Will ROCOR Priests "Commemorate" Alexy II?

[Nathaniel Kapner]

Dear Ekaterina,

I really hope that we can be friends again, in spite of the cold
hard facts that Dr Eugene L Magerovsky presents. What facts
other than "emoting"have either you or Southern Orthodoxy
presented?

And why would you rant and rave against Dr Magerovsky?
Isn't he one of your own? Is he not a life long parishioner
of the ROCOR at the venerable age of 74? Isn't there much
that both you and Southern Orthodoxy could learn from
the good doctor? I have very much. It just takes a little
humility to ask questions like, "Dr Magerovsky, what does
'locum tenens' mean?"

Then you get to September 4, 1943.

Nathanael

[SouthernOrthodox]

Think we might have struck a cord with the good Brother. You see folks on "the inside" like the good Doctor can have an opinion that matters. Now if you have in fact learned from him, you will know he has written on many subjects, or is this just the excerpt you studied. And since we are on the history kick, your background is where? oh that's right not early 20th century Russia. See if you studied more than just excepts might make a little more sense. As for "emoting" I think I will take the word of people who where there and lived it.

I will agree that to some they just can except the fact that times have changed and that's their right, but for the majority of the descendants who endured this, enough is enough. The big picture Orthodox church is what Holy Fathers and New Martyrs envisioned or did you miss that class in zealot school?

[Dr E.L. Magerovsky]

Dear -- How do I address you? as "southern orthodoxy?"

The MP is masquerading as a church, dispenses "sacraments",
deceives hordes of believers, builds stone constructions that
look like churches of old, blesses the secret police headquarters,
gives church "orders" to intelligence officials and "ministers of security".

That's the tragedy that no one appears to notice or care.
E.L. Magerovsky

[pjhatala]

Dear Dr. Magerovsky,

You must be aware that your position is only one of many varying positions which were taken by the New Martyrs. St. Kyrill of Kazan comes to mind as one who never denied the validity of the Moscow Patriarchate's sacraments, nor faulted others for remaining with the MP. This, mind you, was in the midsts of severe persecution, and following, of course, the "declaration" of Met. Sergii. Why is it that today, when there no longer exists a militantly godless state to which one could submit, even St. Kyrill of Kazan's position is too lukewarm for some like yourself who use quotation marks around the word "sacraments" when describing those of the Russian Church in Russia. Even Metropolitan Philaret(ROCOR) referred to an elder of the Moscow Church (Tavrion) as a wise and pious elder, did he not? Is this possible without the grace of the sacraments? Likewise, the 1962 Catacomb Epistle does not go to the extremes of some like Nathaniel/Milton or yourself in rejecting the sacraments of the Russian Church. And, again...this was during persecutions which no longer exist. This was before the Patriarch openly repented, with the Russian people, of the sin of regicide.

[Nathaniel Kapner]

Dear pj,

You are quite wrong on St Cyril of Kazan - it was only
for an interim period that he was willing to accept the
"sergianist" church's sacraments but even that was
"conditional."

I have the full text of his explanation right in front of me..

Subdeacon Nathanael

[pjhatala]

I'd like to see that. In the meantime, some selections from the Catacomb Epistle of 1962:

Now, your basic question: What are you to do? If the present days were like the days of the Sergianist disturbance, I would tell you what I said then: Go to churches which do not have communion with Metropolitan Sergius, but do not go to him and his partisans. But the times have changed. We have no churches in the USSR now, and can we, who have gone into our solitary cells and find there everything which the churches gave us, forbid the thousands of believers who do not have such an opportunity from seeking consolation and spiritual food in the churches that do exist, and can we condemn them because they go there? We cannot imitate those ignorant ones who stupidly affirm: "Those are not churches, they are demon's temples, those who attend them defile themselves and are deprived of saving grace," and other such foolish sayings.

And so I say to you: If you do not have any other way of taking part in Divine Services and receiving the Mysteries, if you are languishing with thirst for church unity and prayer, and if attending the churches gives this to you - then go there without disturbance, and do not fear that this will be a sin. The Spirit breathes where It will; and in His unutterable mercy the Lord, even through His most unworthy ministers, even through unbelievers, does not deprive Christians of His heavenly gifts. If you wish a more intimate personal communion, then I advise you, as I also told you before, to choose for this sincere and unhypocritical priests - and such do exist in the churches. Of course, it is difficult for them, but they somehow try to squeeze through the eye of the needle.

[Nathaniel Kapner]

Dear pj,

If you are going to use the holy new martyr to support
everything they unspeakably suffered for, please get
your facts straight.

I sat through over 5000 Trapeza readings along with
reading a "saint a day" in either Polksy's or Andreyev's
books. Have you ever read or heard either of them?

If you had done so, you would have known that St Cyril
of Kazan was shot by the sergianist perpetrators in 1937.
The date of his martyrdom has been on my very tongue
from the very first time that Fr Gabriel of HTM monastery
read his life. In other words, your're playing with fire
if you misquote the new martyrs of russia to support
the MP Soviet tool.

BTW - The MP did not begin until 1943. (Met C of K +1937)

Here is his letter to an unknown hierarch:

“The sacraments performed by the sergianists who have
been correctly ordained are undoubtedly saving sacraments
for those who receive them with faith and simplicity, without reasonings and doubts about their validity, and who even do
not suspect anything wrong in the sergianist organization of
the Church.” But at the same time Cyril pointed out that “they
serve for the condemnation of those who perform them and
of those who approach them well understanding the unright-
eousness existing in sergianism and who by their non-resistance
to it reveal a criminal indifference to the mocking of the Church.

" That is why it is necessary for an Orthodox bishop or priest to
refrain from communion with the sergianists in prayer. The same necessity exists for those laymen who have a conscious attitude towards all the details of Church life.”

You should know as well, that his uncertain position was that he
was out of touch with Met Peter of Ktutitsk for he wrote:
"It is entirely impossible at the present time to step forth, since
I am entirely unsure of the attitudes of Metropolitan Peter, in order
to be convinced of his actual views and to decide how to act."

As regards your "catacomb epistle of 1962" there were plenty of
"letters" floating around that were penned by KGB agents. Your #
1962 was the work of Nikita Kruschev who is burning in hell right
now along with the traitor sergios stragorodsky.

Subdeacon Nathanael Kapner
I will stop the vote in May 2006.