~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

After my death our beloved Church abroad will break three ways ... first the Greeks will leave us as they were never a part of us ... then those who live for this world and its glory will go to Moscow ... what will remain will be those souls faithful to Christ and His Church. ~St. Philaret of NY

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~





REVISIONIST HISTORY

I noticed this week that the current Wikipedia article on the ROCOR has been carefully revised to omit any references to the historic condemnation of Sergianism by the ROCOR, or to the longstanding relationship between the KGB and the Moscow Patriarchate. The ROCOR Wikipedia article used to have at least one reference to the writings of Konstantin Preobrazhensky on the subject of the KGB/FSB control of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Incredibly, this carefully revised article does not mention the Mitrokhin KGB archives at all, or Konstantin Preobrazhensky's claim that the take over of the ROCOR by the MP in 2007 was part of a well-organized KGB/FSB foreign policy inititative. The article also fails to reference Vladimir Putin's famous quote (from ITASS) in 2007 that "religion is one of the Russian Federation's most potent weapons of self-defense."

There is a reference to The Sword and the Shield and Russia's Catacomb Saints in a Wikipedia discussion thread on the subject of the ROCOR, but someone writing on behalf of the MP-ROCOR, possibly Father John Whiteford, responded to this reference by stating that the article is not about the Moscow Patriarchate, but about the ROCOR, and, hence, should not reference the the Mitrokhin archives!

Obviously, someone within the MP-ROCOR has been carefully editing Wikipedia's article about the ROCOR to present a carefully white-washed, distorted, MP-ROCOR version of ROCOR history. There is also no reference to Metropolitan Vitaly's (Ustinov) well-documented kidnapping by operatives within the ROCOR, and the petition for guardianship of Metropolitan Vitaly by ROCOR Bishop Gabriel in 2003, a case which went all the way to the New York Supreme Court, and is a matter of public record in the U.S.

This sort of revisionist history was the norm in the former Soviet Union, but it is apparently still happening today, even in the "free" world, where the Prince of Darkness reigns, as usual.

Here is the link to the current Wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ROCOR

MP Clergy Letter to MP Patriarch - English

The original Russian text:) http://sinod.ruschurchabroad.org 

"30/03/1911"..... "Clergy of the Udmurdskoy Diocese of the Moscow Patriarchate have stopped their commemoration of Patriarch Kyrill and have sent him to 'treatment'" - OPEN LETTER- with one PHOTO of three clergy making this public declaration-


In essence, what is said here, is a lengthy list of serious complaints about various corruptions inside the MP, the MP's yielding to outside wealthy people, and an appeal for the MP to withdraw from the World Council of Churches, and from the Ecumenical activities en toto. Plus there is a mention of the Russian Church Abroad, etc.

The clergy who have signed this, recognize that they will pay dearly for this, but they say they in good conscience can do nothing else.......

This is a desperate cry of pain, from inside the MP, which gives us outside of Russia, an even clearer picture of what all is so very very wrong in that extremely corrupt  Sergianist 'Moscow Patriarchy' organization ....especially at it's highest levels......
-R.D.



MP Clergy Letter to MP Patriarch - English
To His Beatitude Kirill, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia from the clergyof the Izhevsk and Udmurtia Diocese:

Archpriest Sergey KondakovDirector of the Armed Forces Liaison Department
and Law-enforcement Office of the Izhevsk and Udmurtia Diocese;
Rector of the St. Nicholas Church in Zavyalova;
Member of the Civic Chamber of the Udmurtia Republic.
Archpriest Mikhail Karpeev
Rector of the Transfiguration Church in Yagul
and the St. Basil the Great Church in Khokhryak.
Reverend Aleksandr Malikh
Priest at the St. Alexander Nevsky Cathedral in Izhevsk;
Candidate of Theological Studies

YOUR HOLINESS!

Though we are unworthy, we are moved by our love of our flocks and our personal salvation to write this open letter to you.

With God’s mercy and the prayers of the Holy New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, atheistic communism has been overcome and millions have returned to the Mother Church. Sadly, a complete rebirth of our nation has not occurred. On the contrary, a majority of our people find themselves in conditions that are worse than 20 years ago. Russia is threatened by ruin, caused by a spiritual and moral crisis. One can ask, “Perhaps the reason there was no accompanying rebirth within the Russian government, military, culture and families when the Orthodox churches were restored was that the stain of 70 years of servitude to the Bolsheviks was not removed from life within the Church?”

Your Holiness, in recent years as the vertical power structure has been established in the Church, it has engaged in missionary work that is reminiscent of the “missionary work” which swept the West after Vatican II. What good is our “missionary to Russia,” Fr. Andrey Kuraev, when he mocks the canons and traditions of the Orthodox Church without any punishment?

We cannot hope but be embarrassed when we see how easily the Church awards medals with the likenesses of saints to representatives of governments and businesses. We are compelled to ask, “What medal would King Herod receive from the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church?” After all, he did much to rebuild and decorate the temple in Jerusalem.

Unfortunately, cheap methods of false preaching have become the norm for our Church. Why do we need to repeat the tragic mistakes of Catholic false missionary work? Indeed, “the harvest is great, but there are few workers.” Our people need real preaching, but we do not need priests who are karate experts, or soccer players, weight-lifters, celebrities, rock singers, or bankers. We critically need pastors who would give their lives for their flock, who would be a witness of Christ not only in word but in deed. That is why it is so important that we free ourselves of the web which ensnared our Church during the years of the communist dictatorship.

We earnestly ask you to have the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church leave the World Council of Churches. Many of us do not understand why our episcopate does not make this decision.  Membership in this Council was forced upon the Church by the persecutors of the Khrushchev regime, whose appointed task was to destroy Orthodox Russia. Remember the words of the great theologian of the 20th century, St. Justin (Popovich), who said that it is not possible on the basis of the canons for the Orthodox to participate in organizations such as the World Council of Churches and in the ecumenical movement as a whole.

