www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Alexis II , Metropolitan Laurus To Meet May 18TH In Moscow

ADVERTISEMENT


2004.04.06 ITAR-TASS:

ITAR-TASS - Moscow,Russia
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=658196&PageNum=0
Alexy II, Metropolitan Laurus to meet in Moscow on May 18
06.04.2004, 22.28

MOSCOW, April 6 (Itar-Tass) - Head of the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia Metropolitan Laurus will pay the first visit to Russia in May 2004. Official negotiations between Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia Alexy II and Metropolitan Laurus are scheduled for May 18, sources in the Moscow Patriarchate told Itar-Tass on Tuesday.

"Metropolitan Laurus will come from New York City several days earlier so that he had time for resting after the long flight," Secretary for Inter-Orthodox Relations Archpriest Nikolai Balashov said. The visit aims to outline ways of rapprochement between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia. The Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia has about 300 parishes around the world.

The dialog began in November 2003 when a delegation of three archpriests of the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia led by Archbishop of Germany Mark came to Moscow for the first time in 85 years. The sides said the negotiations were successful. They said the rapprochement had begun but it would be neither quick nor easy.

"The obstacles, which caused the split of the Russian Church, are now gone. They originated in the tragic events of the Revolution and the Civil War when millions of our compatriots had to go abroad, and an epoch of religious persecution began in Russia," Patriarch Alexy II said after the meeting.

President Vladimir Putin handed over the invitation from Alexy II to Metropolitan Laurus during his visit to New York in October 2003. Metropolitan Laurus regarded that as a proof to the changing policy of the Russian state to the freedom of religion.
� ITAR-TASS. All right reserved.

Sounds OK to me!

Political compromise and amnesty of sergianism that is? I was thinking to myself about how +Metropolitan Laurus, a monastic for most of his life, is very much a politician with core values that shift with temporal expediencies. Blessed +Metropolitan Philaret and he did not see eye to eye and it is understandable now why +Laurus was relegated to a secondary role in the Synod during the pastoral rule of Blessed Philaret--to prevent compromise of Truth and the rule of petty cliques and parties of questionable character. +Laurus even disrespected his wishes for burial at Jordanville--Blessed Philaret wanted to be buried with the monks as a simple monk. +Laurus' retort was, "He is no longer in charge here, we (he uses the imperial pronoun) are."

I am no adherent of either jurisdiction nor the OCA--I consider myself a free radical Russian Orthodox Traditionalist who is one in prayer with other Orthodox Christians who confess the Una Sancta. But I will say that in this faustian moment approaching that it is difficult to ascertain who the true sergianist is, the one who compromised the Church under political pressure and threat of death or the one who sold out to secure a fiefdom of his own. My gut instinct is to lambaste the one who sold out without duress. And my heart tells me that the renewal of Orthodoxy in Russia is a blessed event while the moral collapse of ROCOR is the kiss of judas. I am inclined to see the promise of Orthodoxy faithful to the heritage of Holy Rus' within the homeland as opposed to the corrupt and utterly shameless voice of a usurper clique abroad. Nay, I go further and say that the OCA is a more moral and sound institution for it doesn't represent itself as something which is for sale or unworthy of actual perseverence and fortitude. The ruling clique of ROCOR sickens me with its utterly low moral character.

wow! And I thought this was a Byzantine "Catholic" board. I would think that this type of orthodox jurisdictional venom seems best left to another forum (there are a ton of places for the orthodox to rant and rave on yahoogroups for example.) But maybe I am just a silly RC who thought that Byzantine Catholics had more in common with me than the orthodox. PLease correct me if I am wrong about that.

For the record, my grandparents were Russian Orthodox and although I was raised RC and considered going over to orthodoxy, the infighting and one-upsmanship was just too distracting.

So happy to have found you all though!

Peace!
Douglas

I was born a fool, and a fool I remain

Why should I care? For all I know those two churches would regard me as a graceless heretic, if they would know me at all.

But when I see the Russian churches dialoging like this, after their history, regardless of how I might have felt up to now all I can think is the Holy Spirit is at work.

May they all be one; as you Father are in me, and I in you so also may they be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me. The Glory which you gave me I have given them, that they may be one as we are One; I in them and you in Me, may they be perfectly one.

I will look upon this in wonder, and pray.

