Fr. Komarovsky Crowned!!!

[Kollyvas]

My personal views, even if a sinful echo of the Fathers and the Canons are not a Council..When the Council speaks and these issues are not settled, then talk of SCOBA being "heretical" might be a possbility, but resistance DOES NOT AUTHORIZE armchair popes and synodeias acting like popes. Likewise, my loyal opposition in the MP--which has been voiced here--is not solitary: some have even accused me of being a "matthewite." One would do well to orient oneself with the various Traditionalist Orthodox brotherhoods in Russia, like the Brotherhood of St. Ignaty Branchaninov...or the witness of monasteries of Valaam and Optina. (Incidentally, the Fr. Komarovsky ROCOR is undercutting this work with its SELLOUT...). YES, THE COLD WAR IS OVER!!! I fought in it and WE WON!
Orthodoxia I Thanatos!
Rostislav Mikhailovich Malleev-Pokrovsky
Moreover, that is the point--WE DO AGREE more than we disagree (99%). I, a SCOBAn and loyal son of the MP, am not alone. The challenge, then is a nexus of resistance with those in the Oikumene to bring about conciliarity and resolve the issues that divide us. That our ONE FAITH be in ONE earthly Chalice, for it is ONE Chalice in heaven. We are all Orthodox Christians. We are all sinners and we are all bearing our respective crosses. Let us be as our forebears were--the pagan Romans described our communities thus:
"How they love one another!"
Let us love again.

[Cat.Timothy.]

Who called you a "Matthewite"? My experiance of the Moscow Patriarchate and indeed World Orthodoxy in general has been terrible. However yes there are people within what you call the Ecumene struggling to Orthodox, and especially maybe that is true of the MP, and yes most of them struggle more towards it then I ever did when I was within it.

However Renovationism has been condemned by all the parts claiming to make up the Russian Church. Sergianism has been condemned on at least three occasions by the Catacomb Church. Ecumenism was condemned by the ROCOR in 1983 if that heresy infact needed a special condemnation being a it could be said made up of every heresy there has ever been or will be.

My ex-priest in the MP had all these wonderful arguments as to why Papism and Protestantism werent heretical! Do you believe that? Well he argued that they hadnt been condemned by an Ecumenical council aswell.

I would put more hope in Traditionalists within the Soviet Church than I would put in the "White Church" ROCOR, they are moving towards Orthodoxy while the latter is falling away from it! I would like to here more about the brotherhood of which you speak being a great admirer of St Ignatius.

Asking your prayers,
Timothy.

[Kollyvas]

The Brotherhood publishes, reprints, and distributes literature detailing the enormity of soviet persecution and sergianism as well as Traditionalist texts on prayer and the spiritual life. It is based out of Moscow and functions with the blessing of +Alexis II. It is one of many. Others deal with renovationism, ecumenism, the calendar reform, the ep, union with Rome, etc... So comments about the "gracelessness of stalin's pseudo-church" really are tiring and divorced from current realities. Yes, there are problems in the MP and people saying things they shouldn't, ESPECIALLY ABROAD, but a trip to Russia would show you a very vigorous and Traditionalist undercurrent very much the mainstream, WHICH IS BEING HURT BY THE ROCOR SELLOUT. The condemnations you cite are local and not general and need finalization by the entire Oikumene. Why, on this group I've been accused of "fanaticism," maintaining everbody else was graceless, including the MP! Not to mention what I've seen in private...Yeah, the God of Orthodoxy isn't "big enough" for some.
R

[Cat.Timothy.]

But my point is that my ex-MP priest very convincingly argued that protestantism and papism have never been condemned by an Ecumenical council. I take it regard Anglicanism and Roman Catholicism to be heretical? Okay show me where they have been declared as such by an Ecumenical council... This idea of a local condemnation doesnt make sense to me. Either a the condemnation by ROCOR in 1983 reflects the eternal Will of God or it doesnt! You yourself have said that false "Ecumenism" is a heresy so I would expect that you do regard it as doing such.