We earnestly ask that our episcopate decisively disentangle itself from the contemporary heresy of heresies – ecumenism. May those bishops and clergy who participated in joint prayers with heretics ask for forgiveness, as it is written in the Apostle’s Rule: “If a bishop or priest or deacon prays with heretics he will be cast out. If they are allowed to continue to serve, they will be expelled.” (45-e Apostle’s Rule) We categorically ask that all theological conferences and other such ecumenical activities leading to union with the Vatican, which is sullied by heresy, cease.

We earnestly ask that our Russian Orthodox Church and You personally, Your Holiness, defend the holy memory of the Holy Royal Martyrs from the despicable lies that are spread to one degree or another in our country and the entire world. We earnestly ask that the practice of blind agreement with the government and indulging the thick-headed among the people of our country cease. We earnestly ask that You, Your Holiness, make an effort that our people see you not only blessing and fraternizing with representatives of the administration, but also rebuking them.

We categorically ask that You arrange for all clergy who collaborated with the KGB during the years of communist dictatorship to repent before God and the nation.  We categorically ask that that attention be paid to the amoral behavior of clergy, including even senior clergy, who indulge in the shameful mortal sin, the Sin of sodomy, which has crept into the ranks of clergy of the MP and flourishes with the help of intelligence services, destroying our Church from within.

We categorically ask that attention be paid to the impoverished condition of many village priests, while a large percentage of the clergy, who are coddled by the powerful of this world, are drowning in luxury.

We earnestly ask that You hearken to the voice of our brothers and sisters who remained in the part of the Russian Church Abroad who did not agree to union with the Moscow Patriarchate. There is much truth in their criticism. If we listen to them, it will lead to a complete union of the two parts of the Russian Orthodox Church based not on compromises, but on Truth.

We also earnestly ask that You be the first among those who refuse to accept the Universal electronic identification card, which poses a threat to our country and nation.

Your Holiness, pardon us for our boldness, but liken yourself to Holy Martyr Patriarch Germogen, Holy Patriarch Tikhon and St. Mark of Ephesus. Lead our nation and strive to cleanse us of ecumenism, sergianism, defects and all that which hinders us from following Christ and His Virgin Mother.

But You, Holy Bishop, must first ask for forgiveness personally before God and the flock of the Church for these sins. We, the sinful, with humility will stop commemorating You during the services in accordance with the 15th Rule of the Double Council and the 3rd Rule of the Third Ecumenical Council.

Our Most Reverend cannot be someone who leads us on the path to apostasy and union with the papists.  Our father cannot be someone who violates the canons of the Church and the rules of the Holy Fathers.

PS. We clearly understand the sad reality of life in today’s Russia, that there will be an onslaught of denigration, slander and persecution after this letter, but we are guided by our Christian conscience and cannot do anything else. May God help us!

Great Lent 2011, the week of the Veneration of the Cross.

Thank you kindly D.G. for this translation

Excerpt from an old History Book

original unrewritten history re: OCA


A History of the Russian Church Abroad
1917-1971
by Holy Transfiguration Monastery, Boston
out-of-print
originally published by St. Nectarios Press [1972]


Contents

Publisher's Preface

Introduction

Chapter I:  A Brief History of Orthodoxy in America Before the Bolshevist Revolution of 1917   pages 2-8

Chapter II:  The Russian Church Abroad After The Revolution of 1917  pages 9-65

Chapter III:  The Orthodox Church In America Since The Bolshevist Revolution   pages 66-119

Chapter IV:  Is The Metropolia Ready For Autocephaly?   pages 120-149

Chapter V:  Ought The Metropolia To Have Dealt With The Moscow Patriarchate?  pages 150-174

Chapter VI:  The Fruits Of The Autocephaly   pages 175-209

For Further Reading


Chapter IV -- page 121

The preceeding chapters have demonstrated that since 1946 the American Metropolia has been in a state of schism from the Church Abroad.  Being in such a state, she could of course in no way be considered "ready" for autocephaly.

Moreover, in other respects as well the Metropolia is demonstrably unprepared for autocephaly.  This has been pointed out recently by the Church Abroad in a whole series of letters and articles appearing in the Russian daily Novoye Ruskoye Slovo, the Synod's bi-monthly Russian publication Orthodox Russia, and in its English publications The Orthodox WordOrthodox Life, Orthodoxy, and The Orthodox Christian Witness.  A typical statement on the question is the letter of Hierodeacon John [Melander] of Holy Trinity Monastery, Jordanville, New York, to the magazine Logos:  "As for Orthodoxy in America in general, it is not ready for such a move [as autocephaly].  Namely, it has not yet shown the fruits of piety in this new land, in the words of Metropolitan Philaret [of the Synod].  When a regional Church is prepared to receive independence, it must demonstrate that it has matured sufficiently for such a move, that Orthodoxy has become firmly rooted in that region, that its spiritual life is flourishing in the highest degree, and that it is able to look after its own self.  Until such a time, it is like a child which must live under the guidance and protection of its mother.  But what do we see in America?  Can one really say that Orthodoxy is flourishing here?  On the contrary, one can say that there is a falling away. [Logos, May, 1970, p. 2]

Fr. Melander's comments will no doubt prove unimpressive to Met-

page 122

ropolia adherents, who will probably protest that Orthodoxy is flourishing in America, that a "new era" has arrived.  To back up Fr. Melander's statement, therefore, we shall call on Fr. Alexander Schmemann, dean of St. Vladimir's Seminary and leading Metropolia spokesman.  In a series of articles entitled "Problems of Orthodoxy in America," published in St. Vladimir's Seminary Quarterly, Fr. Alexander drew on his long experience with the life of the Metropolia to show the terrible state of affairs the jurisdiction is actually in. Throughout these articles one hears a muted cry of despair over a disintegrating Orthodoxy.

