High Treason: The Luring of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad to the Moscow Patriarchate
In recent years, and especially since the onset of perestroika, changes have begun to take place in the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCA or ROCOR). At first, they were perceptible only to those who followed events closely, but then with the appearance of the October 2000 Epistle of the Council of Bishops, it became evident to anyone willing to read, that a new direction has been designed to create a path for communication and dialogue with the official Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) otherwise known as the Moscow Patriarchate (MP). The Epistle, although heavily cloaked in admonishing its flock to remain busy with their own salvation and personal piety rather than meddle in church affairs, also recognized the Moscow Patriarchate as a legitimate church and canceled the infamous Declaration of 1927 by Metropolitan Sergii (Stragorodsky), later to become known as the first “patriarch” of the official Soviet Orthodox Church (ROC) - a church that worked hand-in-hand with the communist regime in the destruction of thousands of churches and monasteries as well as the brutal torture and murder of millions of faithful, in other words - the annihilation of Orthodoxy. It is only natural that the October 2000 Epistle was followed by a multitude of protests, only for them to be silenced and the clergy forbidden to serve- simply because they came to the defense of the Church Abroad and gave very plausible reasons why a rapprochement with the MP was not possible. Such treatment of dedicated clergy is an ugly and unprecedented event in the history of ROCOR and it resembles the tactics and behavior of the KGB-controlled MP, rather than ROCOR. The MP, which calls itself the Mother Church, despite the fact that it was established by Stalin and is younger than the pre-revolutionary Church Abroad - the MP is not a church but an organization that has been used as a tool to combat religion by the atheist communist regime.
*In the USSR, and in Russia today, the ROC has always been a tool of the State. Though technically, there was a separation between Church and State after the Bolshevik Revolution, the Church as a potential enemy with its own philosophy, was alien to the Soviet State and for that reason, in the initial stage of the Bolshevik Revolution, all the church people who honestly believed that they had their own Supreme Being to serve, not the State, were mostly exterminated.
Therefore, to suddenly speak of the MP as a legitimate church, as was done by the hierarchs in the October Epistle, created dissension and profound consternation, which was voiced by people, from around the world including Russia, through letters, protests and Orthodox Lists on the Internet. Finally, in July of 2001, the President of the Synod of Bishops of the Church Abroad, his Eminence Metropolitan Vitaly, was forcibly and illegally removed in what can be considered one of the most odious Coup d’Etats in history. Those unfamiliar with the Coup might want to acquaint themselves with at least the most recent events, for instance, the fact that Metropolitan Vitalii’s June 22 Epistle, which he ordered to be read from the amvon in all churches, was forbidden from being read- more specifically, suppressed on the orders of Bishop Gabriel. With unprecedented insolence on the part of a young bishop towards his First-Hierarch, Bishop Gabriel discredited Metropolitan Vitalii’s Epistle, with the help of Archbishop Mark, as not having been written by the Metropolitan. This accusation later was proved to be wrong and the document authentic. One should also become acquainted with the accounts of the infamous July 10th-13th events, when the First-Hierarch was yelled at (literally) and lied to by the bishops under him. On July 10th, the Metropolitan walked out of the meeting in which he was rudely mistreated, thus canceling it and making all subsequent meetings of the new Synod illegal. Much has been written about the events that week, but suffice it to say, people who voiced their concern, and spoke in defense of the Metropolitan and the Church Abroad, as well as against union with the MP, were invariably silenced, labeled as mentally imbalanced or otherwise incompetent, and considered as schismatics who “refuse to obey their bishops.” Words such as sectarians, fanatics, extremists have been applied to them, words that stem directly from the KGB-controlled Moscow Patriarchate, and one must add, have always been used by the KGB to degrade, weaken and discredit.
It is with great sorrow and shame that one reads the reactions to the Coup in the Russian Press: «Переворот в РПЦЗ: Митрополита Виталия, оказывается, отстранили от управления Церковью» (Coup d'Etat in ROCOR: Apparently Metropolitan Vitaly Has Been Expelled from Ruling the Church):
«Фактическое отстранение митрополита Виталия от должности первоиерарха РПЦЗ и его изгнание из Синода (архиепископ Лавр и епископ Михаил буквально потребовали, чтобы митрополит «освободил» свою комнату в здании Синода), совпали с «празднованием» 50-летия его архиерейского служения... Члены Зарубежного Синода не только не откликнулись на многочисленные предложения наградить его правом ношения второй панагии и титулом «Блаженнейший» но и подвергли обструкции. Отказ членов Зарубежного Синода от элементарных приличий и уважения к своему старцу-первоиерарху даже в день празднования его «золотого» юбилея является важным индикатором духовной адмосферы, царящей в нынешнем пропатриархийном руководстве РПЦЗ» (The virtual release of Metropolitan Vitaly from his duties as the First-Hierarch of ROCOR and his expulsion from the Synod (archbishop Lavr and bishop Michael literally demanded that he vacate his room in the Synod building), coincided with the 50th celebration of his services as a hierarch… The members of the Synod abroad not only did not respond to many offers to reward him with the right to wear a second panagia together with the title of the “Most Holy” but subjected him to obstruction. The refusal of the Synod Abroad members to use most elementary rules of respect for their elderly First Hierarch even on the day of celebration of his 50th “golden” anniversary, stands as an important indicator of the spiritual atmosphere which reigns in today’s pro-Moscow Patriarchate leadership of the Church Abroad.)
