Friday, September 23, 2016

Two Articles: A Dose... + PLEASE SHARE...


(two separate articles)
1. A Dose of Some Truth
2. PLEASE SHARE! My Open Letter: AND MY RETURN QUESTIONS TO MARK KOTLAROFF: But who?... is the author of this??? www.rocana.org



1. A Dose of Some Truth


   Inbox 

Add star 

Dan Everiss

<oregdan@hotmail.com>
Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 4:08 PM


IN ENGLISH...as posted on the schismatic's site: http://www.rocana.org:
(Their almost daily toxic posting of whatever pathetic and vicious false accusations, slanders, and malicious attacks against our Met, Agafangel, that they can dig up, or make up, or imagine). 

SHAME ON THEM! and MAY GOD...NOT..Bless them!

These rebels are driving out of our ROCA, the truly pious members, those who come to church ONLY to...pray, and those who have always given their monies to support our parishes. Some of our people have also fled to ROCOR/MP because of this schism.

*Already too, they have caused to leave our ROCA a number of our former clergy & their flocks, who have fled to the GOC or other places, for refuge. YET, they blame our Vladyka Metropolitan Agafangel and our Synod of Bishops, for EVERYTHING wrong that they have set in motion.

The original letter of this, 'Nun  Tabitha', [who ignorantly  attacks Met. Agafangel,]  her response to the Snezana's letter, posted on the Internet,  .... Snezana's original letter to the Astoria Parish council: "Can you tell me, what is going on!?"

Both of these two persons, are members of the Astoria Holy Trinity Parish in, New York...or they were previously.

(and clearly by her own unbalanced words, this supposed 'Nun Tabitha', is a loyal blind follower and supporter of  the schism).
Dear Snezhana, 
Let me try and respond to your letter to the best of my understanding. 
You are asking, “What happened to Metropolitan Agafangel”? I knew His Eminence Agafangel already in Jordanville, and later I met him in France, in Cannes: he impressed me as a joyful, friendly, and charming person. So it was totally unexpected to witness how he metes out severe punishments for any, even minor disagreement with him. 
At one point, after His Eminence had opened the forum, I was reading, and suddenly I saw with surprise that His Eminence wrote in response to one person’s objection, “For this answer, you will be deprived of Holy Communion”. 
But the most terrible thing was the harsh treatment of three priests from Izhevsk, when they were simply thrown out of the Church together with their 2,000 parishioners. I no longer remember what their fault was: where they had gone, or where they had not come, but somehow they had caused His Eminence’s displeasure, and he banned all three of them, leaving 2,000 people without Holy Communion. 
Dear Snezhana, you certainly know that the world is upheld by Christ’s Chalice. As long as the Bloodless Offering is done, the world is standing, and the Antichrist, who is already close by, at the door, is not allowed to enter it. And in our time, the pre- Antichrist time, our First Hierarch throws 2,000 people, ordinary Russian believers, out of the Church and bans three priests, who have not committed any significant transgression! 
They never attempted any split or disunity, they just happened to displease His Eminence by something. They failed to display servile submission in one or another matter. 
I joined the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia in 1979. I do not recall a single case of a priest being banned by the Metropolitan, be it Met. Philaret, Vitaly, or Laurus. Our Metropolitans were safeguarding and protecting our Church, not tearing pieces off it and throwing them away, thereby getting rid of the displeasing and the disobedient. 
What happened next, were some horrible, fantastic reprisals. He deprived a nun of her monastic status and forbade her to wear monastic attire; he even prohibited her to be buried in a cassock (to a nun, such a ban equals murder). He forbade some people to receive Holy Communion even on their deathbed. (By the way, our Archbishop Andronik received such a “reward” for his many years of service.) Some people were anathematized by him – until the Day of Judgment and thereafter. 
All of this would be funny if it weren’t very sad. 
Now His Eminence the Metropolitan is ruining the Holy Trinity parish: why is he interfering with the life of this parish? He understands perfectly well that his actions destabilize the parish’s life, that he is deliberately splitting the parish, and that some parishioners will leave. Why did the Metropolitan start the split in Astoria? He himself responded to this question at the Synod meeting in Odessa, where he proclaimed, “I don’t need the people! I need their belongings in a suitcase!” 
The Metropolitan has no right to split the Church by deliberately interfering with parochial life and arbitrarily moving around bishops and priests. This is what is customary in the realm of the Moscow Patriarchate, but the Church Outside Russia has never experienced anything like this. 
By banning and expelling bishops, priests, and the faithful who displease him, Met. Agafangel turns our Church into a small, aggressive replica of the Moscow Patriarchate, which is more distasteful than the Patriarchate itself. 
You are asking, “Is it permissible for the laity to choose another bishop?” 
However, it was Met. Agafangel who arbitrarily appointed another bishop instead of Archbishop Andronik, whom all of us know and love, – that is how they do it in the Soviet-style Moscow Patriarchate. And the parish rose to defend its Archbishop, just as it sometimes happened in Soviet Russia. Met. Agafangel is turning our Church into a structure similar to the Moscow Patriarchate. 
You are asking, “Is it permissible for the laity to make all these decisions pertaining to the Church? It happened in Soviet Russia, and it was useless for the Church”. 
Dear Snezhana, let me argue that in Soviet Russia, lay believers often defended the Church, its bishops and priests at the cost of their freedom and even life. During Khrushchev’s reprisals against the Church, when the authorities were shutting down church after church, it was the laity who protected their churches by staying and praying there around the clock. One zealous parishioner, nicknamed “Priest Natalia”, organized non-stop church-service reading in her church, and the parish was saved. 
In Soviet Russia, the state was the Church’s enemy. And the horror of today’s situation is that Met. Agafangel, we don’t know why, is creating a set of circumstances that resemble Soviet Russia. It is no coincidence that you recalled the USSR. We can only pray to God and ask Him to change our present-day situation. 
Sincerely, Mother Tavifa 
          
