Another (dumb) ROCOR question

[bogoliubtsy]

The bishops, the clergy and the laymen, subordinate to the jurisdiction of the Synod of Bishops Abroad, never broke canonical, prayer, or spiritual unity with their Mother Church.- Metr. Anastassy

Certainly sounds like ROCOR considered the MP part of the Russian Church.

The MP is the Moscow Patriarchate, not the Mother Patriarchate. The Mothr Church (the Church of Russia) is the Church in Russia that kept the faith, preserved the canons and the pledge that was handed unto them, unsoiled and without giving in to the God-less ones. This would be the catacomb Church. This would be the same CHruch that the New Martyrs are part of, not of those that helped to kill them.

ROCOR declaration of 1927:

The part of the All-Russian Church located abroad must cease all administrative relations with the church administra-tion in Moscow…until restoration of normal relations with Russia and until the liberation of our Church from persecutions by the godless Soviet authorities…The part of the Russian Church that finds itself abroad considers itself an inseparable, spiritually united branch of the Great Russian Church. It does not separate itself from its Mother Church and does not consider itself autocephalous

The first line speaks of breaking relations with the administration of the Moscow Church....then a couple of lines later(not straying from the same topic too much...I think the Synod was intelligent enough to stay on one topic per paragraph), they delcare that they will resume relations with this same body once they are able to do so...but until then, they do non consider themselves seperate from this body, the Mother Church- the Moscow Patriarchate.

[Methodius]

Fathers bless.

Now I am no lover of the MP, but there is evidence of grace and if you have ever visited the holy places of Russia you will know what I mean. I also served a molieben at the relics of St Alexander of Svir. His body remains at normal body temp and his incorrupt body exhales myrrh.

Yours in Christ,
Fr Serafim

Welcome back Father Serafim. It has been far too long since we've been graced (no pun intended) by your presence. What happened to your Russian Orthodox Pastoral Theology site at http://www.fatherserafim.info ?

Also I heard that you used to be in ROCOR before you joined the JP. Is this true? If so, why did you leave ROCOR? I ask out of curiosity only.

[Methodius]

Peter was that before or after ROCOR knew that Sergius had promulgated the declaration committing the Church to cooperation with the Soviet authorities?

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

With all do respect and admiration, I must agree with Priest Dionysi.

I cannot number how many times I have heard "visions", miracles, and feelings being used to justify a position.

I have a Roman Catholic friend who has described to me his experience with the glove of "padre" Pio. He will explain to you the unending fragrance, the feelings he felt, the worshippers who came from all around the state to see it. He says the fragrance assaulted you as soon as you walked into the building, and he says he has a peice of cloth that still has the fragrance now.

Now, by what authority and by what criteria would anyone here be able to rebuke me if I were to say: "I also smelled the smells and felt the feelings at being near "padre" pios glove - it was a miracle. Therefore, the Latins have Grace!" ???

We do not need the miracles to confirm Holy Tradition and God's word since it has already been confirmed. What we must do is believe God's word and preach it to a lost and dying world. Miracles are superfluous for us. We have God's completed and confirmed revelation. We have in Holy tradition "all things pertaining to life and godliness" (2 Pet. 1:3).

In Sacred scripture it says that we must not nessesarily follow even those who perform miracles right before us! "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'” Matthew 7:21-23

So by what basis would we not follow even someone performing miracles? Because they do not preach that which is confirmed by Holy Tradition, that is, the Truth that was revealed, this is the measure of all things.

No amount of miracles, signs, and wonders can or should make us deviate, or else we would be creating our own "Orthodoxy" each time.

And to Priest Dionysi's point: take the case of holy father Victor, Bishop of Vyatka, who was recently recommended for canonisation by a commission of the MP on the basis of the incorruption of his relics and the many miracles that have been wrought at his shrine. He was perhaps the very first hierarch to separate from Metropoltian Sergius in 1927, and his condemnation of Sergius was about as "extreme" as it was possible to be. Thus he called Sergianism "worse than heresy", and in his last known letter, of unknown date, he wrote: "In his destructive and treacherous actions against the Church, Metropolitan Sergius has also committed a terrible blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, which according to the unlying word of Christ will never be forgiven him, neither in this life, nor in the life to come.

This is just like the Roman Catholic's considering St. John Chrysostom a Saint - yes he is a Saint of which they have no claim to.

Forgive me Father Seraphim.

[bogoliubtsy]

Methodios,
That was after Sergius.

[Protopriest Dionysi]

The bishops, the clergy and the laymen, subordinate to the jurisdiction of the Synod of Bishops Abroad, never broke canonical, prayer, or spiritual unity with their Mother Church.- Metr. Anastassy

Certainly sounds like ROCOR considered the MP part of the Russian Church.

The MP is the Moscow Patriarchate, not the Mother Patriarchate. The Mothr Church (the Church of Russia) is the Church in Russia that kept the faith, preserved the canons and the pledge that was handed unto them, unsoiled and without giving in to the God-less ones. This would be the catacomb Church. This would be the same CHruch that the New Martyrs are part of, not of those that helped to kill them.

ROCOR declaration of 1927:

The part of the All-Russian Church located abroad must cease all administrative relations with the church administra-tion in Moscow…until restoration of normal relations with Russia and until the liberation of our Church from persecutions by the godless Soviet authorities…The part of the Russian Church that finds itself abroad considers itself an inseparable, spiritually united branch of the Great Russian Church. It does not separate itself from its Mother Church and does not consider itself autocephalousquote]

Yes, this is a good example. You see, this does not talk of the Soviet Church, but the Church in Russia. All things did cease while things were being sorted out with what was going on with the whoe "Serginist" ordeal. In fact, normal relations with the Church in Russia only began in the late 80's early 90's with led to the formation of the Free Russian Church (which is the period when Metropolitan Valentine was consecrated). So again, the Russian Church, the Church in Russia, the Mother Church the Catacomb Church, the Josephites ect. are one thing, the Soviets and their church is another. Yes, it seems that the "in thing" is to look the the MP that was born in the womb of the Soviets, as the Church of Russia.....but...

"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions." - G.K. Chesterton

[bogoliubtsy]

The fallacy which has gained acceptance is the one that the MP is not one of the three parts of the Russian Church. St. John of San Francisco thought it was...and like I said before, that's good enough for me.
In my previous post I quoted:

The part of the All-Russian Church located abroad must cease all administrative relations with the church administra-tion in Moscow…until restoration of normal relations with Russia and until the liberation of our Church from persecutions by the godless Soviet authorities…The part of the Russian Church that finds itself abroad considers itself an inseparable, spiritually united branch of the Great Russian Church. It does not separate itself from its Mother Church and does not consider itself autocephalous.

I feel you response steps around the issue of what is so obviously being stated here. What was understood by St.John as truth, what was confirmed by ROCOR synods times over, and what is still to this day the position of ROCOR. Can't people see that the schims from ROCOR were not caused out of conscience, or due to a change in ROCOR's official stance, but were started by deposed bishops or self-interested parties?