THE RUSSIAN IS THE SERB’S FRIEND FOREVER?

[Tryphon]

30 years ago Who was the State Church anathematized by and for what? I'm familiar with the Anathema against the branch theory given by ROCOR under St Philaret,but then Metropolitan Vitaly stated that it was only binding on ROCOR's Shepherds and flock.
Not to my knowledge has Bp Artemije EVER professed the branch theory, not when He was battling modernist inclined Orthodox,Taliban killers in Kosovo and Methohije or former Orthodox who became muslim. Its easy here as Fr.Seraphim(Rose) years ago stated to be Orthodox,if You don't like something flip the yellow pages to the church section and find something else. Try being Orthodox in a historic Orthodox land which is an open antimen surrounded by killers and haters of the True faith. Now You show more respect for jurisdictional hoppers and Schismatic inclinded power hungry individuals than for warriors of the faith. What in Your opinion Akakios who was on a training program at Esphigmenu is more Orthodox than someone who has lived their whole life Cleanly with faith in the Master.Do You know HOW many" TOC" are sending their reps to Bp Artemy trying to get Him to be in communion with them?

[Suaidan]

30 years ago Who was the State Church anathematized by and for what? I'm familiar with the Anathema against the branch theory given by ROCOR under St Philaret,but then Metropolitan Vitaly stated that it was only binding on ROCOR's Shepherds and flock.

The anathema was not against the "branch theory", but ecumenism (of which the branch theory is a part) and its related behaviors, which all the hierarchs of World Orthodoxy are ensconced in. The subsequent argument is a legalism introduced in the 90's. Metr Vitaly's qualification is canonically correct because Synods cannot operate outside their own jurisdiction, but the anathema is still a valid anathema anyway. There is no way heresy is "ok" in another part of the Church that it hasn't been anathematized in. Such an argument would eventually conclude that Rome technically was outside the reception of any anathemas in 1054 and is therefore not anathematized.

[Tryphon]

Anathema against Ecumenism!
Thank You for the correction,for some reason my mind jumped straight to the Branch theory. You're absolutely right that heresy is not okay,ever! I still do not understand however, that Bp Artemije in your opinion falls under that anathema. The Man has been a constant opponent against Ecumenism and the Wcc ,and Serbia's involvement. He has educated thousands to battle against these reforms in Serbia and the diasapora.
I do not think at all that the Holy author of the Anathema would agree with You at all concerning Bp Artemije, on the contrary I belive He would praise Him,just as He praised His Spiritual Father Saint Justin the new,who paved the path before Bp Artemije.

[Suaidan]

Anathema against Ecumenism!
Thank You for the correction,for some reason my mind jumped straight to the Branch theory. You're absolutely right that heresy is not okay,ever! I still do not understand however, that Bp Artemije in your opinion falls under that anathema. The Man has been a constant opponent against Ecumenism and the Wcc ,and Serbia's involvement. He has educated thousands to battle against these reforms in Serbia and the diasapora.
I do not think at all that the Holy author of the Anathema would agree with You at all concerning Bp Artemije, on the contrary I belive He would praise Him,just as He praised His Spiritual Father Saint Justin the new,who paved the path before Bp Artemije.

Forgive me for being so blunt, but let us look at the reality.

Until last year, the SP was headed by Patriarch Pavle, an active member of the WCC (a president of the WCC) and Bishop Artimije, far from being the "defender of Orthodoxy", was simply a right-wing member of a mixed Synod, in communion with ecumenists, as all "fighting from within" people are. Nothing makes me sadder than when people try to put words in St Philaret's mouth. You do realize that he stated-- repeatedly-- that he believed the MP, which the SP so treasured communion with, was an anathematized pseudo-Church which performed false mysteries? Unless you realize precisely what St Philaret actually taught, you shouldn't presume to speak for him. Fr Justin Popovic anathematized the Patriarch upon his deathbed. Shall we now recycle the old argument that he did not anathematize the whole Synod by name? Let's not-- because it's a deflection from the fact that the Patriarch he anathematized was so anathematized over 30 years ago. Bp Artemije leaves communion with a liberal ecumenist (as opposed to a conservative ecumenist like Patr Pavle) and all of a sudden we should regard him as a hero?