For those who do not have access to the Internet and are patiently “obeying their bishops,” it is crucial, for the sake of ROCOR’s existence, to become acquainted with that which has been withheld from them. After the Coup d’Etat, an Epistle was issued by the Bishops stating that they “cannot fail to note how, through the wide dissemination of all manner of distortions and false interpretations- especially on websites formed for this purpose on the Internet… full of slander against the hierarchy.” The Epistle admonishes: “Pay no attention to the various Open Letters, Statements… [by that they mean the protests to the October 2000 Epistle voiced by those concerned]… which are being disseminated on the Internet and by electronic mail by various provocateurs.” What these bishops fail to mention is that for many years now, a very vocal, persistent and highly determined and organized group of real provocateurs have been unrelentingly brainwashing the flock on the Internet promoting what they thought would be a smooth rapprochement and convergence with the MP, cheering each other as they went along. These have become so obvious to the readers’ dismay, that they have been labeled as the “pro-MP” faction, gradually leading the Church Abroad into union with the MP and ecumenical World Orthodoxy. As stated in their Epistle, “not one of the hierarchs is striving for a speedy unification with the MP-” maybe not speedy but a definite gradual, highly calculated, behind the scenes process has been under way for years. Behind the names of those who have become obvious advocates of the Union, stand others, who are steering the entire process. Their names will become known later, as more is unveiled- but for now it is important to make that unveiling process available to the public rather than being fearful of repercussions and personal attacks. It is to those who intend on working in whatever capacity God has endowed them with, to help the Church Abroad continue its existence, to those who will not be afraid of spreading the truth - and to disseminate literature banned by the official so-called pro-MP faction - and to those who do not have access to the Internet (apparently a large number of parishioners who have remained in the dark during the entire process), that this work is humbly dedicated.
Reactions from Moscow
Shortly after the forced removal of Metropolitan Vitaly, in July of 2001, the MP began to voice its endorsement:
Мы приветствуем тот факт, что наиболее здоровые силы в лоне Русской Зарубежной Церкви сегодня практически у руководства. (We welcome the fact that the more healthy forces in the Church Abroad have predominated and are now for all practical purposes in charge of it.)
“A Rapprochement with the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad?” sneers the Nezavisimaya gazeta on July 20, as it proceeds to state that a “new split within the émigré Russian Orthodox Church Abroad may lead to the reunification of many of that church’s leaders with the Moscow Patriarchate. The recent departure from the émigré church of its leader Metropolitan Vitalii opens the way to such a rapprochement.” And from the official website of Tass, in an article entitled “Metropolitan Vitaly is No Longer the Head of the Church Abroad,” we read:
“Bishop Michael, who was Metropolitan Vitaly’s immediate vicar, supported the suggestion of the other hierarchs to put an end to Metropolitan Vitaly’s powers. Archbishop Lavr (Shkurla) of Syracuse and [Holy] Trinity [Monastery] is the key figure in the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, those taking a stand for union with the Russian Church…The attainment of positions of leadership within the Church Abroad by supporters of union with the Mother Church permits us to hope that the surmounting of the [existing] divisions in the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad is not too far distant.”
Having realized that their actions were becoming too obvious, and people were beginning to read and pay attention, shortly after the Coup d’Etat, the pro-MP faction of the bishops decided to switch gears and appear as if they were slowing down the process of unification. One guesses that it is only done temporarily, so as to pacify people, let them “fall asleep” and let them think all is well- after all, our bishops said that there is no unification process taking place. We learn that Abbott Ioakim, for instance, who was sent to hold talks with the MP, is excommunicated. The question arises, why hold “talks” and appoint someone who suddenly will not be “allowed” to talk? In “Blow to Possible Reunion in Russian Orthodoxy: The Thorny Path to Moscow,” Dmitry Starostin observes:
The repressed archimandrite declared his own adherence to the MP and was received into its bosom ‘at existing rank.’ The chief significance of Archimandrite Ioakim’s transfer into the jurisdiction of the MP is that now the “Commission of Relations” that he headed has ceased its existence…Even if Archbishop Laurus and his fraction retain control over RPTsZ (Church Abroad) they will not tackle any new contacts with Moscow very soon.”’
Then we learn that Fr. Joachim left the Church Abroad and joined the MP. Sergei Chapnin, in his article “К Чему Смута?” (Why the Discord?) unravels the ploy:
РПЦЗ - одна из порожденных той революцией церковных групп- сегодня тратит все свои силы на борьбу за выживание. С этой точки зрения только один вопрос имеет принципиальное значение: когда и на каких условиях состоится воссоединение РПЦЗ с Московским патриархатом (МП). Если говорить кратко, митрополит Виталий был лидером «сектантского» крыла РПЦЗ (Тhe Church Abroad - one of those groups born of the revolution- today is wasting all its strength on the struggle for existence. Yet only one question remains meaningful: when and on what terms will the union of the Church Abroad with the Moscow Patriarchate take place? In short, Metropolitan Vitaly was the leader of the “sectarian” wing of the Church Abroad.)
Note that the word sectarian reappears time and again, belittling the Church Abroad. When did the term sect become so popular that the Church Abroad, the original Russian Orthodox Church, which was forced into exile during the Bolshevik Revolution, is now suddenly labeled a sect? As to the recent statement made by the bishops in their July Epistle, denying the fact that there is a pro-MP faction amongst them, the Russian Press comments:
Это заявление может быть дипломатическим ходом и не соответствовать действительности в полной мере. Верующих необходимо успокоить и сделать это можно только одним единственным способом- подтвертить существующий status quo и заявить об отказе от каких бы то ни было перемен в политике по отношению к МП. Логика сохранения РПЦЗ как единого организма требует тактики умиротворения. (This could have been a diplomatic step and did not correspond to reality. It is important to pacify the flock in the most efficient way possible, by reaffirming the status quo and deny any political changes with regards to the MP. The logic of preserving the Church Abroad is an organism that requires the tactic of conciliation.)
How were such devious tactics of conciliation acquired by ROCOR hierarchs?
Conciliation, convergence and high treason
As things unravel, one becomes aware of the fact that, contrary to the bishops’ denial, there has indeed been a unification process taking place and the pro-MP faction has been fast at work for years. Newspapers mention it without any reservation, yet the bishops dare keep it from their flock. One might begin with 1997, when in an Interview with the MP entitled «Надо стремиться к единству Русской Православной Церкви, и в этом направлении я стал предпринимать осторожные шаги» (We Must Strive Towards the Unification of the Russian Orthodox Church, and in that Direction I Began to Take Careful Steps), Archbishop Mark of Germany clearly stated:
Interviewer: «На Православие Вы смотрите широко, включая в него и Вселенскую Патриархию, и Московскую?» (You see Orthodoxy in general as including World Orthodoxy and the Moscow Patriarchate?)
