Translation of Bp. Gabriel's interview of 25 Aug."06

[尼古拉前执事]

A letter to Metropolitan Lavr ~ Письмо Княгини Ирины Багратион Мухранской Митрополиту Лавру.

From Irina Bagration: The following letter was transmitted to Metropolitan LAVR by Fr. Luke in Jordanville.

To His Eminence, Metropolitan LAURUS

Your Eminence,

Many, and myself among them, are appalled at the strange manipulations being enacted on the Synod website with reference to the Synod of Bishops decision on the Act of Canonical Union .

In the first version published on the Synod website the document appears with the hand written signatures of all members attending the Synod and with the hand written addendum over the signature of His Grace Bishop GABRIEL stating that he disagrees with the document.

The document then disappears and reappears with all handwritten signatures erased and with just the printed names remaining. That too disappears and reappears without the name of Bishop GABRIEL.

Furthermore there is no mention at all of the letter forwarded to the Synod by His Eminence Archbishop HILARION stating his opinion.

Many also question the absence of the text of the Act of Canonical Union.
If the Synod of Bishops has approved this document why is it not published? Or must it remain secret ?

Your Eminence, is it possible that such methods previously foreign to our Church are now deemed acceptable?

Always remaining faithful to the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, I ask your Eminence’s blessing.

Princess Irina Bagration Moukhransky

cc: His Eminence Archbishop HILARION
His Grace Bishop GABRIEL

New York, September 10, 2006

[strastnaya]

A letter to Metropolitan Lavr ~ Письмо Княгини Ирины Багратион Мухранской Митрополиту Лавру.

Many, and myself among them, are appalled at the strange manipulations being enacted on the Synod website...

One thing is clear: the ROCOR has had a very difficult history with integrating "internet technology" into its mission.

It would almost be as funny as receiving "Orthodox Life" which publishes things that happened 10 months ago.

There have been numerous examples of faux pas over the past years.
Once years ago somebody put up a letter by Bishop Mark that he didn't want made public and a day later it was removed causing an uproar.
Then there was all the Met. Vitaly insanity of almost daily ukaz's and the Mansonville meltdown.

Now there was a PDF and then it was removed.

So what does any of this proof except that Princess Irina may want to direct a contribution towards helping the Synod do some risk management prior to communicating on the net.

In Christ,
Deacon John

[joasia]

There is nothing odd about the disappearance of the initial post of the original signatures. Plain and simple...it was removed. Princess Irina makes an obvious point.

As I've stated..Bishop Gabriel is opposed to the union and made it clear with his comment on the document. What's so difficult to understand??

Joanna

[尼古拉前执事]

Attached is a reply by Bishop Gabriel to the commentary by the
journal "Russkaya Linia" on his interview in "Novoe Russkoe Slovo."

This statement was posted by Bishop Gabriel on September 6, 2006 --
last week, during the meeting of the Hierarchical Synod, and was read
to the bishops at the meeting.

Russian original at http://www.rusk.ru/st.php?idar=104504&page=2#form

====================================================

Answer by Bishop Gabriel to the Commentary on "Russkaya Linia"

With some amazement, and please forgive me for Christ' sake, with an
involuntary smile, I read the commentary of the editors of "Russkaya
Linia" on my recent interview, in which I, it seems, "confirmed my
reputation as the main opponent of the reunification of the Russian Church."

Not in my current, nor in my previous interviews, which, I recall,
"Russkaya Linia" was happy to publish, never, not with a single word,
did I state my disagreement with the reunification (or, as it would
be more correct to say, the reestablishment of the unity) of the
Russian Orthodox Church. Just very recently, on September 2, at a
reception with a large group of clergy and laity on the occasion of
my 10-th anniversary of service in the rank of bishop, I especially
underlined, that such unity is the path toward the votserkovlenie
[literally, "rechurchification"] of our suffering people.

Only one who completely, as they say now, "is out of it" could deny,
however, the existence of difficulties and all kinds of obstacles on
this path. It is difficult for me to conceive how the editor in chief
of "Russkaya Linia," the Orthodox historian Anatoly Stepanov-- does
not know the history of the Orthodox Church, of which he is a son.
And so, if you, dear Anatloy, could point out to me in which words,
even by a hint, I defined myself as an "opponent of reunification" --
please point them out to your readers. If, as it seems to me, someone
else spoke to you about my "role as the main opponent" -- let him
name himself openly. Is it not he, who jokingly told you that the
question of reunification will be decided at the Synod "in a working
manner." I do not completely understand the meaning of this Soviet
term, but it appears that it means, "casually," "without any special
attention." "in the way of things," or "by the way." Do you really
think that the supremely important matter of the unity of the Church
could be decided "by the way"?

Such an approach will not lead to good.

You could have approached me for clarifications, but for some reason
you chose not to do so. That is saddening.

Your well-wisher,

• Bp. Gabriel of Manhattan (Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia)

===========================================

It is good to know that Bishop Gabriel vehemently protests being
called an "opponent of the reunification," or as he notes it is
better to say "the reestablishment of the unity of the Russian
Orthodox Church," and, in fact, considers that such unity is the
"path toward the 'rechurchification' of our suffering people."

With love in Christ,

Prot. Alexander Lebedeff

[catechuman]

Surely this above statement by Bishop Gabriel is to be understood in context with statements in his other interviews as "I believe in unification but not until certain key items have been reconsiled"?

Here is his latest interview given on Sept 20th:

http://portal-credo.ru/site/?act=authority&id=595