We can do so when he reaches out to the traditional Orthodox-- then we will let bygones be bygones. Until then, he could well be another Bp Diomid, preparing to resurrect a long-dead heresy in the name of fighting ecumenism, or perhaps a honeypot for the True Orthodox until enough confusion is sowed.

Rather, if he comes to the True Orthodox of any of our jurisdictions, saying plainly that he was wrong where he was, and that his placement misled people to communion with the ecumenists-- I am sure ANY of our Bishops would gladly welcome him with open arms. But we are not going to run to Artimije! The Holy Father Theophan the Recluse says "stand fast-- remain unmoved". Let him return to the Orthodox from the bosom of ecumenical confusion, of which the SP was a willing host for too long.

[Tryphon]

Pardon, but what words are being placed in St Philarets mouth? That He had a great admiration for St Justin? That He would have the same love for Bp Artemije who is living in even harsher times in Serbia and is still following the path set By St Justin?
How come Saint Philaret did not openly condem the MP at the 3rd all Diasapora council? How come He did not create a new Synod with true Orthodox Bishops around Him? In order to prevent a schism which would have happened through the liberal Bishops at that time. Why did He stay in communion with Bp Anthony of Geneva? Why did He allow the russian churches in the Holy Land to serve on antimens given by the JP and allow commemoration of the same who was in communion with all the ecumenist WO jurisdictions including both the MP and SP?
Pat Paul was not running the SP for the last few years due to ill health,there was a 4-5 Bishops council in place,I did not know that He was a president of the Wcc? So there was a lot of positioning within the SP by both liberals and Orthodox. I've never heard that St Justin anathematized the SP (Herman) on His death Bed by anyone before.
As I've stated earlier different TO synods have been coming to Bp Artemije seeking dialogue and giving moral support. Met. Agathangel of the SIR-ROCOR and some other Catacomb synods from within russia have sent letters and support,and of course Greek synods thus far and even the Georgian Church. But if You my dear brother do-not consider Him Orthodox at least say a prayer for Him to become so,since many in long suffering Serbia are seeking Christ through Him.

[Suaidan]

Pardon, but what words are being placed in St Philarets mouth? That He had a great admiration for St Justin? That He would have the same love for Bp Artemije who is living in even harsher times in Serbia and is still following the path set By St Justin?

But he DIDN'T follow the path of Fr Justin. This is my point. He made excuses for it for 15 years. If he is now, so be it. But I lack your certainty.

How come Saint Philaret did not openly condem the MP at the 3rd all Diasapora council? How come He did not create a new Synod with true Orthodox Bishops around Him? In order to prevent a schism which would have happened through the liberal Bishops at that time. Why did He stay in communion with Bp Anthony of Geneva?

Some might raise an objection and say to me: Did not the Third Pan-Diaspora Sobor address both one and the other, the Parisians and the Americans, with a call for peace and unity? Yes, it did address them, but it addressed them not at all as was needed, and for that very cause this appeal produced no results, or rather, it produced a negative result. I had been certain that such would be the result. For we should have told them: you have gone astray, you have fallen away from the Church — strive to return to Her!

But the appeal as published speaks to them as though they were within the Church just as we are, with equal rights and position. Whereas what should have been told them then and there was: you are not some sort of “different jurisdictions”; you are simply schismatics, and have no rights whatsoever... Come to your senses and return in repentance!

Most likely such an appeal would have provoked only an outburst of rage from the leaders of the schism (God grant that I am mistaken; but then, we know their attitude). But among their “flock”, many, very many may have pondered it over and come to understand that matters do not at all stand well with them, just as the late Sandrik Filatev and many others who have broken with the schism came to understand after hearing the serious and convincing explanations of Fr. Gerasim41.

The question might be posed to me: why I didn’t mention at the Sobor that I felt the appeal to be inappropriate. I would reply: because I saw the attitude at the Sobor and I feared an explosion and a possible catastrophe. For I had been forewarned that the enemies of the Church wished to arrange such an explosion, in order to “blow up” the Sobor from within. Therefore I was compelled to avoid issues which might have provoked heated exchanges.