"It is not important to them whether a priest is involved in shady business dealings or purely church activities; whether he is a democrat or a monarchist; whether an ecumenist or a zealot; whether he wants to serve Vigil for six hours or one; whether the priest serves a panikhida for the victims who defended the White House or a moleben for those who sided with Yeltsin; whether the priest wants to baptize by immersion or by sprinkling; whether he serves in the catacombs or openly; whether he venerates the Royal Martyrs or not; whether he serves according to the New or Orthodox Calendar - it really doesn't matter. The main thing is to commemorate Patriarch Alexis. Let the Church Abroad have its autonomy, let it even speak out, express itself as in the past, but only under one condition: commemorate Patriarch Alexis. This is a form of Papism - let the priests be married, let them serve according to the Eastern rite - it makes no difference, what is important is that they commemorate the Pope of Rome."[105]

Father Peter Perekrestov.

[Cat.Timothy.]

Do really think that OCA, the EP and all the rest, no mind the current leadership of the MP will have anything to do even with the Synod in Resistance no mind at general council bow down before the views of the Catacombniks and Old Calenderists and admit they were right on the basics ( Ecumenism, Modernism and the dogmatized apostasy of Sergianism being heretical)?

Forgive my awful syntax!

Asking your prayers,
Tim.

[Kollyvas]

Firstly, after the fall of Constantinople and the triumph of the party of St. Mark Evgenikos, it was generally accepted by all Orthodox churches that the excommunication of the latins for blasphemy of the Holy Spirit was an ecumenical pronouncement. Furthermore, there is the Hagioritic Tome which has Conciliar character as well which anathemizes them for teaching created grace. Then there's 3 Synods of Jerusalem signed by the Eastern Patriarchs which have ecumenical character which anathemize them for changing the Calendar of Nicea. So, yeah, in a conciliar manner, the Church has condemned the latins...By extension, the anglicans carry the same condemnations, being a schism from Rome. Now, I think it would be constructive to witness Orthodoxy with them incrementally, but, yes, by council, they bear condemnations.

Now, the OCA, etc. recognizing resistance... If the patronage of the MP is received, this could definitely blossom. The ep's neo-papal pretensions and meddling will eventually spark a backlash; ergo, the opportunity will arise...As far as the OCA is concerned, Holy Transfiguration Monastery and its communities were initially received by them. All it takes is a zeitgeist working in the right direction. All this begins to take shape with dialogue and friendly exchanges, less the condemnations, etc. I saw Fr. Perekrestov's quote: sure seems very pliable, for he changed his position. But let's grant the MP is pragmatic, does that discount the Traditionalist trends and resurgent Russia which will eventually assume their rightful places in the Russian church? I think the answer is plain...
In the LOVE of Christ,
Rostislav

[Mytilinyos]

In those blessed days when such men as Metr. Philaret, Archbp. Averky and our beloved Saint John Maximovitch lived and guided the church, there was never a question, nor evidence to the contrary, that these Hierarchs were no friend to ecumenism or ecuminists, Sergianism or hierarchs or priests of the MP, or desired unity with anyone who believed not as they believed. Are we to assume that the Moscow Patriarchate has condemned itself, as these holy men once proclaim the church's anathemas against Sergius and his pseudo-church, on the Sundays of Orthodoxy during their episcopacy? MP in their eyes was anathemized for killing and imprisioning its own monks, priests and hierarchs and laymen, for refusing to laud the Soviet regime? Are we to accept now that Sergianism is now a non-issue? Are we to forgive Sergius and his church for anathemizing all of our Bishops of blessed memory? Are we for the love of Russia and all things Russian, now going to overlook the MP's membership in the WCC, Its corgial relationship with all those "official orthodox" jurisdictions in world orthodoxy, especially since the union with the monophysites? Are we truly following in the steps of Blessed Philaret? Or are we being led in the steps of a new brood of Pseudo-Orthodox, Apostates from a formally zealot Church? If this quest for union with MP is a thing that is Good and Godly, then "DEMAND" conformity in truth: The truth is SERGIUS and his God-Hating Communists buddies, ECUMENISM, COMMUNISM, MONOPHYSITES, AND those who desire to change and pervert Holy Orthodoxy are anathemized by the Church and by God; ALREADY!, let Moscow "OFFFICIALLY and OPENLY PROCLAIM" this too and I will be glad to attend and commune at services performed by the Moscow Patriarch himself!