In his article devoted to "The Spiritual Problem," Fr. Alexander affirms that, "Orthodoxy in America is in the midst of a serious spiritual crisis which endangers its very existence as Orthodoxy."  [S.V.S.Q., vol. IX, no. 4, 1965, p. 171]

He continues:

"Nothing probably reveals better the nature of the crisis than the impressive amount of doctrines, rules, teachings, and customs which, although taken for granted for centuries as essential for Orthodoxy, are by a wide consensus declared to be 'impossible' here in America.  Speak to a Bishop, then to a priest, be he old or young, speak finally to an active and dedicated layman and you will discover that in spite of all the differences between their respective points of view they all agree on the same 'impossibilities.'  Thus you will learn that it is impossible to enforce here the canonical norms of the Church, impossible to preserve from the wonderfully rich liturgical traditions of the Church anything except Sunday morning worship and a few 'days of obligation' common in fact to all 'de-

page 123

nominations,' impossible to interest people in anything but social activities, impossible. . .But when you add up all these and many other 'impossibilities' you must conclude, if you are logical and consistent, that for some reason it is impossible for the Orthodox Church in America to be Orthodox, at least in the meaning given this term 'always, everywhere by all.'"  [S.V.S.Q., vol. IX, no. 4, 1965, pp. 171-2]

He goes on:  "There have always been minimalistic attitudes among clergy and laity.  But they were always recognized as such, never accepted as the norm.  A Christian could think it impossible for him to live by Christian standards, but it never entered his mind to minimize the demands of the Church."  [Ibid., p. 172]

The Metropolia and other jurisdictions in America, according to Fr. Alexander, have done just that -- tacitly agreed to accept the minimal as the norm.  If, one is tempted to ask, there is a "consensus" that traditional Orthodoxy is "impossible" in America and that minimalism must be the norm in Church life, then how can it be that the Metropolia is "ready" for autocephaly, i.e., total self-government and the complete management of her own affairs?

Fr. Alexander continues his indictment:

"The spiritual crisis of Orthodoxy in America consists, therefore, in the fact that in spite of. . .absolute incompatibility, Orthodoxy is in the process of a progressive surrender to secularism, and this surrender is all the more tragic because it is unconscious."  [S.V.S.Q., vol. IX, no. 4, 1965, p. 175]

...

Reader Daniel Shares...

***THIS IS SHARED, SOLELY for STUDY/KNOWLEDGE purposes, not for any other reasons:


Of new interest, read:

1) http://ocanews.org   under 3/29/2011 'News From Across the OCA' (read the whole article) - which site seems to represent more the mainstream semi-official OCA Synod's view of things..... which more and more, they do appear as seeing Met. Jonah as a rogue/out of control/off-the-wall, harmer of their church, etc........

2) AND, from the pro-Jonah (or so they seem to think of themselves as) 'devotees':
 http://www.ocatruth.com   is a collection of various hysterical/angry ...mostly unsupported by the facts, calls, 'to arms' to save their beloved 'persecuted Met. Jonah'  from the machinations (real or imagined) against him, etc.

Comment: We seem to see the battle lines forming: those opposed to Met. Jonah, and those who doggedly revere him, as some sort of saintly martyric hierarch.  Will this split up the OCA?   Some feel that it might, especially with a large part of their 'DOS' (Diocese of the South) strongly  behind Jonah, and opposed to anyone, whom they suppose, are against him, including their own OCA Synod and Administration.

Some in the OCA are talking of some sizable segment of their clergy/parishes, POSSIBLY leaving and seeking shelter under EP Bartholomew, if this mess continues, and if they conclude that the OCA is no longer canonically  Orthodox, etc. Others, are privately questioning the possibility of joining themselves to one of the anti-MP,  Russian 'dissident' jurisdictions. Some may run to ROCOR/MP, or directly appeal the MP to take them in (forgetting about 'autocephaly').

The OCA, is definitely in a sour kettle of borscht, with the caldron boiling and bubbling. The MP, their 'Mother Church' does not seem to be able to direct OCA affairs the way they want, though they are trying. Clearly, they want their pro-MP, Met. Jonah to stay in power, but......? 

...the OCA Synod recently thanked the MP for their help, via the recent visit of MP Met. Hilarion-Alferov & his mission from 'Pat. Kyrill' but, told Met. Hilarion: 'we shall take care of our own affairs'.

Rd. Daniel Everiss

Diocesan Meeting

MINUTES OF THE DIOCESAN MEETING
OF THE EASTERN AMERICAN AND NEW YORK
AND SYRACUSE-NIKOLSKIY DIOCESES OF THE ROCA
March 2\15, 2011
St. Arsenius, Bishop of Tver


The meeting took place at the Tolstoy Foundation in Valley Cottage, New York.  The meeting of the Eastern America and New York and Syracuse-Nikolskiy Dioceses of the ROCA was chaired by the Most Reverend Metropolitan Agafangel, Chairman and First Hierarch of the ROCA, and was attended by: Archbishop Andronik, Bishop Joseph, Bishop georgiy, Archpriest Gregory Kotlaroff, Archpriest Vsevolod Dutikow, Fr. Andrew Kencis, Fr. Nikita Grigoriev, Fr. Daniel Meschter, Fr. Oleg Mironov, Hieromonk Makariy (Foster), Fr. John Hinton, Deacon Fr. Dimitriy Dobronravov, Mother Agapia (Stephanopoulos), Dimitri Gontscharow and Evgeniy Vernikovskiy.
The meeting began at 0900 with the prayer “O Heavenly King.”

The meeting accepted the following agenda:
1. Met. Agafangel’s report on matters in the ROCA.
a) On unity between the Local Jerusalem Church and the ROCA
b) On the matter of unifying the “fragments”
c) On relations with our Sister-Churches
d) On the possibility of establishing a residence at Mountain View
2. Reports by the pastors about their parishes.
a) On matters at the Boston parish
3. Report by the Diocesan Secretary.
4. Report by the Diocesan Treasurer.
5. Report by the Pilgrimage Coordinating Committee.
6. Report on the California Mission.
7. Discussion of publications and diocesan websites
a) Proposal to create a Missionary newsletter.
8. Report on the establishment of a correspondence seminary.
9. Discussion of the creation of a catechism for laypeople to include contemporary issues.
10. Other.

