Archbishop KYRILL announces union between ROCOR and MP!

[mwoerl]

cparks wrote:

"Again, this is just my speculation, but I can't see the ROCOR bishops wasting their time making such a trip if they weren't closer to the end than the beginning."

A pretty fair speculation I would say. It seems the topic for the pastoral meeting and the Sobor of Bishops, 'the ROCOR yesterday today and tomorow' (or something like that . . .) is not going to be a "discussion," kinda thing, but a "here it is whether you like it or not . . . " kinda thing.

I have been somewhat suspicious all along, as the clergy on the various lists, when they engage in their attacks against those who question such a 'union,' also seem to display an air of weariness, that seems to say to those who ask questions, "it is a done deal, stupid, so why dont you just shut yo mouf!"

perhaps the only question left is will the oh-fish-ul announcement come at the end of the clergy meeting, at the end of the bishop's sobor, or, ladies and gentlemen, live from moscooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww . . .

Code: Select all

michael woerl

[Daniel]

cparks wrote:

"Again, this is just my speculation, but I can't see the ROCOR bishops wasting their time making such a trip if they weren't closer to the end than the beginning."

A pretty fair speculation I would say. It seems the topic for the pastoral meeting and the Sobor of Bishops, 'the ROCOR yesterday today and tomorow' (or something like that . . .) is not going to be a "discussion," kinda thing, but a "here it is whether you like it or not . . . " kinda thing.

I have been somewhat suspicious all along, as the clergy on the various lists, when they engage in their attacks against those who question such a 'union,' also seem to display an air of weariness, that seems to say to those who ask questions, "it is a done deal, stupid, so why dont you just shut yo mouf!"

perhaps the only question left is will the oh-fish-ul announcement come at the end of the clergy meeting, at the end of the bishop's sobor, or, ladies and gentlemen, live from moscooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww . . .

Code: Select all

michael woerl[/quote]

Hence my reference to Ferrara-Florince. The out come was pre-determined then, and as it seems now.

Now, the question is: Which bishop will sign, and which will not?

[Bogatyr]

Look to Los Angeles. This work was accomplished by lebedeff and his cadres in secret. He subverted the witness of ROCOR. He wears the sergianist tiara...
ORTHODOXIA I THANATOS!
R M Malleev-Pokrovsky

[Reader Mark]

Let us pray that there are hierarchs brave enough not to sign the agreement that may or may not have been reached. Let us pray to St.Mark(Evgenikos) of Ephesus who withstood singularly the last "signed" betrayl of Orthodoxy. We do not desire the reunification under hurried pretenses. Let there be a declaration against ecumenism, let there be declaration against the ethnic nostalgia that is blinding those who seek to lie in bed with the "mother church". Until these declarations have been made, there can be no deal. The precious Pearl of our Faith is not to be bartered. And if indeed it has been bartered ask yourselves, Who will be the hierarchs that don't sign and be excommuniated....who shall be rally around and entrust the leadership of a decisively smalller Church. Pray that the Holy Spirit will guides those who have visited with the Patriarch. to carefully present their findings, and that the fruits of these will be reunification.............under the right, moral, repentant circumstances, and a denounciation of all things evil that has seeped into the Russian Orthodox Church under 75 years of the godless Soviet yoke.

Holy St.Mark of Ephesus, Pray unto God for us!

[mwoerl]

i would be extremely surprised if any would decline to follow the rest. i have only seen two "negative" opinions of union from bishops- bishop gabriel (chemodakov) of manhattan and bishop daniel (alexandroff) of erie (and the old rite). of course, if anyone gets the last minute frights over going from being a big fish in a little pond to a minnow in the ocean . . .

both are vicar bishops-even if BOTH declined, a very big deal would be made of the factthat they are, indeed, vicar bishops, and not ruling bishops-also it would undoubtedly be remarked that both were being disobedient to their own ruling bishop-who, for both, is metopolitan lavr. i dont see bishop gabriel declining the signing and going off on his own, or joining up with anyone else who has already gone off on their own . . .

bishop daniel is old and ill; if he were to decline, i am sure he would simply be retired. bishop daniel (bishop daniel has shown in the past that he does have 'a mind of his own.' he was suggested as a candidate for bishop on more than one occasion, i believe, prior to his actual consecration. as he was working with old rite parishes, he declined the offer, stating that it would interfere with his 'mission' to the old ritualists. he was also offered consecration to the episcopate through the old rite belo-krinitsa synod, which he considered uncanonical, and he refused that offer also. he only accepted consecration when offered as a bishop for the old rite. so, he is not afraid to stand up and say his piece . . . ), of course, is the bishop for the old rite parish in erie, pennsylvania. has anyone, perchance, heard any opinions of all the goings on concerning the union from the parish in erie? from some of the things i have heard from erie in the past, i dont think they would be amused . . .

