bogatyr,
I disagree; participation in the WCC has helped the MP and the Serbians while under the Communist yoke. Serbian children received food because of their involvement with WCC. The Russian Church received education, books, and contact with free Orthodox.
The teaching and statements coming out of the MP are solid Orthodoxy. These are not Latins we are in dialogue with. Do they have 'less than perfect' clergy? I'm sure they do; so do we. Do they have some clergy that are supportive of the Communist Church? I believe that also.
The murderers you spoke of are dead. That is over. Their clergy now commemorate the New Martyrs in Russian Churches.
What would the MP need to do to satisfy you? Is there ANYTHING they could do?
What would you do if ROCOR and the MP united tomorrow?
Moderator: Mark Templet
paleocon wrote:What would the MP need to do to satisfy you? Is there ANYTHING they could do?
Repent!
To say 'Oh compationate father I sinned before thee, receive me repentently, and make as one of thy hired servents'.
They must realize that they have basically been just playing church since 1927, particularly those who are or were KGB agents.
The methodist church down the street could start commemorating the New-Maytrs, but that doesn't make them Orthodox.
The whole problem with ROCOR's current dealings with the MP is that they seem them as equals. Which is the same logic behind the WCC.
(please forgive any spelling errors, I'm sure there's some in here)
Daniel,
Commemoration/acknowlegement of the New Martyrs IS repentance. Do you know what is confessed and repented of by me, or anyone? I have heard of numerous occasions where MP bishops have fallen down prostrate and asked forgiveness for current and past wrongs.
I have already forgiven them; have you? The father ran to the Prodigal Son before his son asked forgiveness. I do not need a statement from the MP; I trust the bishops from ROCOR will do what is right.
They ARE equals, and ROCOR has asserted that for decades, so that's a non-issue. Take that argument up with St. John Maximovitch.
So...
even if they come to you and everyone and personally beg forgiveness; with tears even, it wouldn't satify you because you say they are 'just playing church.' How do they rectify that situation?
ecumenism
Even Fr. Georges Florovsky and Fr. John Romanides were utterly critical of the wcc. One should acquaint oneself with their positions. What paticipation in the wcc has done has empowered certain elites to compromise Orthodox doctrines and the canons. Two blatant examples: the ecclesiology of the wcc--seeking to create an imperfect union of the "churches" and create the "church" (of antichrist). "Orthodox" heirarchs praying with shamans in Australia and concelebrating with heretics whilst UNDERMINING the teachings of the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils. One of these silly people, supposedly an "orthodox heirarch" later wrote an apology for this action with the inflamatory title of "I am possessed by demons" or some such nonsense. Another case in point: in 1965, the non-Chalcedonian camp came to the Orthodox and said that they wanted to be reunited to Orthodoxy and reintegrated. The ecumenists said, "no", we must learn to appreciate the differences of our two expressions of the church and come to understand a "real, nonconfessional" unity. The list could go on and on. Ecumenism DID NOTHING to stave off famines in Russia and a book or two in NO WAY promoted religious freedom in the face of horrendous persecutions. It is of no wonder that St. Justin of Chelje pronounced ecumenism, "the heresy of heresies!" One should acquaint oneself with his position. The witness of the deified to me is more authoritative than masonic charity, for it expresses the path BLESSED by the Holy Spirit. To even imply that ecumenism is good because you get some sort of material support for betraying Orthodoxy is already a form of iscariotism. No, membership in the wcc is the heresy of ecumenism, and was affirmed as such with an ANATHEMA from the Synod of Bishops of ROCOR under Blessed +Metropolitan Philaret.
Lastly, to imply that the structure created by those who murdered the legitimate successors of St. Tikhon WHO HAVE NOT REPENTED AND GLORIFIED ALL THEIR VICTIMS, is to say that a maffia which now is no longer "officially" engaged in organized crime is a legitimate business partner. Only a fool or an unscrupulous person would invest in such an enterprise. Likewise the mp is a structure created by/of/for sergianists and even today compromised with WCC MONEY, vatican MONEY and contacts with the Russian intelligence services and the maffia. THIS IS THE LEGACY of sergianism. The fact that these PIGS live in largesse with ecumenist and maffia money while the elderly sleep in cardboard boxes on the streets and die of exposure is proof enough of a structure which IS NOT Christian.
Orthodoxia I Thanatos!