1. The Chairman expressed his pleasure that our Church’s overall condition is stable. Others are beginning to view us as the Russian Church Abroad from before, whose destruction was not achieved.  It is important for us that others are confirming who we are. An example is the recent telephone call with the Jerusalem Patriarch Irineos in which he underscored that he is well acquainted with developments in our Church and considers us the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad and that he prays for us and has allowed our First Hierarch to commemorate him during the Great Entrance.

It is invaluable that the Patriarch confirmed the historic relations between our churches. The matter will be discussed during the Synod meeting to follow.
Decided: After a varied discussion, the information was taken under advisement and that a decision will be made by the Synod.

1. b) The Chairman noted that much was done to establish contact with the former members of the ROCA, but so far no one from the existing “fragments” has even agreed to talk about what has transpired and how to overcome it.

Bishop Joseph expressed the opinion that it is crucial that these attempts continue, since only through meeting in person may we find a way to come together.

Fr. Andrew spoke of his experience of speaking with parishioners from the “fragments” and his conclusion that they believe the ROCA should be made up of “old émigrés” and that the primary obstacle to our union is our relations with the Synod of Met. Cyprian.

The Chairman pointed out that our views are not exactly those of Met. Cyprian and that we continue the tradition of the ROCA of old, which held to the middle Royal path and avoided extremes.

After more discussion, Bishop Joseph offered to contact Bishop Stefan of the RTOC, who was present at the Vth Council, and invite him to the ROCA Synod session that follows the next day.

1. c) The Chairman said the matter of commemorating the Jerusalem Patriarch Irineos will be decided after consultations with our Sister-Churches.

1. d) The Chairman spoke of the initial agreement achieved between the Synod Chairman and the director of the corporation “Mountain View” George Lukin to develop and renovate the property “Mountain View” together. This will allow the ROCA Synod to establish a residence there. The agreement will be formalized legally and presented for review by the ROCA Synod. At the behest of the ROCA Synod, this matter will be handled by Dimitri Gontscharow.

2. The rectors told the meeting that all is well at their respective parishes.

2. b) Since Fr. Dmitry Amelchenko was not present at the meeting, discussion of the matter was shelved.

3. The Diocesan Secretary’s short statement was taken under advisement.

4. At the behest of the Diocesan Treasurer Alexander Renko, Dimitri Gontscharow provided the financial report and noted that all the parishes of the dioceses submit their tithes regularly and conscientiously. Travel expenses make up the bulk of outlays, but we are able to fund those for now.
Decided: To accept the report.

5. Archbishop Andronik informed the attendees on behalf of Tatyana Tkachenko that people continue to sign up for the pilgrimage. They have 19 interested parties so far, but not everyone has completed the
registration forms.

The Chairman noted that it might be better to merge the pilgrimage and youth committees and use one well-known address as a contact for anyone interested in either activity.
Decided: To assign Mother Agapia as a coordinator for pilgrimages.

6. Fr. Vsevolod reported he has had difficulties contacting Galina Volkova to organize church services in California. He believes that the hope that she will help in this matter will not be realized

Fr. Nikita offered to try to gather information on the faithful that have remained true to ROCA in California.
Decided: To include Fr. Nikita in the diocesan mission in California and continue attempts to organize church services in northern California.

7. Evgeniy Vernikovskiy reported on the status of the ROCA news site http://news.ruschurchabroad.org
and thanked John Herbst and Dimitri Gontscharow for their timely support and submission of subject matter.

The Chairman noted the importance of organizing more church sites in addition to the parish websites.
Decided: To ask Evgeniy Vernikovskiy to develop a website for the Eastern American & New York diocese and Fr. Oleg Mironov to create one for the Canadian diocese. It was suggested that the websites include parish directories, contact information and a list of clergy with short biographies. Photographs of the clergy and parishes should also be included wherever possible.

7. a) The Chairman explained Peter Nikolayevich Koltypin’s idea of creating a newsletter in color which would include news of the Church and would be distributed widely.
Decided: To ask Dimitri Gontscharow to meet with Peter Nikolayevich Koltypin and John Herbst to discuss the creation of such a publication.

8. The attendees discussed the important need for a correspondence seminary for the Eastern American & New York diocese. Bishop Joseph, Fr. Nikita and others had helpful opinions.

Bishop Joseph stressed that the seminary should be modeled after the Jordanville seminary of old, especially the textbooks used back then.
Decided: To ask the Synod to give its blessing for a seminary in the Eastern American & New York diocese. To ask the group of instructors headed by Archbishop Andronik to hold a meeting to organize the endeavor, plan out a course curriculum for the first year and hold entrance exams for the Seminary on September 16, 2011.

9. Fr. Andrew stressed the need to publish the Church’s official stand on current issues, for example organ donation, which is being heavily promoted in today’s society.  A lengthy discussion ensued.

10. Fr. Andrew reported that Fr. Elias Warnke’s health is declining further and asked everyone to keep Fr. Elias in their prayers.
The meeting concluded at 1600 with the prayer “It is Truly Meet…”

Meeting Chairman
+Agafangel
Metropolitan of Eastern America and New York
Meeting Secretary
Evgeniy Vernikovskiy

Report of Archpriest Lev Lebedev

Excerpts of the report of Archpriest Lev Lebedev 
Council of Bishops of Rocor in 1998

[not too bad Google translation]

In April of 1998. Lev Lebedev, arrived in New York to make a report to the Council of Bishops of ROCOR.  This report was supposed to answer the question: "Why has not occurred in the mass conversion of Orthodox Russia in the ROCOR? and "what to do next." 

Unfortunately, Fr. Lev died before reaching the opening of the Cathedral a few days.  But his report was read by the Council of Bishops of ROCOR, who took a very important and correct decisions.  The most important of which is: in any case not unite with the MP. 

In 2000-2001, these decisions will be reviewed, and Metropolitan Vitaly (Ustinov) dismissed from his post as First Hierarch of ROCOR, but that's another story.


1. Experiencing a period of 

World, humanity, more and faster and faster plunging into a state of Sodom and Gomorrah, irresistibly moving towards the completion of the new Tower of Babel - the "new world order", ie, the Antichrist.  Behind him - Second Glorious Coming of Christ.  Here we are now experiencing the essence of the moment of time. 