Archbishop Mark: “Конечно, безусловно! Надо довести церковный народ до такого сознания, что это- правильный путь» (Of course, indisputably! We must lead the people to such a state of mind, that this is - the right path.)
To this insolent statement vis-à-vis the people of ROCOR, which attempts to brainwash and lead people to a state of mind and which contradicts everything that ROCOR stands for, Metropolitan Vitalii replied:
Vladyko, no one ever, neither Sobor, nor Synod, nor I gave you permission to conduct these ongoing conferences, persistently leading towards a final resolution, as is written in your statement”
To Archbishop Anthony of San Francisco, Archbishop Mark of Germany is known to have written:
Если мы откажемся- по указке фанатиков- от общения с Сербской Церковью, тогда мы просто скатимся в сектантство… мы должны восстановить общение с Русской Церковью в ее полноте, мы теперь находимся в опасности вообще потерять связь со вселенским православием. (If we refuse- as suggested by fanatics [sic] - to commune with the Serbian Church, then we simply will slide down into sectarianism... we must restore communication with the Russian Orthodox Church [MP] in full, as we are now in danger of losing contact with World Orthodoxy.)
Thus, for those who find it hard to believe, the issue is quite simple and Bishop Mark made his position quite clear, ROCOR must unite with World Orthodoxy and Ecumenism, the “heresy of heresies”! One might mention that the May 2001 (SCOBA) Meeting of Orthodox Canonical [sic] Bishops, [as purposely entitled by the Press-Secretary Representative of the MP in the USA], has established a committee and an administrative board that will look into interjurisdictional Orthodox problems in America, with the purpose of «attracting and inviting bishops and representatives of various Orthodox jurisdictions». Slowly but surely, the Church Abroad, if left out of these ecumenical meetings, will begin to be viewed as uncanonical. The path is indeed, highly organized and planned down to even a very specific use of such denigrating vocabulary as uncanonical, sect, fanatic, mentally imbalanced, etc. The sinister Beria, Stalin’s right hand was one of the masterminds behind some of the tactics used to bring people to a state of mind:
It is not always necessary to remove the individual. It is possible to remove his self-willed tendencies to the improvement of the gaols and gains of the whole. The technologies of Psychopolitics are graduated upon the scale which starts somewhat above the removal of the individual himself, upward toward the removal only of those tendencies which bring about his lack of co-operation.
Any man who cannot be persuaded into Communist rationale is to be regarded as somewhat less than sane, and it is therefore completely justified to use the techniques of insanity upon the non-Communist. Entirely by bringing about public conviction that the sanity of a person is in question, it is possible to discount and eradicate all of the goals and activities of that person. By demonstrating the insanity of a group, or even a government, it is possible, then to cause its people to disavow it. By causing a revulsion on the part of the populace against its leader it is possible to stop any government or movement. “A paranoid believes he is being attacked by Communist.” Thus, at once the support of the individual so attacking Communism will fall away and wither. An entire revolution can be effected without the suspicion of a populace until it is an accomplished fact. Just as in Russia we had to destroy, after many, many years of the most arduous work, the Church, so we must destroy all faiths in nations marked for conquest.
The changes of loyalties, allegiances, and sources of command can be occasioned easily by psychopolitical technologies. Defamation is the best and foremost weapon of Psychopolitics. Continual and constant degradation of national leaders, national institutions, national practices and national heroes must be systematically carried out, this is the chief function of Communist Party Members, in general, not only the psychopolitician. Every individual who rebels in any way, shape, or form against efforts and activities to enslave the whole, must be considered to be a deranged person whose eccentricities are neurotic or insane and who must have at once the treatment of a psychopolitician.
Used in psychological hospitals or “psikhushki” to this day, what does that treatment consist of?
Brain surgery, as developed in Russia, should be practiced by the psychopolitical operative in training to give him full confidence in 1) the crudeness with which it can be done, 2) the certainty of erasure of the stimulus response mechanism itself, 3) the production of imbecility, idiocy, and dis-coordination on the part of the patient and 4) the small amount of comment which casualties in brain surgery occasion. Using criminals and prisoners, the psychopolitical operative in training should experiment with duress in the absence of privation, administering electric shocks, beatings, and terror-inducing tactics, employed in hypnotism, and watch the conduct of the person when no longer under duress.
Dimitry Pospielovsky, a graduate of the London School of Economics and “confident in the leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate,” predicts the take-over of Rocor:
“To avoid confrontation and splits, the patriarch has chosen to avoid direct exposure and chastisement of the extremists within the church, concentrating instead on preaching morality, moderation and tolerance [the word tolerance in perestroika terminology, is often used promote conciliation and convergence] to the whole nation and its leaders… The renewed supreme ecclesiastic bodies, mandated by the whole church, commanding the respect and support of the flock, would then be able to take a stand, condemn extremism and racism, and ban dissemination of hatred by any groups within the church. Should this lead to some of the perpetrators of hate propaganda [sic!] joining the ROCOR or some or some other esoteric sect [sic!], it would not hurt the church as a whole; on the contrary, it would purify it and assure it of the position of spiritual leadership in the nation. Moreover, it is only then that the more moderate majority of the ROCOR membership would likely reunite with the mother church, and whatever might remain of the ROCOR would become irrelevant [sic!] as a small extremist sect.”
Why such a meticulously planned take over of Rocor? The answer is the same as “why perestroika?” Economics. Western hard currency for military advancement is an old trick, even before perestroika, from the likes of Armand Hammer who robbed Russia of its treasures, to Lenin’s NEP which fooled the world, to the Rosenbergs who gave away secrets to Soviets on jet engines. Soviets used them in the Korean war, before the US even had a chance to build them! Monastery and church lands forcibly being taken over by the MP are financially beneficial, and of course, power, control and modernization of Orthodoxy have something to do with it as well.
*We have to have all Russians united, wherever they live, whatever they preach!