michael woerl

[mwoerl]

bogatyr wrote:

"Look to Los Angeles. This work was accomplished by lebedeff and his cadres in secret. He subverted the witness of ROCOR. He wears the sergianist tiara... "

are we looking to los angeles because that's where "lebedeff" resides, or because los angeles had something to do with it too? i bet it was them mexicans, huh?

seriously speaking . . . i dont think "lebedeff" can be handed the entire credit for this impending union; it seems that -uh- some other people, let's see, i THINK they are called bishops or something like that, it seems like i read somewhere they have like a lot of stuff to do with changing stuff and stuff like that-um-you know?

and wow! "lebedeff and his cadres . . .in secret . . . " um-the zhidstvo-masonstvo wouldnt be involved in this too, would they? um-well, darn, i forgot-the zhidstvo-masonstvo are involved in EVERYTHING!

you know rosti, i think here is what happened-spurred by the sight of thousands of people goin to real purty churches in russia, and the fact that the pres-a-dent of russia hisself came and paid one of them thar courtesy calls, plus the fact that a lot of ROCOR clergy wannabe in on the cool stuff lile the orthodox clergy associations and all that jazz-in other words, nationalism, seeking worldly glory, fitting in, beng respected, the usual suspects in such "unions" from way back to the original unia itself-are at work here.

i dont see a deep dark comspiracy engineered by "lebedeff and his cadres." i think you give "lebedeff" more credit here than he deserves. maybe it would be easier to swallow if there were some deep dark conspiracy at work, if "lebedeff and his cadres" were working for the zhidstvo-masonstvo, who were working for the trilateral commission, who were working for international oil, who were working for osama bin laden had somehow snuck in and go this union deal goin-because then, of course, a hero could emerge who would draw his big ole sword and chop off some heads here and there, and then make everything kosher again-ooops-wrong choice of words-that would be the zhidstvo hero if he made everything "kosher," huh?

but, unfortunately for those seeking a little excitement out of life, it is all a rather mundane run-of-the-mill deal; no heores are gonna burst upon the scene or crawl out of the woodwork or make a grand entrance in the way that heroes do and make everything ko-ooops-uh-right! so looks liek we are stuck with this decision by the church abroad, and some not so attractive alternative possibilities . . .

oh-and by the way-what the heck is a sergianist tiara??? hahaha
michael woerl

[尼古拉前执事]

Address of the First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia

Beloved in the Lord, faithful flock of the Russian Church Abroad!

At the September 2003 meeting of the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, it was decided to send a delegation of Bishops to Russia to meet with Patriarch Alexy of Moscow and of All Russia, as well as to get acquainted with church life in Russia, in preparation for the All-diaspora Clergy Conference and the Sobor [Council] of Bishops of the Russian Church Outside of Russia, both of which are scheduled for December of this year. The delegation was to clarify the position of the Church in Russia regarding a list of issues which determine our relationship with her and to investigate the possibility of beginning to develop further ties with her.

The official website of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, at the request of the delegation, posted two reports regarding its visit to Moscow. Upon reading these reports, some of the faithful of our Church came under the impression that the delegation was not only clarifying the position of the Moscow Patriarchate regarding certain questions, but that it had already taken some concrete steps and made certain decisions. This is not the case. The delegation had expressed our Church's desire to regularize many unresolved issues. The desire to draw nearer on an Orthodox foundation and the development of such a process in the spirit ofsobornost'[conciliarity] corresponds with the direction of our Church, as expressed in a series of Epistles of the Sobor of Bishops.

I urge our dear flock not to come to hasty conclusions and to remain calm.The members of the delegation will return from Russia in a few days and will brief me in detail concerning their encounters. They will communicate their impressions and report on their activities both at the All-Diaspora Pastoral Conference and the Sobor of Bishops.

It goes without saying that the delegation cannot on it's own make important decisions concerning the fate of our entire Church. Such decisions are exclusively in the sphere of the highest organ of our Church Authority, the Sobor of Bishops.

The All-diaspora Clergy Conference is being summoned to provide the opportunity for the pastors of our Church to pray together and constructively, in the spirit of brotherly love andsobornost', to hear lectures, to voice their opinions, to listen to their archpastors and co-pastors, and to communicate the desires of their parishioners. This conference goal remains intact.

According to the tenets of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, one of the primary tasks of our Church is to spiritually sustain the Russian Orthodox flock in the diaspora, regardless of their nationality, and to preserve and strengthen the purity and untaintedness of the Holy Orthodox Faith in the souls of our faithful. This goal, the salvation of the souls of the flock which has been entrusted to us, remains the most important goal for our Russian Church Abroad.

May the blessings of God upon you!

+Metropolitan Laurus
21 November 2003