2. The position of Orthodoxy 

Given these global phenomena and in connection with them seems particularly sad that the majority of formerly Orthodox Churches through ecumenical and interreligious movement is actively drawn into the world building and draw his flock in the Ziggurat of Babylon.  The only significant island of the righteousness of God in the world has remained until now the Russian Church Abroad. Small islands of solid standing in the truth were also some Old Calendar unification of Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, some adherents of Orthodoxy in other countries. 


3. The position of Moscow "Patriarchy" 

Lawless (uncanonical), in its origins the Moscow Patriarchate, by its very nature, is a church organization, which (from 1927) under the guise of serving Christ, actively serve the antichrist. Poetomy is not surprising, but it is quite natural that the current MP is actively involved in completing the construction of Babylon, the new world order, as accurately and correctly stated in the "management" meeting of the Russian arhiereev ROCA oktyabrya/12 of 30 November 1997 in Yalta. 

Some bursts antiekumenicheskih sentiment in the bosom of the MP, as well as protests of its individual sluzhiteley against countless other otstupleny from the truth, are nothing more than weak convulsions dying or already dead body. 

Bce is explained by the fact that the current Russian-speaking population of the Russian Federation, including - of the Orthodox faithful part in a state of total "faith lies," characteristic of the times people and the Antichrist is described An. Paul as God's punishment for what they did not love the truth "(2 Fecs. 2. 10-11). 


4. The position of Russian in Russia 

The entire Russian Orthodox nation as a whole (only about 80 million Great Russians) with Russia St. at its base was physically destroyed in the period from 1917 to 1945, just 28 years!  So the Lord gave to the Russian people by crucifixion on Calvary historic victory Sunday in Gornji Jerusalem Kingdom of Heaven, seizing this nation out of the modern historical process.  Simultaneously, from 1917 onwards in the USSR artificially cultivated new "Soviet" nation "new historical community," as the Party and the Soviet government in 1977, but in fact this "new Soviet people" was not even the people, m . since there's no sense of its unity, and a conglomerate of Russian-speaking population, spilled into the gravel after 1991, therefore, except for small remnant Russian abroad, currently on the ground of the Russian people no longer exists. 


5. Status of Russian believers 

For russskoyazychnyh believers in Russia is characterized by the predominance of terrestrial interests over spiritual, rogue nature of psychology, faith lies, "fearfulness, and molovernost skvernost" (Rev. 21.8).  Extraordinary widely witchcraft and quackery.  Christ and His righteousness no one is looking for: looking for one of "their system."  Thus revealing the phenomenon was that after 1991-1992.  In an atmosphere of real freedom of conscience in Russia, mass, popular treatment of Russian-speaking to the Church of Christ has not happened.    Some slight lift of faith and the influx of young people in the church has a place, but now and these effects have subsided.  If you do not overestimate the data at the present time in the Russian Federation no more than 15-20 million Orthodox believers, and regularly attending church twice less.  According to the MP, if back in 1993 income from voluntary donations from individuals accounted for 43% of total revenues, "patriarchy", then in 1997 they accounted for only 6%!  The rest is "patriarchy" gets from usury, trade, oil, vodka, tobacco, nozhkamu Bush, "other types" buznesa, as well as from a very obscure foreign sources. 

It is sometimes said that nowadays in Russia a lot of good, good people.  But those few, and among Catholics and Protestants in all Western countries.  It is also said that in Russia, and now you can find, even in the bosom of the MP, blagochectivyh, diligently laboring fervently in prayer and fasting people.  But you should know that this is not the rays of sunrise and the last rays of sunset.  On a large landfill caught antiques, icons, and even gold items, but it is - not a palace or temple - namely garbage dump. . . 

100 years ago in 1899, Archbishop Anthony (Khrapovitsky), referring to rastserkovlennuyu part of Russian society of his time, wrote: "This is not a people, but the rotting corpse that decay takes over his life, and live on it and it just moles, worms and insects are filthy ... because in the living body would not satisfy their greed, there would be no life for them "(Talberg. History of the Russian Church. Jordanville, 1959, s.8Z1).  At the end of the past - the beginning of this twentieth century, this decaying part of the Russian population was only about 5-6%.  Now, at the end of the twentieth century.  It constitutes 94-95% in Russia. "Rotting corpse" is a whole entire Russian Federation. 


6. The situation with respect to ROCA MP 

It must be admitted that such a state in the general population is consistent with apostate, heretical and criminal state of the overwhelming majority of the hierarchy of MP, as one of "moles" or "worms", greedily devouring a rotting corpse that is still possible to catch and eat. 

That the total could be in such a case, the Russian Church Abroad and the Moscow "patriarchy"? nothing!  Hence, any "dialogue" or "interviews" with the MP in order to clarify what divides us, and that - together - is the top or misunderstanding the essence of things, or - a betrayal of the truth of God and the Church.  Divides us literally everything!  And does not merge anything, except the appearance of temples, vestments of the clergy and the rite of services (and even then not all!). 

Therefore, we must clearly understand and to formally approve that the ROCOR now - it's not part of the Russian Church, as the only legitimate Russian Church in its entirety! 

One must also understand that this osoznaetcya and Moscow. "Patriarchy"!  That is why she is seeking admission of how it is (without giving up the apostasy and heresy) from the ROCOR Council.  This "confession" the MP from the ROCOR, the MP would have reported the appearance of full legitimacy in the eyes of the world. But this should not be allowed. 

ROCA to abandon dreams and illusions "vozrozhdeniya Russia."  Unless there is some sort of emergency unpredictable intervention of God in earthly affairs, but by its degree of allowance and the harvesting of all will go on as now, with Russia's all over.  God forbid only from excessive attachment to her with her not to fall into the abyss of perdition.  Need now only determined to "keep what you have."  And when the soul is still sore about the Russian in Russia, only the constant and firm denunciation of the MP, but not flirting with her, you can save in Russia, those who are still looking for salvation and is able to accept it. 

It is therefore necessary to return to the position of intransigence with the MP, which from the beginning took the Russian Church Abroad. 