Author: Why? What is their [the MP's] gain?
*Well, first, economic gain. The Russian community in some parts of the world is quite well off.
Archbishop Mark’s role, as a major leader in the process of unification, is quite clear from his writings and actions, as well from his choice of words, with such terminology as sectarians, fanatics, denigrating anyone dedicated to preserving the purity of Russian Orthodoxy. The Office of External Ecclesiastical Relations of the MP welcomed Archbishop Mark's efforts in joining the ecumenist World Orthodoxy:
On September 9, the body calling itself the Commission of German Orthodox Churches, which incorporates the German Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad headed by Archbishop of Berlin and Germany Mark, published a statement calling for continued communication between the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, and expressed its disappointment with the Appeal of the ROCA Archbishopric Council of May 13, 1998 which defies such communication.
For further information on Archbishop Mark’s position, see «Экумнические похождения нашего? Архиепископа Марка» (Ecumenical activities of Our? Archbishop Mark).
On the occasion of Orthodox Sunday in 1992, chaired by ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and attended by the Head of the Moscow Patriarchate, the Heads of Holy Orthodox Churches and World Orthodoxy strongly denounced what they labeled as «the schismatic activities of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad». It is important to keep in mind that Rocor considers ecumenism as the «heresy of heresies» and leaders associated with ecumenical organizations during the course of the 20th century, including the World Council of Churches, are the same people, and descendants of those, who laid the path for and brought into being the Revolution. Although a discussion of ecumenism is outside the scope of the present work, it is crucial for every Orthodox to become acquainted with its perilous consequences. As to the WCC, here is a small window into its relationship with the MP:
Author: Why did they [the MP] join the WCC?
*Well, they joined to snoop around, to look for potential gains. Don’t forget that the the ROC was very actively used to promote the cause of Peace- to unite peace loving people against the US, as the no. 1 potential aggressor. So ROC tried to influence these church officials, through the WCC, that Soviet Union foreign policies were very peaceful [sic!], aimed at Universal Peace and nothing else. It was the US and NATO allies who undermined the world stability. So in their own subtle way, they tried to simply spread Soviet propaganda - it was a tool of Soviet propaganda inside the WCC. That was their mission, and also, to look for some weak spots among individual priests, Protestant and Catholic - were not alien to communist ideology. In fact in Italy some Catholics were voting Communist! Also ROC looked for potential friends among other denominations, trying to take them over to their side. “Let’s work together for World Peace” thus softening, of course, the resistance towards communism.
An appeal, entitled “Orthodox Anti-Globalists Think RPTs (MP) Accomplice of Antichrist” has been recently enacted to challenge globalization, ecumenism’s closest associate. It states:
“The leadership of the MP actually supports dragging Russia into the system of the new world order and traditional ecumenical contacts of MP with the World Council of Churches and Congress of European Churches are openly being transformed into participation in the work of global inter-religious unification operating under the aegis of a world government. The appeal expresses serious doubt that genuine national and church regeneration is taking place in Russia. Russia’s participation in the process of globalization will inevitably lead to a loss of national sovereignty over the maintenance of its appearance and can become the last stage in state degradation.”
The process of unification through deceitful convergence is indeed, and very obviously so, well under way.
Author: What about the Church Abroad?
*Well, the Church Abroad today is now being courted. [sic!] In the old days, the Church Abroad, as I said, was to be neutralized. Today this problem has been resolved. We don’t have to neutralize. It’s no longer a hostile organization. We want to embrace all under the Moscow jurisdiction [MP]!
In the old days, everyone who lived outside of the USSR, emigres, writers, displaced persons, they were all considered as potential enemies of the State. They were enemies because they lived outside- why not go back to Russia? [because that is how they were annihilated] Today the policies of the Russian Government have changed completely. All emigres outside USSR are friends! [how come, then, is force necessary during the seizures of the Holy Land Rocor property] who have to help Russia and we will help [help?! By forcibly taking over?] each other! And it was Putin, actually Yeltsyn but Putin made it more forceful, [sic!] who proclaimed that we have to unite all Russians abroad, we are one community, one nation, nothing separates us any more! [sic!]This is why the Church Abroad is probably loosing its position [the intention all along, ever since communism outlawed it] among the parishes- because the Soviet monster is dead. There is no evil empire! ROC is tainted by cooperation with the Soviet system but sill Russia is moving forward [militaristically, through western funding, yes, otherwise it is a dying nation, as will be observed below] and why not, in the end, unite?
The terms schismatic and sect have been used by various ecumenical, world Orthodoxy and MP writers and spokespeople to denigrate the Church Abroad and to gradually instill in its flock that it has no right to exist. This tactic, typical of communist and ecumenical brainwashing techniques, has been adopted by some members of the Rocor clergy, those in the pro-MP faction. Fr. Roman Lukianov (Boston), for instance, in his letter to the Metropolitan of July 1997, states that the «Church Abroad is in danger of becoming a sect», to which the Metropolitan’s response entitled «Letter to a Priest Concerning the Origin and Status of the Moscow Patriarchate» includes the famous statement once made by Lenin:
“If you need a Church, we will give you one, we will even give you a Patriarch, but it is WE who will give you your Patriarch. And it is We who will give you your Church.”
The unification process, despite what the pro-MP bishops say, has been on-going for a number of years, even among the clergy. In addition, the term sect has also been used by the Putin regime to enact and enforce its “law of no tolerance” with regards to sects, for the purpose of especially targeting the Russian Church Abroad which it considers a sect.
The intentions of the MP are quite clear. According to the Deputy President of the Foreign Relations Department of the Moscow Patriarchate, abbot Mark Golovkov, who chaired on March 9th a round table conference entitled «Problems of Property of the Church Abroad», at the Moscow Lomonosov State University:
The matter of church property is a closed area for studies. In this sensitive region it is necessary to have basic materials and to tightly cooperate with the Foreign Relations Department of the MP...lawyers of the MP at present are trying to secure the «return» of all the property [he was speaking of Rocor churches in Germany] to the Moscow Patriarchate . Similar real estate is located in Switzerland, France, Denmark, the USA and Argentina. The most effective way to extricate it from Rocor and transfer it to the MP would be to use the channels of Foreign Affairs Ministry of Russia.
