Waldemar,
If (or is that when?) St. Seraphim is resurrected in Russia would he be considered a Sergianist, Ecumenist, Modernist if he does not repudiate the MP and those jurisdictions in communion with the MP?
That's a hypothetical I can only take about as seriously as the notion of him also embracing the Non-Chalcedonians as brothers. Without any way of knowing what exactly will happen in such an event, my guess is such a miracle itself would be the herald of repentence for Russia - both of ecclessiastics, and also the people themselves. Should that happen, I have little doubt the great St.Seraphim would embrace the "MP".
As for the passages you cite from the Holy Fathers...
Wherefore a man can know nothing about the judgments of God.
Which is precisely why it is illicit to presume the mysteriological grace of those ostensibly outside of the Church, whether Sergianists, Ecumenists, Papists, Protestants, etc.
OTOH, there is no private judgement involved in respecting the God-breathed canons and the real borders and limits they place upon the confession of the faith, and the genuine unity only such a confession can provide.
If we were to take your misrepresentation of patristic guidance to heart, then we would have little choice but to discard of all of the Church's symbols of faith, holy canons, anathemas, etc.
I believe that it is against the instruction of Christ to judge Orthodox Christians about their status within the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, especially with a presumptuous "He/She is on the Outs while I'm definitely on the In" attitude.
All heretics and schismatics have claimed to be "true believers" and within the bosom of the Church - yet this is not how they were regarded by the confessors of their times, even prior to the concilliar vindication of said confessors and martyrs.
Nothing wrong with recognizing heresy. I had hoped that quotations that I posted from our Saints would cause some on this forum to recognize the glaring heresy that one may make the judgement that belongs to Christ alone.
The expulsion of heretics or cessation of communion with bodies corrupted by (or through indifference, maintaining communion with) heresy is obviously a "judgement" which the Church has seen fit to make in times past, and I submit continues to do. I'd also put forward that such is ultimatly a judgement of God, and not merely a matter of human decision ("for without me, you can do nothing".)
If you have not judged, then it must be your bishop who has judged that only those within his jurisdiction are the Church and those outside of said jurisdiction are gracelesss, without the Mysteries. Then it seems to me that this bishop is a schismatic as well as a pretender to the Judgement Seat of the Lord Jesus Christ. Shades of neo-papal patriarchalism! (At long last I get to use my new vocab word!)
Given that the Church has condemned men by name, I find your exegesis on the Biblical command not to indulge in private judgement to be unconvincing.
I hope that you would see or sense this communion, but it appears that you are not allowed to.
There's a terrible presumption involved in men of little experience or sanctity pretending to know the hidden activities or decisions of God - that somehow I have the insight to detect signs of grace in the temples of the Papists, or the on-goings of Sergianists. However, what we do have are the Symbols of the Faith, and the Holy Canons which do provide legitimate guidance regarding the limits of the Church, and by default, the presence of the unique activities of the Church (in particular, the stewardship of the Holy Mysteries.) The idea that I somehow have a role in saving those (possibly) being ministered to by God in ways I can hardly imagine, that they NEED my recognition for God to take care of them, is the height of self importance. This is aside of course from the fact that there would be terrible consequences in sweeping recognitions (in violation of the canons) of non-Orthodox bodies, even IF I could know there were those within them somehow receiving the mysteries of the Church (which we cannot) - the acceptance of heresy, schism, anti-canonicity as the norm, etc. This of course having the consequence of not only harming the heterodox, but undoing the work of the Church Herself.
In essence, the above is ecumenism - and precisely why Orthodox can have nothing to do with the communion of heresy often called "canonical Orthodoxy".
Seraphim
).