I wish to return to the issue of heresy and schism. His Beatitude, Metropolitan Anthony asks: is it permissible to be stern with heretics, who perhaps sincerely believe in the righteousness of their cause? One must never idealize heretics, he replies, since the basis for their departure is not virtue, but the passions and sins of pride, obstinacy, and malice. Sternness towards heretics, says Vladyka, is beneficial not only for the sake of protecting people from their influence, but also for the heretics themselves. We have seen that the Holy Fathers equate obstinate schismatics with heretics. Consequently, is it proper to coddle them as, unfortunately, occurs among us? And all this for the sake of an evil and false “peace”... If the Lord permits me to live until the next Bishops’ Sobor, at it I shall pose this question “point blank”.42 -- Postscript, http://blessedphilaret.blogspot.com/200 ... alena.html

His next response was the Anathema against Ecumenism.

Why did He allow the russian churches in the Holy Land to serve on antimens given by the JP and allow commemoration of the same who was in communion with all the ecumenist WO jurisdictions including both the MP and SP?

The situation with the JP is complex, and I'd rather someone with the knowledge of experience explain it correctly. I was not there. Nor, I'd venture, were you.

Pat Paul was not running the SP for the last few years due to ill health,there was a 4-5 Bishops council in place,I did not know that He was a president of the Wcc? So there was a lot of positioning within the SP by both liberals and Orthodox. I've never heard that St Justin anathematized the SP (Herman) on His death Bed by anyone before.

It was in 1971; I have erred. Orthodoxos Typos (Orthodox Press), № 144, June 15, 1971, page 4 (G); Hieromonk Sabbas of Dečani, personal communication. When Fr. Justin died on March 25, 1979, the patriarch did not attend his funeral. (Cited in Moss, New Zion in Babylon, V, note #31 http://www.romanitas.ru/eng/NEW%20ZION% ... htm#_ftn31)

As I've stated earlier different TO synods have been coming to Bp Artemije seeking dialogue and giving moral support. Met. Agathangel of the SIR-ROCOR and some other Catacomb synods from within russia have sent letters and support,and of course Greek synods thus far and even the Georgian Church. But if You my dear brother do-not consider Him Orthodox at least say a prayer for Him to become so,since many in long suffering Serbia are seeking Christ through Him.

Well, if he is reaching out to the True Catacomb Synods, Greek Synods, and the SiR-ROCOR, I shall withold further comment. I will grant he is trying, and will not be so harsh. (I believe the Georgian hierarchy is a deceptive, pseudo-Orthodox hierarchy, which admitted leaving the WCC for fear of a schism in their ranks, a cheap external "unity").

I was under the impression he was still trying to form a movement in World Orthodoxy and nothing else. This is helpful. He should now reach out to the TOC Bishop right near him.

[Tryphon]

Pardon, but what words are being placed in St Philarets mouth? That He had a great admiration for St Justin? That He would have the same love for Bp Artemije who is living in even harsher times in Serbia and is still following the path set By St Justin?

But he DIDN'T follow the path of Fr Justin. This is my point. He made excuses for it for 15 years. If he is now, so be it. But I lack your certainty.
Actually He has and not only that He has gone further and broke communion with the SP.

How come Saint Philaret did not openly condem the MP at the 3rd all Diasapora council? How come He did not create a new Synod with true Orthodox Bishops around Him? In order to prevent a schism which would have happened through the liberal Bishops at that time. Why did He stay in communion with Bp Anthony of Geneva?

This shows that Saint Philaret was cautious NOT to cause a schism even though the truth was on his side. Why not give the same benefit of doubt to Bp Artemy,He certainly has dealt with some shameless hierarchs who also would love to blow up Synods from within
Some might raise an objection and say to me: Did not the Third Pan-Diaspora Sobor address both one and the other, the Parisians and the Americans, with a call for peace and unity? Yes, it did address them, but it addressed them not at all as was needed, and for that very cause this appeal produced no results, or rather, it produced a negative result. I had been certain that such would be the result. For we should have told them: you have gone astray, you have fallen away from the Church — strive to return to Her!