The seizure of property belonging to the Church Abroad, is indeed, very financially advantageous for the MP. One only has to recall, for instance, the multi-million dollar value of the Holy Land church and monastery properties that have been lost to the MP. To those unfamiliar with the tragic events of Hebron and Jericho, the seizure of property, incidentally, was, indeed, carried out by force!
Author: What about the Holy Land?
*Well, the ROC in Jerusalem was always the main harbor, a KGB outpost in Israel.
Author: What happened to the land seized by the MP in Hebron, Jericho?
*Well, there was a forceful eviction. Well, it is now fully under the MP, that’s all. They took it over forcibly.
Author: Why would there be a need to use force, aren’t we friends?
*Well, because they resisted. So they took it over by force. All property now is under the MP.
Another act of misleading the uninformed, used to discredit the actual existence of Rocor, is the notion that Rocor was established after the revolution, when actually it represents the continuation of the original pre-revolutionary Russian Orthodox Church. The blessing for its continued existence was given by His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon, prior to his being murdered by the Bolsheviks. The brainwashing technique of considering Rocor as a “temporary church” is demonstrated quite clearly in the following statement by Vsevolod Chaplin, a spokesman for the MP, who after mentioning a list of monarchist organizations that have been formed in the early 90s (many of which were actually controlled from the inside by the KGB and were created to discredit those in favor of the revival of monarchy, as will be seen below in the case of Pamiat’), states:
Among the supporters of these organizations are significant numbers of priests and active laypersons of the ROC of the MP and the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, a church structure created after the post-revolutionary emigration [sic!] and today having no canonical ties with the Moscow Patriarchate.
To the uninformed, this can easily sound as if the Church Abroad appeared out of nowhere after the revolution and now is no longer canonical because it has no ties to the MP.
The insolent article «Алексий II ждет 'отчета' от Иерархов РПЦЗ и подтверждает свою верность экуменизму» (Aleksei II waits for an ‘Account’ [sic!]from the ROCA Hierarchs and Confirms his Allegiance to Ecumenism) in the Russian Press confirms the fact that the MP is actually suggesting that during the course of unification, Rocor be “subservient and not delay”!
While on vacation in Switzerland, Aleksei II made an important statement with regards to the relationship between the MP and the Church Abroad… “The schism between the ROC and the ROCA will be resolved in time. I believe that time heals all ailments and divisions. It will heal this division as well because ROCA and the MP are flesh and blood of their people’s flesh and blood. Reasons that have previously justified the separation are no longer relevant and all factions not only of world Orthodoxy, but all Christian denominations must also unite. There must be compromise and subservience [sic!]. As to the process of unification, the ROCA is advised not to delay it [sic!]” (не затягивать).
*Whereas the ROC [MP] was always a subservient tool of the State, it never existed on its own (as for instance, did the Polish Church), the Church Abroad was part of the white guard movement, anti-Soviet, hostile émigré organization - and as such, it was targeted for penetration by the KGB, with the purpose of dissolving the organization or turning them over to the Soviet side, or neutralizing them as anti-Soviet elements.
Author: How was it done?
*Very simple. There were 3 ways. 1) To neutralize, to put an end to anti-Soviet activities, 2) To turn them into your friends and 3) To take advantage of the parish and to turn the parish, to manipulate the parishes, to look for potential friends of the Soviet State.
Author: Things have been developing quickly these days, a sort of a dictatorship has been created, silencing people, banning clergy, making people believe they are fanatics, mentally imbalanced-weakened, etc. Was that one of the tactics of manipulation?
*In the old days yes. Nowadays, well, ROC has gained some status in Russia. In the old days it was an obedient servant of the state. Today it has become a Junior Partner of the State. Patriarch Alexei has been a Soviet Agent since 1960s, I believe, and he had also been helpful in cementing Russia’s new system, a semi-democratic, semi-totalitarian system. Because Russian leadership has discarded Communism as a main ideology, it had to accept some kind of ideology, it could not operate in a void, so they accepted Russian Orthodoxy as a new substitute for communist ideology. As a result, the church moved up in the Soviet - I mean Russian- hierarchy, up from the servant to a Junior Partner. They now occupy a certain niche inside the Russian political system and the patriarch, Alexei II, has become a far more visible figure than in the old days. They are still very loyal to the State but they try to conduct their own policy. For instance, Mr. Putin would like to invite the Pope, well he wants to raise his own prestige in the eyes of the civilized world and he knows that it is difficult to ignore the Vatican, but Alexei said “no, in my lifetime, not one single hierarch of the Catholic Church will come to Russia.” [The author’s question was never really answered.]
Every sentence of the above statement is highly important, pointing to the reader, that the changes in the Soviet Union-Russia have been highly planned to fool the world, to pacify and to deceive, for the purpose of convergence. As will be observed later, nothing has changed, only renamed, in the name of false friendship, typical in communist-internationalist-ecumenist tactics which have remained the same since the 19th century agitation days of the Social Democrats. Junior partner of the State! Alexei has been instrumental in cementing the new system! It had do accept some kind of ideology! Orthodoxy as a substitute for Communist ideology! [sic!] Putin wants to raise his prestige!
As it seems in foreign nations that the church is the most ennobling influence, each and every branch and activity of each and every church, must, one way or another, be discredited. Religion must become unfashionable by demonstrating broadly, through psychopolitical indoctrination, that the soul is non-existent ant that Man is an animal. The lying mechanisms of Christianity lead men to foolishly brave deeds. By teaching them that there is a life hereafter, the liability of courageous acts, while living, is thus lessened. Religion must be made synonymous with neurosis and psychosis. People who are deeply religious would be less and less held responsible for their own sanity, and should more and more be relegated to the ministrations of psychopolitical operatives. While we today seem to be kind to the Christian, remember we have yet to influence the “Christian world” to our ends. When that is done we shall have an end of them everywhere. You may see them here in Russia as trained apes.
