A Lecture by Fr. Seraphim Rose

[Incognito1583]

Chech this out:

Father Seraphim stated:

"Our Church has no communion with with Moscow. But our Church recognizes this as a temporary situation, which will end when the Communist regime comes to an end." [LFSR to J. H., Sept 16, 1980].

Elsewhere , writing about Fr. Dimitry Dudko, who belonged to the MP, Fr. Seraphim affirmed that:

"Once the political situation in Russia that produced 'Sergianism' will have changed, a full unity in the faith will be possible with such courageous strugglers as Fr. Dimitry." ["In Defense of Fr. Dimitry Dudko, Orthodox Word, no. 92 (1980), p. 127].

Sources from "Father Seraphim Rose: His Life and Works."

[priestjohn]

In what sense has the political situation in Russia changed when the FSB, as well as the higher levels of the government, are dominated by KGB agents and/or Communists? A murderer who changes his clothes is still a murderer.

In Christ,

+Fr. John

[Incognito1583]

Just because people look to someone as a "guru", Elder or saint, does not mean they are infallible. I don't agree with Father Seraphim on the toll houses. Michael Azkoul, Ph.D in patristics from Oxford, wrote a book called "The Toll House Myth," where he refutes Father Seraphim's teaching. Bishop Lazar Puhalo has also written against this.

Some people might believe that Father Seraphim's perhaps improper reception into the Church (chrismation) might be the source of his errors -- toll houses, Augustine, the MP.

[priestjohn]

I did not say that I disagreed with Fr. Seraphim. I actually respect and admire Fr. Seraphim and his writings. I simply disagree that the conditions that produced Sergianism in Russia have ceased to exist. The Toll-Houses are another issue altogether.

In Christ,

+Fr. John

[jckstraw72]

if the tollhouses are a myth or heresy or whatever, then we have a lot of mythological prayers and Church services and Patristics.

[GOCPriestMark]

There is already a huge thread dedicated to the toll-houses. Any further comments on that topic will be moved there. You are all free to go there and read and if something else needs to be added or clarified then please do it there.

[Constantine]

Incognito, perhaps you missed the below, but could please answer when you have the time.

I believe those bishops were fanatics and hateful men.
Today the situation is different because of ecumenism

The pre-cursor to the calendar change was the encyclycal which was the charter of ecumenism issued in 1920 by the EP, "To all the churches of Christ". The calendar change was the physical transformation of the ecclesiastical calendar, which was established by a Ecumenical council btw, for the purpose of fulfilling the 1920 Encyclical, for the purpose of concelebration with heretics, for the purpose of ecumenism. Ecumensim was just as much a heresy and alive in 1920 as it was now, so I am afraid your comment:
Quote:
Today the situation is different because of ecumenism
. is incorrect based on historical fact.

As far as your feelings towards the hierarchy of the Orthodox church in the 1930's, I do not see how you can say that, could you please elaborate.

Quote:
I've already showen [with a link] why Matthew was a un-canonical schismatic. He did not have the right to violate the canons of the Church for what he thought was a just cause

If you could re-post that so I could see it, I would love to discuss this topic with you. You yourself said "truth and unity in the church" you cannot sacrifice one for the other, I believe you missed my question, or perhaps I did not word it properly, either way my apologies, but if you dont mind please answer my question, besides Bishop Matthew, which bishop in their time believed, new calendarists were void of grace, and that the apostolic succesion of the GOC should continue?

Constantine