And you can not, under the pretext of "benefit of the Church" and improve her "office" to shake the authority of the First Hierarch of ROCOR, able to distinguish truth from falsehood and to distinguish between spirits. 

Recently ROCA befallen a number of disasters, one by one.  Especially scary murder keeper Iberian myrrh-streaming icon, Joseph Munoz and hiding the icon itself.  Recall that the working of miracles from it began in 1982, before this in 1981 ROCA glorified among the saints Hovomuchennikov Russian headed with the royal family, and in 1983 was declared anathema ecumenical heresy.  It is clear that mirotochenie Iberian icon was a sign of God's approval of the ROCA for solid state the truth against any lie, including - lies MP.  Ho now, after a very uncertain decisions of Bishops of ROCOR Sobora 1993-1994 gg and follow-up of some of our bishops in the direction of rapprochement with the MP and began, one by one, such disasters, which definitely indicate the retreat of God's grace to our Church for its departure from the truth.  How many more ills want to bring on our heads supporters of fraternization with the criminal and heretical MP?

http://cyril-methodius.spb.ru/
St. Petersburg Russia, ROCA

Stickies

Holy Trinity Monastery - Defending Orthodoxy

√ Milan Synod Concelebrates with MP http://www.metropoliadimilano.it/

What a feast for the eyes!  Press the left side of the picture for the panoramic effect and the star to go to the next image.

√ Photos Holy Trinity, Astoria
and here:

Appeal to the Faithful of the ROCA

Here is an English translation of the Appeal [thank you D.G.]:

A Letter to the Faithful Members
of the Russian Church Abroad

Dear archpastors, pastors, monastics and all faithful members of the Russian Church Abroad!

It is necessary for us to address you with a very real warning, since now as before the question we raise has great meaning for the unity of our Church.

Recently, attempts by representatives of the Moscow Patriarchate to convince our clergy to join that jurisdiction have increased. Unfortunately, those who engage in these actions often use the practices and methods employed by the KGB in the Soviet era. One such practice is the attempt to elicit a promise from the one being pushed into betrayal that even the fact that the person spoke with a recruiter (or shall we say “well-wisher”) will be kept secret from the hierarchy.

Thus, we seek to warn all the faithful members of the Russian Church Abroad that such an agreement in itself is already a sign of distrust of one’s hierarchy and a form of collaboration with the enemies of our Church.

Ignoring such matters led our Church to the split in 2007

Therefore we ask all those who have been approached or may be approached in an attempt to make them an informant or to discuss the conditions for leaving the Church Abroad, or to discuss any other such matter which may bring harm to our unity, to immediately report such an event to the hierarchy. Peace within the Church should be dearer to all of us than abasing oneself to others and other various dubious ploys.  Ignoring such matters led our Church to the split in 2007. If the faithful members of the ROCA had not hidden known facts of the imminent plot and had not bound themselves with our foes, then the unity of the Russian Church Abroad would without a doubt be preserved.

The enemy of our Church, who was unable to achieve complete victory then, has now once again started to approach us with temptations with the aim to finish what they started and totally destroy the ROCA.

We call upon all our faithful members to mutual trust, which unfortunately was shattered by those who chose the path of divergence from the spirit and traditions of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad.

May we always remember that the fraternal unity of all the faithful members of the ROCA is a condition of our being in the Church, of our salvation and our future. We ask all of you to pray for the strengthening of love and the avoidance of disagreements in our Russian Church Abroad.

March 3\16, 2011
Synod Chairman
+Metropolitan Agafangel
Synod Members
+Archbishop Andronik
+Archbishop Sofroniy
+Bishop Georgiy
+Bishop Afanasiy
+Bishop Gregory

Letter to Patriarch Irineos



A Letter to Jerusalem Patriarch Irineos
from the ROCA Synod of Bishops

March 03\16, 2011
Martyr Eutropius of Amasea, and with him Martyrs Cleonicus and Basiliscus

Patriarch Irenios
PO Box 1620
Jerusalem, Israel 91016
Your Divinity and Holiness Patriarch of the Holy City of Jerusalem and all Palestine, Syria, Arabia, all Trans-Jordan, Cana of Galilee and Holy Zion IRINEOS,
Your Beatitude!

Having gathered during Great Lent in the God-City of New York, we considered it our duty to express to Your Beatitude our sincere sympathy for the unfair and unlawful way in which Your Beatitude was deposed from the stewardship of the Church of Jerusalem, with which our Church Abroad has had close ties of friendship and brotherly fellowship for many years.  Just as the Church of Jerusalem experienced difficult trials which resulted in the usurpation of the Patriarchal cathedra through nefarious means, so was the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad divided in 2007 by the successors and followers of the atheistic communist regime and a part of it was joined to the Moscow Patriarchate.  It can be likened to how the Roman bishops attempted to supplant Christ’s place in His Church and as a result they fell away from the Catholic Orthodox Church.  By taking control of the Patriarchal throne unlawfully, the current administration in the Church of Jerusalem also risks being driven from it by a force from Above.

The time is coming when God will allow a transgressor to appear “and it was given unto him to make war with the saints and to overcome them” (Revelation 13:7).  We see clearly now the primary signs of the approach of this time – the victory of lawlessness, which resolutely attempts to penetrate even the territory of the church, and the extreme withering of faith.  No longer do we have the incontrovertible religious authorities who were with us still in the recent past and whose voices were heeded by many.  The Lord is with us though, Whose voice will be heard always, “In this world you will have trouble.  But take heart!  I have overcome the world." (John 16:33).  The words of the Savior are especially relevant for us in the end times, “that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.  May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. (John 17:21).  These words are now understood as a clear call to action.  We trust that the Lord will not leave us divided and subject to torment from the forces of evil, but will gather His faithful followers together “as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings” (Matthew 23:37).

In these times of universal apostasy, we thank God that He saved the kind brotherly relations between You and the loyal remnant of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad and did not allow them to be destroyed by the transgressors. This is positive proof, proof that the Lord preserves us and does not leave us.