It is necessary to work incessantly upon the official,using personal defamations, wild lies, false evidences and constant propaganda to make him fight for you against the church. We must be like the vine upon the tree. We use the tree to climb and then, strangling it, grow into power on the nourishment of its flesh. We must strike from our path any opposition. We must use for our tools any authority that comes to hand. And then the decades sped, we can dispense with all authority save our own and triumph in the greater glory of the Party.
Now that Communism has not “fallen”
One of the most often heard statements in defense of the unification process is the notion that communism has fallen, and therefore talks and committees can be formed to discuss that which stands in the way of unification. This kind of thinking presupposes that indeed a change of guard has taken place in Russia, and that the MP is now a legitimate church with which one can talk and even merge. In reality the insidious ways of those who created the Revolution, the Internatsional and persecution of the Orthodox, have unfortunately not ended with perestroika.
It is in the reform movement of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, existing side by side with the liberal intelligentsia, the Social Revolutionaries and those preparing the path to the revolution, that one finds the roots to the on-going destruction of Orthodoxy.
«Решили реформировать Церковь Божию.. Для этой пагубной цели эти враги истинной Церкви мнящие себя последователями первенствующей апостольской Церкви... они постараются увлечь за собой маловерующих из интеллигенции... Собор возбуждающаго в некоторой части нашего духовенства и так называемой интеллигенции дикия желания внести посредством реформ в православную Церковь чисто протестантский дух» (They have decided to reform the Church... For this perilous goal, these enemies of the True Church, having labeled themselves as the followers of the early Apostolic Church... will try to lure those members of intelligentsia who have little faith… the Sobor will arouse in some of our clergy and in the so-called intelligentsia an incredible desire to introduce into the Orthodox Church reforms of a purely Protestant nature.)
The reform movement with its direct line to renovationism and ecumenism, was active in infiltrating the church for years before the revolution and it continues to do so today. The circle included the future лже-патриарх (false patriarch) Sergei Stragorodsky, who even before the Revolution worked to destroy Orthodoxy, and who, then after the Revolution, viciously persecuted the Church and led its faithful to their deaths.
ХХ век, век царствования тeмных сил, можно сказать начался с 1904 года. Силы тьмы подготовили к этому времени никому ненужную войну с Японией, кончавшуюся весьма неудачно для России. Посредством пропаганды и трудностей, вызванными войной, создали револьционную атмосферу в стране. Уже в это время внутри Церкви среди духовенства обнаружились лица с революционными воззрениями… Будущий патриарх РПЦ Cергий (Старогородский) выступал на собраниях в Петербурге в качестве председателя. Из всех духовных участников собрания еп. Сергий (Старогородский) занимал самую радикальную позицию, признавал принципиальную свободу совести и необходимость отделения Церкви от государства...
Либерально-реформационное движение подготовило почву - идеологическую, социально-политическую, философскую, подготовило кадры для будущей обновлеческой реформации… Уже задолго до революции зарождалась внутри Церкви новая неверная церковь «блудница». Все это собрание разрозненных группировок и личностей старалось посредством пропаганды создавать революционную реформационную атмосферу в Церкви. (The 20th century, the century of the reign of the dark forces, started from about 1904. The dark forces had by then prepared the war with Japan that nobody needed, and that ended disastrously for Russia. By means of propaganda and difficulties caused by the war, they created a revolutionary atmosphere in the country. Already then, in the Church, among the clergy, appeared a number of characters with revolutionary views. The future patriarch of the ROC, Sergei (Stragorodsky) appeared on various committees in St. Petersburg in leadership position of chairman [he presided]. From amongst all the clergy who participated on these committees, Bishop Sergei (Stragorodsky) always held the most radical position and he recognized the freedom of worship and the need for the separation of Church and state [!!!] The liberal-reformationist movement paved the way- ideologically, socio-politically, philosophically- for the future renovationist reform movement… Already long before the revolution, was conceived within the Church [through these infiltrators] the new «whore [false] church». All these groups and their diverse opinions, were trying by means of propaganda, to create a revolutionary reform-minded atmosphere in the Church).
The offspring of the reform movement, the Living Church was to do away with His Holiness Patriarch St. Tikhon and that which he represented, true Orthodoxy. Here is a window into their insidious ways, for the reader to compare with what is taking place today.
Тихона вызвать и затребовать от него в 24 часа публикации, отлучения от церкви лишения сана и отречения от должности вышеуказанного духовенства, а также потребовать от него издания специального послания заграничному православному духовенству и выдаче представителям Соввласти ценностей находящихся в заграничных церквах. В случае если Тихон откажется от исполнения вышеуказанных требований такового немедленно арестовать предъявив ему все обвинения совершенных им против Советской Власти по совокупности. Тогда перед нами встала задача обработать Тихона, так чтобы он не только извинился перед Советской властью, но и покаялся в своих преступлениях и тем самым поставил бы в глупое положение- монархистов. Благодаря созданной для Тихона обстановки и условий, где он содержался под стражей, а также и правильно сделанного к нему подхода, Тихона удалось убедить и он собственноручно написал раскаяние, которое конечно, не могло не поразить его друзей считавших его три дня тому назад стойким и неустрашимым человеком… (Call for Tikhon and demand from him within 24 hours, that he publish his excommunication from the church, with loss of rank and renunciation of responsibility of the above-mentioned clergy along with him, and also demand from him that he write a special decree to the clergy of the church abroad and ask that all valuables in churches abroad be relinquished to the representatives of the Soviet Power. In case Tikhon refuses from performing these said demands, arrest him immediately and present him with all the charges committed by him against the Soviet Power...Then in front of us rose the need to «work Tikhon over», in order that he will not only beg forgiveness of the Soviet Power, but that he confesses his crimes and thus would put in a bad position- the monarchists… Thanks to the creation for Tikhon of a special environment and conditions, where he was under arrest and guards, as well as the right kind of tactics, we were successful in persuading him and he penned his confession, which of course, could not but surprise his friends who 3 days ago thought of him as a firm and fearless person [excellent brainwashing tactics at work].)