Michael, that sinner...fool...worm

"Political infighting, oneupsmanship, etc." is a natural consequence of autocephaly, self-rule, and a structure that encourages discussion, even dissent, so that Truth be preserved at all costs, not unlike a constant dialectic--this isn't truly defined in the latin church any longer. That is what has preserved Orthodoxy in the Truth whereas in other places that Truth has been lost, fragmented and/or obscured.

The whole issue of whether or not the Orthodox voice is heard here I think boils down to the drive by Rome to achieve rapproachment with Orthodoxy. And although the disagreements of factions of factions may seem tiresome to some, what it ultimately leads to is reconciliation and validation of a legitimate interlocutor. Rome, of course, in the modern era has monitored this with interest because it allows Rome to see the benefit and/or risk of dialogue and the parameters it should set with its encounter with the Orthodox. Obviously, if I weren't concerned about that and the vocation of the Byzantines I wouldn't be here. You see, for all the hoopla and backpatting of the ecumenists, none of it will have force with a constructive dialogue which moves to oneness of Faith. Orthodox are resolving their response and Tradition will be triumphant in Orthodoxy if this dialogue is ever to mean anything. However, the point that I am working on expressing that once Tradition is triumphant once more, polarization may indeed lead to a closed response which will derail the possibility of true rapproachment. Whom does that serve? Neither the Traditionalists (for it leaves half of christendom behind), nor Rome, nor the West. Hence, my insistence on detailing the Orthodox situation. I beg the indulgence of all.

In response to the idea of a euphoric reunion of "good feeling", what the Byzantines can more than attest to is the corruption of the Church with sergianism and its deleterious effects on a Faith based organism which have real and very lethal effects on ones "rivals". If it is not utterly condemned and rooted out, Russian Orthodoxy can neither renew nor grow but simply remain captive of a national government with political ends which lead it into countless moral compromises with reaction and revolution. That neither serves Orthodoxy nor Christendom for all it does is show a corrupt local church, the largest in Orthodoxy, being utterly unChristian even though legally it seems "legit". I prefer the Spirit of the Law and not the letter; here, that is turned on its head to the spiritual detriment of all. Succinctly, when is the Truth subject to political compromise? When is Christ's Church in need of the salvation of men and/or their reform and "cultivation"? Struggling with this one finds the evil face of sergianism staring straight into the face of Dostoevsky's inquisitor.

Balaban,

Thank you for that clarification. You have made the situation and my understanding of it much more clear. Appreciate you responding.

Regards,
Douglas

Christ is Risen!
Metropolitan Laurus would not want me or anyone else to defend him against a hateful attack on Holy Pascha, of all days. I pray that His Eminence has had a most joyful celebration of the Feast of Feasts, and that he will remain unaware of what Balaban has just written about him. Let us call even those who hate us "Brethren", and in the Resurrection let us forgive all things, and so let us cry aloud [that] Christ is Risen from the dead! Vladyka Metropolitan will have no words to add to that, so neither shall I.
Incognitus

Holy Blessing of Pascha to all,

God Bless you, Coalesco and Incognitus, for your devout summons to prayer and reliance upon the Holy Spirit to be present in these proceedings. The stirring up of rancor will never bring about good. The Holy Immortal One knows the path to true unity. Shall we listen to Him and prayer for true unity? Or shall we be part of the wall that divides? No matter the wrongs already committed, we must forge ahead in faith. May the Most Blessed Holy Trinity be our defender and our guide.

Khristos Voskrese!
Voistino Voskrese!

sergianism = mass graves, Orthodox and "rivals". ROCOR selling out = amnesty of sergianism. Got it? I knew +Metropolitan Laurus personally. My accounts are very much firsthand.

Christ is risen!

This is a contradition in terms! There is no such thing as a "free" Orthodox Christian, if you're not in the jurisdiction of a canonical Orthodox bishop, then you are not a part of the Church of Christ.

The ecclesiology you seem to adhere to (at least by judging from your post), "one in prayer with other Orthodox Christians who confess the Una Sancta", is Protestant, not Orthodox!

Christian

Let us leave the so-called "traditionalist" Orthodox iin-fighting to such places as the Indiana List, It is a disgrace to our Holy Orthodox Church to display such venom and we are really guests on this Byzantine Board and out of respect for Byzantine Catholic people, let's not go through this particular part of our dirty laundry. As someone said before, there are PLENTY of other places on the net for that (ROCOR Cafe, Indiana List etc)

Christ is Risen!
Indeed He is Risen!

