate.
The same St.John Maximovitch, and the same Metropolitan Philaret had concelebrated with other clergy IN THE NEW CALENDAR.
The first problem is not the Calendar, is the Heresy.
Why about the Ukrainian “uniates” that offices in the Old? I know, and perhaps you too, that there are some links between this vatican appendix and many so-called “orthodox ” as the Austin group.
Meantime, we can see what say the Blessed Fathers about the Schism and the Heresy.
Saint Basil the Great in his First Canon (from his Letter to St. Amphiloquios of Iconium) says that heretics are wholly separated from us and they are as strangers. The Schisms have his aim in the motivations of the ecclesiastical life and can eventually are solved. The parasynagogal groups are people whitout instruction reunited around insubordinate clergy and bishop.
I think that St. Basil is very clear and that this applies very well at cases as this.
We can speak so long about this Catharist heresies, as the Donatist.., or the search not of the Church that saves, but the search ot the Church worth of ME...
WITH LOVE,
GIORGOS
¡SEÑOR JESUCRISTO TEN PIEDAD DE MÍ PECADOR!
Saint Basil the Great in his First Canon (from his Letter to St. Amphiloquios of Iconium) says that heretics are wholly separated from us and they are as strangers. The Schisms have his aim in the motivations of the ecclesiastical life and can eventually are solved. The parasynagogal groups are people whitout instruction reunited around insubordinate clergy and bishop.
There's a good case for characterizing the MP as a schismatic and heretical organization, such as you describe above. It is a much better case, in my opinion, than the one against ROCiE and Metropolitan Vitaly.
We should always be more concerned with being with the truth than with the majority, but the arguments I hear most against the ROCiE make the fallacious claim that we (including Metr. Vitaly) owe absolute obedience to a majority of hierarchs regardless of whether they are right or wrong.
There are other arguments against the ROCiE, but they generally depend on whether or not the MP is an intact church, something ROCiE denies for good reasons.
Regarding Bishop Alexander's treatment of Metropolitan Vitaly:
He may not have witnessed Metropolitan Vitaly discussing his views on the Moscow Patriarchate, and may not have read the Metropolitan's written opinions on the Moscow Patriarchate even prior to his retirement, but others have and continue to witness Metropolitan Vitaly's stance on this issue. It is most certainly his own. He is adamant that the Moscow Patriarchate is not the Church.
Siluan wrote:Dear Ania:
Do you pray with people and priests of MP?
Is allowed to pray with schismatic and heretics? The Holy Canons prohibit that
With all what you tell me, I am planning go to live to Russia, but of course I won't pray with those of MP.
I do apologize.
How can you stand in front of the relics of such great saints as St. Filaret of Moscow, or Sergius of Rodonizh, or St. Ksenia of Petersburg, or on the Butovo Polya, where thousands upon thousands were martyred, and not pray with the Russian people?
They are not heretics, nor schismatics. I have not heard a valid argument yet that would make them such. If you want, I'd able to give you several reasons why ROCOR can be considered heretical & shismatic. I can give you reasons why the Russian church before 1918 could have been considered schismatic & heretical. I can give you examples of actions of clergy in both those groups that could be considered an abomination... and yet somehow your own jurisdiction you see as the "heir" of both of those. We would need a lot of time & a lot of bandwidth to go into it though, and unfortunately I do have a job.
Argue Ecuminism & Sergianism, and I will argue right back. They have their issues regarding both, but I do not believe they are without grace.
If you start talking to me about KGB agents in the MP, I've met one while I was in Russia, who was still functioning as a priest. It was a jolt when my father told me afterwards who that man had been. People know who the KGB agent priests are. Most are advanced in age. The one I met died a few years ago... the parish let him stay on until his death, since he was well past 80, and pretty much had nowhere else to go. Hopefully he repented somewhere along the way, God grant him eternal rest & mercy. They are dying out, and serve no funtion, and are not being replaced.
In going to Russia, meeting Russian people, and keeping track of the news from all sides of the issue, rather than just one side, you will eventually realize that in Russia things are not black & white. Someone said before that a bad tree can not yield good fruit, or something like that. Go to Russia, and you will see exactly what kind of fruit the MP is bringing forth.
Joshua said
Dear Josua I think that your focus of the thing is correct.
Dear Giorgios:
I don't have anything "personal" with Vladyka Alexander, and if I had it I would say it to him personally "face to face" as so many times I have made it.
I have simply put in this forum the letter to debate it... and DON´T to ATTACK anybody (it is clear, or you need that T repeat it to you) and I don't know what you take everything as an attack.
You mention to former Bishop Gregory of Colorado, you should know that he is no longer bishop of ROAC, and maybe one of the causes can be that letter that you mention (Ukaz 48) http://www.aloofhosting.com/joesuaiden/ ... col48.html
What you say against the Synod of Milan (pardon "group of Austin") is it serious, do you have tests?
I find that freemasons, parasynagogals etc etc.. you should look for them in other places (if you want, you can read among lines)
And as Joshua before correctly said, we should follow to the Faith, not to most. Because most can make a mistake.
Dear Giorgos, I don't want waste time in this discussion, because I see that your view of the things is different. And we won't come to an agreement
With Love in Christ