Противодействие Тихона изъятию ценностей есть преступление (Tikhon's opposition to the seizure of church valuables is a crime) Нужен-ли Патриарх? Вместо патриарха не оставить-ли во главе церкви «коллегию» но без присутствия в ней контр-револьционных элементов (даже в канцеляриях) (Do we need a Patriarch? Instead of a patriarch, should we not put at the head of the church a "committee" but without the presence in it of any counter-revolutionary elements (not even in the secretariat)).
In the writings of the revolutionary Vladimir Bonch-Bruevich, we can observe the task of the Bolshevik-led Living Church unfold:
Духовенство должно было свернуть своего вчерашнего властелина и главу, Патриарха Тихона. Они люди полезные и нужные для творчества новой жизни [комунизма]...Они назначили в Храм Христа Спасителя хитрейшаго политикана из своей среды, делающего церковную политику, прот. Красницкого [один из вождей Живой Церкви]. Не надо думать что церковь слаба, что она разложилась, упала. Неть она еще сильна и мы не ослабевая ни на минуту должны наносить ей удар за ударом своей открытой пропагандой наших идей, нашего материалистического миросозерцания, помня раз и навсегда, то само религиозное миросозерцание глубоко враждебно всему нашему строю мыслей... с религией нужно боротся до конца, пока человек совершенно очистится от этой проказной шелухи, от всех религиозных предрассудков. Религиозная мысль- одна из самых консервативных дисциплин и боротся с ней надо во что бы то не стало. Особенно союзу молодежи. (The clergy had to overthrow its past landlord and leader, Patr. Tikhon. Some people are useful and needed for instituting the new life [communism]... they appointed at the Christ the Savior Church a most cunning politician, one of their own, who promulgates church politics, Fr. Krasnitsky [one of the leaders of the Living Church]... Do not think that the church is weak, that it has crumbled, fallen. No, it is still strong and, we, not weakening for a minute, must inflict upon it blow after blow, with open propaganda of our ideas, of our materialistic world view, remembering once and for all, that the religious world view is deeply damaging to our order of thinking... we must fight religion to its end, until man will totally cleanse himself from this leprosy peel and from all religious beliefs/prejudices. Religious thinking is one of the most conservative disciplines and fight it, we must at all cost, especially with the help of our youth).
The main leader and agitator of The Living Church, a “priest” of non-Orthodox origin, first a reformer and member of the same circles as Sergii Stragorodsky, then a Bolshevik collaborator, A. Vvedensky, wrote words that are sadly familiar to us as we witness a similar enticement to join the official false «church» - a Stalinist organization known under the guise of the «Mother Church» - ever since its inception, relentlessly trying to lure the naïve and uninformed to union. After all, as they say, to unite in Brotherhood is the “Christian thing” to do!
О если бы мы все слились в единой порыве любви и братства! Тогда как сон, миновал бы этот постыдный паралич церкви. Свободная церковь в свободной России согревала бы, как ясное, яркое солнце, всех- добрых и злых как говорил о том наш Господь. (O if only we could all merge in an upsurge of love and brotherhood! Then as in a dream, this paralysis of the church would end. The free church in a free {sic!] Russia would warm like the bright sun, all - the good and the bad, as spoke about this our Lord.)
*Hewlett Johnson, Dean of Canterbury- he was a pro-Soviet in Great Britain, he even wrote a book which I read a long time ago, Christianity and Communism, and in it, he tried to prove that there was no essential difference [Why then were millions of Christians exterminated?] Christians have to be communists, this is part of God’s bequest for us, part of His heritage. He said that the atheistic nature of Soviet Communism does not necessarily contradict the Christian values, in fact, there is a lot in common. And this is precisely what the ROC preached across the world “We have to forget our differences!”
Let us recall the real intentions behind the "love and brotherhood":
Протокол #64-14 февраля 1925 года. Постановили: Открытые с разрешения Ленинградского Губисполкома две Богословских академии (тихоновская и обновленческая) соединить в одну обновленческую академию, о чем поручить т. Тучкову [ответсвенный за убийство тысячей Православных] снестись с Ленинградом. (Protocol No. 64. 14 February 1925. Resolution: To open with the permission of the Leningrad Gubispolkom two Theological Academies (one Tikhonite and the other renovationist), and then combine them together into one renovationist academy, to be taken care of by Tuchkov [responsible for the murder of thousands of Orthodox] in conjunction with Leningrad [The State, which will take care of the murders.)
World Revolution has always been the end goal of Marxism-Leninism and creating dissension, division, conflicts and schisms have always served as tools for the destruction of its most hated enemy, religion, especially Russian Orthodoxy.
Какова политика советской власти по отношению к церковному расколу? Раскол в церкви выгоден [рабоче-крестянской] власти, ибо это ведет к ослаблению ея врагов, к победе революции (What is the policy of the Soviet regime towards the church schism? The schism in the church is beneficial for the [worker-peasant] powerful, since it leads to the weakening of its enemies, thus to the triumph of the revolution.)
But one might say, these are not the 1920s, how can there be any mention of destruction of religion now that there is “freedom of religion” in Russia, now that “communism is over,” now that the “Soviet USSR has been abolished.” The mastermind of perestroika, Mikhail Gorbachev made sure that before proceeding with one of the greatest travesties in history, he first put firmly in place his «Long-Term Program of Atheistic Education of the USSR», then finally in November 1987, he stated to his Politburo:
Perestroika is no retreat from Communism but rather a step toward the final realization of Marxist-Leninist utopia: a continuation of Lenin's ideas. Those who expect us to give up communism will be disappointed. In October 1917, we parted with the Old World, rejecting it once and for all. We are moving toward a new world, the world of Communism. We shall never turn off that road. Perestroika is a continuation of the October Revolution.