We ask for Your prayers and remain Your supplicants in Christ.

[Roca Synod]

Minutes of Synod Meeting

Minutes Day 1
A Meeting of the Synod of Bishops
of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad
March 3\16, 2011


The meeting was held on the grounds of the Tolstoy Foundation in Valley Cottage, New York.  The meeting began at 15:20 with the prayer “O Heavenly King.”  The meeting of the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad was chaired by the Most Reverend Metropolitan Agafangel, Chairman and First Hierarch of the ROCA, and attended by: Archbishop Andronik of Nikolskiy and Syracuse, Archbishop Sofroniy of St. Petersburg and Northern Russia, Bishop Georgiy of Bolgrad and Belgorod-Dnestrovsk and Synod Secretary, Bishop Afanasiy of Vologodsk and Velikoustyuzhsk and Bishop Gregory of Sao Paulo and South America.

The Synod approved the agenda of the meeting:
1. Chairman’s report.
2. Discuss attempts to disrupt the unity of the Church.
3. Discuss the determinations of the ROCA Bishops’ Councils of 1934 and 1959.
4. Discuss the Synod residence.
5. Discuss the Jerusalem Orthodox Church.
6. Discuss contacts from other jurisdictions.
7. Discuss request from clergyman Nikolay Mogabadze to join the ROCA.
8. Discuss relations with our Sister Churches.
9. Discuss proposal to establish a correspondence seminary in the New York Diocese.
10. Discuss the borders of the dioceses.
11. Discuss the standardization of liturgical practices.
12. Discuss status of delegates to the All-Diaspora Council.
13. Financial report.
14. Other.

1. The Chairman read a report of the current status of the ROCA since the previous meeting of the Synod (see attachment 1).

Decided: The report was accepted.

2. His Eminence informed the Synod that some of the bishops and clergy have been contacted by representatives of the MP for them to cross over to their jurisdiction. He cited several examples and proposed to issue a letter to the flock with the goal of warning them of the possibility of similar contacts.
The Chairman read a draft of the letter.

Decided: to accept the draft and publish “A Letter to the Faithful Members of the Russian Church Abroad.”

3. The Chairman read a portion of the statement of the ROCA Bishops’ Council of 1959 which was found in the archives (Minutes No. 2, paragraph 18 (see attachment 2)) and pointed out to the Synod that this statement confirms the correctness of the actions taken by those who remained loyal to the ROCA after May 17, 2007.

Decided: To accept and use as a reference the statement from August 31, 1934, which was confirmed by the ROCA Council in 1959.

4. The Chairman provided the Synod a status of talks between the Synod Chairman and George Lukin, the director of the corporation “Mountain View,” to use the center together and develop it further, which will give the ROCA Synod an opportunity to have a primary residence there. The initial agreements will be codified legally shortly. The goal will be for the Synod to provide funds supplied by its members to develop the property, which will be used by both entities.

The Chairman said this was an important step forward and explained that the Synod residence should not be considered part of any canonical diocese, and added that he and Bishop Andronik agreed on this aspect. Archbishop Sofroniy proposed consecrating the main church in honor of the “Kursk” Mother of God icon. The Chairman and others proposed to consecrate it in honor of Holy Metropolitan Philaret. The Chairman proposed a further discussion and to decide when to consecrate the church. A lively interchange followed.

Decided: To ask Dimitri Gontscharow to draft a legal agreement with the firm “Mountain View”, whose terms will be approved by the Synod. To establish a journal, which could be used for legal purposes, listing donations for the creation of a Synod residence. To consecrate the church in honor of Holy Metropolitan Philaret of Eastern America and New York. To announce plans to consecrate the church with an attendant reception on November 19, 2011. To have the residence sign read, “Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad.”  

The Chairman noted the importance of having an administrative assistant on site to answer phones and correspondence.

Decided: To agree on the importance of identifying a suitable administrative assistant and to allow the Chairman to make the final selection.

5. The Chairman reported on his telephone conversation with the Jerusalem Patriarch Irineos. His Eminence noted the importance of this discussion, since it is not enough what we declare about ourselves, but also what statements others make about us. We have the canonical right to support Patriarch Irineos since he does not recognize the decision to depose him, which gives us the opportunity to continue relations with him that were established previously between our Churches. We believe he was deposed as a result of his anti-ecumenical stand, his disagreement with the union of the ROCA with the Moscow Patriarchate and other disagreements he had with official bodies representing so-called “World Orthodoxy.” 

The Chairman provided a letter he received from the Synod of Metropolitan Cyprian regarding their views on the possible re-establishment of relations between the ROCA Synod and Patriarch Irineos, as well as his response. (See attachments No. 3 and No. 4.) The Synod discussed possible actions in support of Patriarch Irineos. A draft of a letter from the ROCA Bishops’ Council to Patriarch Irineos was considered.

Decided: The Synod is pleased that good relations, which existed for many years, have remained between the ROCA and Patriarch Irineos. The question of the commemoration of the Jerusalem Patriarch will be decided only after discussing it with our Old Calendar Sister Churches. To send a letter to Patriarch Irineos from the ROCA Synod (see attachment No. 5.)

6. The Chairman proposed establishing a standard response to requests from those in other jurisdictions seeking to establish relations with the ROCA. A lively discussion followed.

Decided: The Synod will consider such requests in light of the status of those making such requests. 

Metropolitan Agafangel spoke of their opinion of the group led by Vladimir Tselishchev and others who belong to the so-called “Metropolitan Vitaliy” group.

Decided: In light of newly-revealed facts, to not recognize the consecrations of all the bishops in this group, as well as any clergy consecrated by them. 

The first day concluded at 20:00 with the prayer “It is Truly Meet…”

Minutes Day 2
A Meeting of the Synod of Bishops
of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad
March 04/17, 2011

The meeting was held on the grounds of the Tolstoy Foundation in Valley Cottage, New York.  The meeting began at 09:15 with the prayer “O Heavenly King.”  The meeting of the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad was chaired by the Most Reverend Metropolitan Agafangel, Chairman and First Hierarch of the ROCA, and attended by: Archbishop Andronik of Nikolskiy and Syracuse, Archbishop Sofroniy of St. Petersburg and Northern Russia, Bishop Georgiy of Bolgrad and Belgorod-Dnestrovsk and Synod Secretary, Bishop Afanasiy of Vologodsk and Velikoustyuzhsk and Bishop Gregory of Sao Paulo and South America.