Rostislav Mikhailovich Malleev-Pokrovsky
-
mwoerl
is the mp all its cracked up to be?
there are still questions i have about the mp; questions, when asked other lists caused pro-mp clergy of rocor to basically attack me. i dont know about anyone else, but for me, when a person is attacked for asking a question, it raises suspicions; this was the modus operandi of these pro-mp clergy to anyone who asked questions. so, i am suspicious of this union on those gorunds alone. yet, my questions were never answered. i will repeat some of them here, and, i am looking for responses from those who welcome the union, to see how they view these "topics," if that is what they can be called.
although i know this will probably not make much difference to anyone, but i am not interested at this point in replies from the hard-core opposition, especially answers that only accuse, or offer such "proofs" as "so-and-so said this," strictly personal interpretations of documents, or any other generally vague, off-the-wall, or bizarre replies.
following are some of my questions:
how is the fact that the mp has "glorified" SOME of the new martyrs of russia, while absolutely refusing to glorify those who strongly opposed met. sergius evidence of anything "good," of anything that would make anyone in rocor feel somehow pleased with the mp? supposedly there are factions within the mp who want to also "glorify" met. sergius, citing his "moral suffering," and the fact that he "saved" the church. would this be acceptable? what would "former rocor adherents" after a union do if such a "glorification" was undertaken by the mp, other than shutup and have to accept it?
patirarch alexey II himself has said (in an interview) that "met. sergius saved the church." the statement of met. sergius, "i am saving [or trying to save] the church" was always ione of the biggest points, as it was rebutted by the fact that only christ can save the church, and attempting to safeguard church institutions-such as a visible above-ground episcopate-incidentally, which of course includes "me" (that is, met. sergius) is not saving the church anyway, but simply saving yourself and your cronies. if patriarch alexey II believes what he said in the interview, that met. sergius indeed "saved the church," with all that implies, why does anyone think he has "repented" of sergianism?
a recent post stated that "the murderers are all now dead." i have read that patriarch alexey II, in some former capacity in the mp, was put in charge of the investigations, etc., surrounding the actions of boris talantov. boris talantov was a soviet citizen who protested about mp activities, and was subsequently sent to the gulag and died. the article i read suggested strngly that patriarch alexey was implicated in the imrpisonment of boris talantov in the gulag and his subsequent death. if this is indeed the case, then it seems "all the murderers" are NOT dead. also, hierarchs of the mp who clearly were kgb officers, who worked for the kgb, who informed on believers, which caused more than "mere discomfort" for those believers in the soviet union (if you care to recall, anti-government activity was punishable by long imprisonment in the gulag or the death penalty; long imprisonment in the gulag often was a death penalty in itself!). should such hierarchs still be in control of the church in russia? even if they have gotten down on their knees and repented? would not such "repentance" be a bit more believeable if such hierarchs were to include giving up their privileged postions as the most powerful hierarchs of the mp and retiring to a monastery? can such people be trusted at all?
in the same post, i think, that mentioned "all the murderers are dead," a statement was made concering the "worthiness" of the bishops and clergy of the mp-something like, "oh some of their clergy aren't the best-we have the same problems in rocor." while no one can deny those problems in rocor, do we have problems of the same scale? the post of the article by vladimir moss, which outlined very disturbing-to say the least-activities of, again, some of the most powerful mp hierarchs-not merely homosexuality, but entire monasteries as havens of homosexual activity-there is simply nothing happening in rocor even remotely close to this scale of activity. do we want to be in "union" with such hierarchs, some of whom are certainly powerful enough to become the next patriarch?
i do not know that simple membership in the wcc is "evidence" of heresy-is there some sort of statement of beliefs churches must "sign on to" to join? and, although i am not comfortable with membership in the wcc for an orthodox church, on the other hand, i do not know that receiving "charity" is a good enough reason to participate. if the wcc is such a "wonderful organization," why would their "charity" rely on membership? we are being told that the mp is "no longer meaningfully involved" in ecumenism, which i do not think it the truth. also, does anyone really buy patriarch alexey's excuse that the mp must be in the wcc to "help fight terrorism"?
what benefits will the rocor gain from union with the mp? it seems to me that this union is being based largely on sentimental and nationalistic reasons. the "temporary" nature of the rocor is always being mentioned, yet, in the very same document, also "after the fall of the godless authority," a "return to russia" was called for. i dont see nobody returnin! of course, it is a heck of a lot more comfy here . . .
is the russian government what anyone could irrefutably call "stable"? can anyone turthfully say a resurgent communist party will never regain power? if they do-and if they once again control the church-where does that leave us? the fact of the russian government being mixed up with gangsters, and the well known fact that "big business" in russia is largely in the hands of these same gangsters, as well as cooperation of the mp with the governmant and big business-is this a healthy situation? patriarch alexey made a tv commercial for the biggest oil company in russia! apparently, since the mp can do no wrong in the eyes of its rocor supporters-this kind of thing is perfectly acceptable? or, is it that we really DO NO WANT TO KNOW how all these connections and cooperations play out?
these are a few of the questions i have. so-if you favor the union-does any of this concern you? should it all be simply ignored? or should we hope for the best? couldn't this union wait? at least unitil the kgb men in the mp have all "went to their reward"?
mwoerl
wcc
The charter of the wcc states to the effect, that "men have sundered the unity of Christ's Church; hence, they are uniting all the dissident groups to reconstitute the "church"". That's branch theory and out and out heretical.
Orthodoxia I Thanatos!
Rostislav Mikhailovich Malleev-Pokrovsky
PS The ecumenism St. Justin of Chelje was addressing was percisely that of the wcc.