But the appeal as published speaks to them as though they were within the Church just as we are, with equal rights and position. Whereas what should have been told them then and there was: you are not some sort of “different jurisdictions”; you are simply schismatics, and have no rights whatsoever... Come to your senses and return in repentance!
But it wasn't told to their face now was it; So was the ROCOR Synod in Heresy then? As we're quick to condem Bp Artemy
Most likely such an appeal would have provoked only an outburst of rage from the leaders of the schism (God grant that I am mistaken; but then, we know their attitude). But among their “flock”, many, very many may have pondered it over and come to understand that matters do not at all stand well with them, just as the late Sandrik Filatev and many others who have broken with the schism came to understand after hearing the serious and convincing explanations of Fr. Gerasim41.

The question might be posed to me: why I didn’t mention at the Sobor that I felt the appeal to be inappropriate. I would reply: because I saw the attitude at the Sobor and I feared an explosion and a possible catastrophe. For I had been forewarned that the enemies of the Church wished to arrange such an explosion, in order to “blow up” the Sobor from within. Therefore I was compelled to avoid issues which might have provoked heated exchanges.
Where's the open zealous staunch confession and condemnation of heretics?
I wish to return to the issue of heresy and schism. His Beatitude, Metropolitan Anthony asks: is it permissible to be stern with heretics, who perhaps sincerely believe in the righteousness of their cause? One must never idealize heretics, he replies, since the basis for their departure is not virtue, but the passions and sins of pride, obstinacy, and malice. Sternness towards heretics, says Vladyka, is beneficial not only for the sake of protecting people from their influence, but also for the heretics themselves. We have seen that the Holy Fathers equate obstinate schismatics with heretics. Consequently, is it proper to coddle them as, unfortunately, occurs among us? And all this for the sake of an evil and false “peace”... If the Lord permits me to live until the next Bishops’ Sobor, at it I shall pose this question “point blank”.42 -- Postscript, http://blessedphilaret.blogspot.com/200 ... alena.html
This was a personal letter to Abbess Magdalena,in it St Philaret quotes the Fathers regarding power hungry schismatics such as todays Akakios
His next response was the Anathema against Ecumenism.

Why did He allow the russian churches in the Holy Land to serve on antimens given by the JP and allow commemoration of the same who was in communion with all the ecumenist WO jurisdictions including both the MP and SP?

The situation with the JP is complex, and I'd rather someone with the knowledge of experience explain it correctly. I was not there. Nor, I'd venture, were you.
Oh is it? Some would compare it with Sergianism. No of course we weren't there. We were with Saint Philaret,and putting words in His mouth!

Pat Paul was not running the SP for the last few years due to ill health,there was a 4-5 Bishops council in place,I did not know that He was a president of the Wcc? So there was a lot of positioning within the SP by both liberals and Orthodox. I've never heard that St Justin anathematized the SP (Herman) on His death Bed by anyone before.

It was in 1971; I have erred. Orthodoxos Typos (Orthodox Press), № 144, June 15, 1971, page 4 (G); Hieromonk Sabbas of Dečani, personal communication. When Fr. Justin died on March 25, 1979, the patriarch did not attend his funeral. (Cited in Moss, New Zion in Babylon, V, note #31 http://www.romanitas.ru/eng/NEW%20ZION% ... htm#_ftn31)

As I've stated earlier different TO synods have been coming to Bp Artemije seeking dialogue and giving moral support. Met. Agathangel of the SIR-ROCOR and some other Catacomb synods from within russia have sent letters and support,and of course Greek synods thus far and even the Georgian Church. But if You my dear brother do-not consider Him Orthodox at least say a prayer for Him to become so,since many in long suffering Serbia are seeking Christ through Him.

Well, if he is reaching out to the True Catacomb Synods, Greek Synods, and the SiR-ROCOR, I shall withold further comment. I will grant he is trying, and will not be so harsh. (I believe the Georgian hierarchy is a deceptive, pseudo-Orthodox hierarchy, which admitted leaving the WCC for fear of a schism in their ranks, a cheap external "unity").
No, actually they are reaching out to Him. That's why I personally belive that the Akakian-clique acted as if they had a gun to their heads and HAD to have their Guru made a Bp No matter what the cost
I was under the impression he was still trying to form a movement in World Orthodoxy and nothing else. This is helpful. He should now reach out to the TOC Bishop right near him.

He's ( akakios) only for family and blog-space Friends. You do realize that the majority of people who know Him were against His elevation.