To which President George Bush, in his Address of November 22, 1989, responded:
«There is no greater advocate of perestroika than the President of the United States!» thus establishing a smooth “convergence” of communism and democracy, which in Lenin’s agitation days, were used interchangeably. There was little or no differentiation between labels such as народники (populists) who were also called демократы (democrats), радикалы (radicals), либералы (liberals), социал демократы (social democrats), социал революционеры (social revolutionaries), etc. as they were all part of the opposition or освободительное движение, which in the West eventually became known as socialism, communism and internationalism. Much time is wasted needlessly to differentiate them. Here is what the Bolsheviks and their leaders had to say about such labels:
У нас есть класс, способный мгновенно разнести революцию по всем концам России!», they boasted. «Этот класс известен в радикальском мире под кличкой «либералов»…может он и станет таковым со временем, как предсказывает наш «Социал-Демократ». Наши либералы соответствуют французским радикалам. На самом деле они более радикальны… Либерал, хотя бы и более умеренных взглядов, вступивший в конспирацию и бросивший оседлость, станет тотчас же «радикалом» (We have a class, capable of promptly proliferating the revolution to all the corners of Russia! This class is famous in the radical world under the name of “liberals.” Maybe it shall become so with time, as predicted by the “Social Democrat.” Our liberals correspond to the French radicals. In reality, they are more radical… A liberal, although he holds more moderate views, if he joins the conspiracy [sic!] and throws off his normal way of life, will immediately become a «radical».
Либералам- политическая борьба. Его главной теоретической опорой был «легальный марксизм» или «струвизм» (Liberalism is a political struggle. Its main theoretical pillar was “legal Marxism” or “Struvism”.)
As noted by a Social Revolutionary, the ability to undergo transformation and adapt to the times, was important in communist ideology:
Поведение г. Струве, приспособляемости который сумел раньше воспринять все внешния формы социалдемократическаго учения, а теперь так же воспринял либеральный катехизи… Kак вам понравится следующее местечко из современных писаний г. Струве: 'Если православие вообще может воскреснуть в новой жизни, то для этого ему нужно прежде всего признать право на существование за своим духовным противником, за новым религиозным сознанием'» (Struve's behavior - being able to adjust - his ability in earlier years to absorbb all the external forms of social democratic teachings, and now to be able to perceive the liberal catechism… How do you like the following spot in the contemporary writings of Struve: If Orthodoxy can be at all resurrected in the new life [under communism], then for it will first of all, have to fight for the right for existence with his sacred enemy, the new religious consciousness”.)
Interesting, considering that as an émigré to the West, Struve became known as a “religious” writer. Struve is also famous for his “Manifesto” against the Tsar and for promoting renovationist [i.e.ecumenist] “reforms” in Orthodoxy. Christians have been blinded by one of his descendants, Nikita Struve, who wrote the disgraceful Christians in Contemporary Russia, in which he approved the activities of Patriarch Sergius, even going as far as comparing him with St. Sergius of Radonezh, and this in the 1960s, during some of the worst years of persecution of the faithful in the Soviet Union.
One of the main accomplishments of perestroika was to put people to sleep and, especially, not to have to account for the tens of millions killed (in Russia alone), something that was becoming too obvious due to the documentation that was slowly beginning to leak out. Let the world forget the atrocities of Communism, is the motto, somehow it must be quickly erased or at leased minimized. Yet, let us not forget what this appeasement policy led to- such massacres as the one on Tienanmen Square in Communist China where thousands were killed as well as massacres in Kuwait, Lithuania and Latvia. In his November 1987 speech to the Politburo, Gorbachev continues:
“Comrades, do not be concerned about all you hear about glasnost’ and democracy. These are primarily for outward consumption. There will be no serious internal change in the USSR other than for cosmetic purposes. Our purpose is to disarm America and let them fall asleep. We want to accomplish three things - 1) the Americans to withdraw conventional forces from Europe, 2) the Americans to withdraw nuclear forces from Europe, and 3) the Americans to stop proceeding with the SDI”
Appeasement, reconciliation without accounting for the truth, leads to society lending a deaf ear to and denying the truth, a very dangerous step in mankind’s history. But thus it has been since Lenin’s world revolution, with the help of Trotsky, Zinoviev, Bukharin, Lunacharsky, Pokrovsky, etc. - (see U nas dazhe istoriia Rossii unichtozhena (We Have Even Done Away with the History of Russia), who fought viciously against Russian national identity (Orthodoxy being part of it) in order to attain world domination and camouflage their lies in the process. Saturated by diversity slogans today, one cannot help but marvel at Krasin’s and Lenin’s tactics in diplomacy:
“Complete unanimity can hardly be a precondition of joint action… What is needed is not static, monolithic unity, but a dynamic system of views and positions marked by differences [a term used often today] on particular issues but developing on the basis of the fundamental principles of Marxism-Leninism common to all.”
Lenin's creation of an independent Far Eastern Republic, whose policies were closely but secretly coordinated with those of Soviet Russia, had demonstrated the advantages of using a diversity of forms in the pursuit of «activist diplomacy». Lenin had also said that «what we need is a great orchestra» with the different parties, like different instruments, playing different roles. The feigned disunity of the communist world promotes real disunity in the non-communist world. False alignments, formed with third parties by each side against the other, make it easier to achieve specific communist goals, such as the acquisition of advanced technology or the negotiation of arms control agreements. In Western eyes the military, political, economic, and ideological threat from world communism appears diminished. In consequence, Western determination to resist the advance of communism is undermined. At a later stage the communist strategists are left with the option of terminating the split and adopting the strategy of «one clenched fist».
Here, reference is made to Dimitrii Manuilsky's speech of 1931, delivered at the Lenin School on Political Warfare in Moscow, in which, echoing Lenin’s observation “when the enemy is put to a disorderly retreat, the command to fire is normally given,” he stated:
The bourgeoisie will have to be put to sleep. So we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movement on record. There will be electrifying overtures and unheard of concessions. The capitalist countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction. They will jump at another chance to be friends. As soon as their guard is down, we shall smash them with our clenched fist.
In his famous Harvard Address, Solzhenitsyn proclaimed:
Anguish about our divided world gave birth to the theory of convergence between leading Western countries and the Soviet Union. It is a soothing theory whic