Firstly, "canonical Orthodox bishops" can duly be addressed with the concept of Catholicity itself--it is a unity in Faith and Love through and outside of time. If a believer is indeed in unity with that Catholic Church and receives the Mysteries in her while resisting "canonical Bishops" which have violated that model, that model of resistance is wholely Patristic in application and thoroughly Orthodox for it in and of itself is the model of CATHOLICITY, OF CONTINUING CHURCH. Blind obedience to hierarchs is the model of sergianism which is an ecclesiological heresy. To wit, the Church's pastors are not above scrutiny and in no wise infallible. Rest assured, the Hierarch and Synodia to which I am loyal is indeed "canonical", be that any of anyone else's business.


The blatant attempt at censorship of views some do not entertain has no place in the free marketplace of ideas. One can dispute what is put forward, reject it, or simply ignore it, but when one simply demands silence, one advances a totalitarian model of monologue. No one is interested in arbitraty dictates of someone else mediating their conscience: affirmation of the freedom of conscience should silence that type of nonsense. Now, as has been stated above, Rome at the behest of the current pontiff is in dialogue with Orthodoxy in the hope of rapproachment. Dispite the strong arm tactics of the ecumenists, that model has been stymied by Traditionalist resistance. Rome will have to broaden this dialogue if it is to be successful. The point then begged is that ones would interlocutors and opposition to them be best appreciated and understood. "Dirty laundry"--my opposition to +Metropolitan Laurus is in no wise based off of petty personal disputes, but rather INFORMED dissent to his COMPROMISE of Orthodox ecclesiological principles and his unscrupulous management style which allows him to entertain utter contradiction of things he has said 10 years ago, 5 years ago, two months ago, etc. Surely, these are characteristics which are allowed to be examined if only in the light of assessing the legitimacy of certain voices. How can you trust someone who is going to tell you something else tommorrow and then directly contradict himself the next day? This should not be confined to such places as Indiana List and Euphrosynos Cafe simply because the discussion is not about "guests vs hosts" but it's aim is constructive dialogue and assessing how that may come about. No one is going to accept the authoritarian model of morally compromised and removed elites. To advance rapproachment means to do so in good faith and the understanding that all voices and opposition must be taken into consideration. This I adhere to.
E D

Balaban,

This Forum is about constructive dialogue among and between its members. The only web-based Eastern Catholic forum of any size (of which I'm aware) is presently on the verge of self-disintegration, due in large measure to the virulent, venomous, and triumphalistic postings that routinely grace its board. When another member there, frustrated with the lack of charity among the Eastern Catholic members to one another's views - let alone those of Orthodox members, asked if there was an alternative, I unhesitatingly recommended this Forum:

The beauty of this Forum is who we are and what we bring to it. Pedantic, argumentative posts that seek to overwhelm the reader and aggressively impugn the sincerity of Eastern Catholics or those of our Orthodox brothers and sisters who have the temerity to believe and hope that, by communing intellectually here, they may somehow be contributing to the day when we can all stand together and worship in the fullness of communion that today is denied us, are an unwelcome intrusion into what is truly its own community of faith.

The purpose of your joining this Forum is lost on me. We know we have differences of belief between and among us and that the baggage of history comes with a heavy price. But, I for one, and I suspect many others here - if not most, cherish the faith, the sincerity, the forthrightness, and the honesty of our brothers and sisters, and the opportunity to dialogue with them, even when we disagree. You, on the other hand, see only black and white and seem to have no appreciation for the fact that gray is within the spectrum.

The Churches that I referenced in describing this Forum's membership are, in fact, persons - an Episcopalian who offers his prayers, during his Maundy Thursday vigil, for our intentions; a Ruthenian who is geographically separated from her Church and worships with Melkites; a Russian Catholic who chants Holy Week services in an Orthodox Church in Malaysia; a Greek Orthodox who fervantly prays to see union between our Churches; a Latin who crafts beautifully written prayers on subjects of import to all of us and posts them for our edification; an Orthodox Archimandrite who does likewise; an Albanian Orthodox who spoke on behalf of the Italo-Greek-Albanians, when they had no member here; a Latin whom we watched as he converted from Protestantism and decided whether to go to the East or West; and, I could go on.

My point: we are people here and, for most of us, that is as or more important than rabid ideology. To disagree or post an opposing view is one thing; to deluge the Forum with massive amounts of material and to harangue is another. We aren't a venue for traditionalist - Catholic or Orthodox - rhetoric; there are plenty of those.

Give some thought as to whether this is really the place you want to be.

Many years,

Neil