7. Archbishop Sofroniy spoke of his recent meeting and discussion with clergyman Nikolay Modebadze near Moscow. They discussed the group surrounding Raphael Prokofiev and their “ecclesiastical” practices.  The opinion was given that we cannot turn away anyone who desires to join our Church without a detailed examination of their circumstances. The Chairman noted that we have to explain to each interested party upon which terms we will accept them.  Nikolay Modebadze was asked to join the Synod meeting and answered a range of questions.

Decided: To send Archbishop Sofroniy and Bishop Afanasiy to Georgia to see first-hand the parishes which support Nikolay Modebadze. Postpone any decision until the results of this trip are reviewed and then come to a conclusion.

8. The Chairman discussed our relations with our brothers in the Old-Calendar Greek Synod (see Attachment No. 7.) The Chairman read a draft of a letter to the Synod in Resistance of Greece.  A discussion followed.

Decided: send a brotherly letter to the Synod in Resistance of Greece (see Attachment No. 7) on the occasion of Great Lent.

9. The Chairman discussed the results of the diocesan meeting of the New York Diocese and the request to the Synod to bless the establishment of a diocesan correspondence seminary in honor of Holy Metropolitan Philaret at the Synod residence.

Decided: To accept the report and give a blessing for the proposed seminary at the Synod residence

10. Archbishop Sofroniy spoke of the problems arising from the unclear boundaries of the Suzdal diocese and the resulting difficulties in the parishes of Tolyatti and Samara belonging to either one or another bishop. A similar problem exists in Perm.

Decided: To ask Archbishop Sofroniy and Archbishop Ioann to call a general of the three parishes in Samara to delineate their canonical ruling authority. The parish in Perm will be assigned to Archbishop Sofroniy.

11. The Chairman spoke of the importance of having the typicon used in the diocese to be identical to that used by the Synod, so that there are no inconsistencies.  Archbishop Sofroniy gave a detailed explanation of the typicon and liturgical calendar printed by the St. Petersburg diocese and the inclusion there of anniversary dates of important figures in Tsarist Russia who are not saints.  Metropolitan Agafangel warned that the last liturgical calendar printed by ROROR before the union of 2007 already included saints whose inclusion was not approved by any Council and was meant only to please the MP.

Decided: To use the liturgical calendars from the time of St. Philaret as reference.  Bishop Gregory pointed out the importance of conformity in ekteniyas. In the ensuing discussion, it was noted that in resolving this matter, local conditions of church life in the various countries should be considered.

12. The Chairman read a statement published in the “Church Gazette” printed by the Supreme Russia Church Authority Abroad, Nos. 10 & 11 of August 1(14)-15(28), 1922, regarding the “Rights of Delegates to the Council of 1917-1918” (see attachment No. 8) and proposed having these rights apply to those delegates of the IV and V All-Diaspora Councils who have not been excluded by the church.  A discussion followed.

Decided: The rights apply to those delegates of the IV and V All-Diaspora Councils who have not been excluded by the church.

13. The Chairman reviewed the ROCA Synod financial report from the period of September 16, 2010, to February 2, 2011 (see attachment No. 9).

Decided: To accept the financial report.

14. Other:
a)The Chairman proposed the creation of a coordinating person\office for the organization of pilgrimages for ROCA members.  Archbishop Sofroniy suggested an administrator for every region.

Decided: Starting in August, 2011, m. Agapia will be an administrator for pilgrimages and the youth center.  Archbishop Sofroniy will be the administrator for Russia. Fr. Vladimir will be the administrator for South America.

b)Bishop Gregory read a statement from the diocesan council of the South American diocese on a host of topics relevant to the Church (see attachment No 10).

Decided: To accept the statement into the Minutes.

c) The Chairman informed the Synod of a proposal by Peter Nikolayevich Koltypin to publish a high-quality, color newsletter for the Orthodox world with information on church life in the ROCA.

Decided: To consider the proposal.

d)Bishop Afanasiy proposed to the Synod that they issue a determination regarding sergianism, as such a statement is anticipated by many. He offered this formulation for further consideration:  “For senselessly espousing the modernist heresy of sergianism, teaching that the life of God’s Church can be founded on the renunciation of Christ’s Truth, and claiming that serving atheistic governments and obeying their atheistic orders which contradict the Holy canons, the legacy of the Holy Fathers and ecclesiastical dogmas, and destroys all of Christianity somehow saves Christ’s Church, and for obeying the Antichrist and his servants and his predecessors and those who follow him as legitimate authority derived from God and blaspheming against the new confessors and martyrs – Anathema.”

Decided: To consider the proposal.

e)Bishop Georgiy requested approval for the following awards for clergy in the Bolgrad diocese: Archpriest Vasiliy Ikizli – a cross with decorations; Archpriest Boris Volya – a palitsa; Hieromonk Aleksey (Kaloev) – a gold cross; Fr. Sergey Televinov – a gold cross.

Decided: To approve all requested awards.

f)Bishop Gregory spoke of the importance of issuing gramotas by the ROCA Synod.

Decided: To have the Synod Chairman print 300 gramotas and establish procedures for their awarding.

g) Bishop Georgiy told of life in the newly-founded Resurrection monastery near Kishinev in the Bolgrad diocese.

Decided: To accept the information into the Minutes.

h)The Chairman said a plot of land with an unfinished church was given as a gift to the ROCA Odessa diocese and they wish to establish a benevolent center in honor of Martyr Elizabeth Fedorovna.

Decided: To accept the information into the Minutes.

i)The Synod decided to hold the next ROCA Synod session on November 16-18, 2011, in the USA.

The session of the ROCA Synod ended at 16:10 with the prayer “It is Truly Meet…”