========================================================================================================================

Found on: http://internetsobor.org and put there in English:

In English: Response of Met. Agafangel to this critical 'Nun Tabitha', who claims to belong to the Astoria Holy Trinity Parish in New York:

# RE: Ответ на письмо монахини — Митрополит Агафангел 23.09.2016 20:44

A certain nun wrote a response to the "Letter to the Church Council of the Trinity Church in Astoria."  Since this nun's letter is of a slanderous nature, to post it here is impossible, but a refutation of some of its arguments is needed, - as they are actively spread not only in this letter,- I consider it necessary to make.

+ + +

Currently, strange things are happening.  A nun who, as she says, I have seen only a few times in my life, and at the same time, she says that she herself had not seen anything bad, suddenly starts to accuse me of grave sins, of which she had only "heard" about.  One of my most terrible sins, in her view, is the "harsh treatment towards priests of Izhevsk, when three priests from Izhevsk and their flock of two thousand were simply thrown out of the Church."  For some reason, this nun thinks that I have to report to the world all the details, each time, of even the not-so-wonderful l happenings, which unfortunately, sometimes occur to us.  Thus, with the Izhevsk priests.

 Firstly, they have never belonged to the ROCA ("our Church"), since, at their reception they insisted that they remain in the MP ("mother-church"), yet outwardly, ostensibly be subject to the ROCOR Synod.  Secondly, this prohibition did not appear suddenly, but it was preceded by its own history.  The priests themselves declared their disobedience to their ruling hierarch, and despite the warning, went to a schismatic gathering, telling me that for them, the ruling bishop is not of authority.  And this opinion is unfortunately held to this day.  I do not want to give details and to quote the letter - that would be already too much.  There are things towards which one can turn a blind eye, but then there are those things which can not be ignored.  If a husband tells his wife that he has been living with another woman and has moved to her house, then the abandoned wife has to take this fact into account , instead of building up some fantasy.  The statement of the withdrawal of their subordination to the jurisdictional hierarchy does not mean anything else, other than the fact of a schism, and the necessity to therefore draw conclusions from this fact.  Consequently, the answer to the question "who is it that deprived the care of 2,000 people" can only be one - the pride and disobedience of the priests themselves.

Pride and disobedience is the public, on the Internet "accusation" of an unfamiliar person to that nun,- and all the more so a bishop,- despite the fact that the nun only hears rumors.  My advice to this deluded nun and to many other accusers - is to look at the facts, of which you are first-hand witnesses to, and to pay less attention to rumors, so as not to fall,- through ignorance,- into the sin of condemnation.

Matushka (the nun) writes: "I was in the Orthodox Church Abroad since 1979. I do not remember a single case in which Metropolitans Filaret, Vitali or Laurus ever banned anyone no matter who", not to mention "banning all three, (i.e. priests) leaving 2,000 people without holy Communion!"   I can remind her and other forgetful persons, that as recently as the mid-90s, the Synod of Metropolitan Vitaly (in which Archbishop Laurus was a part) banned not three priests, but five bishops from serving, with ten priests and thousands of parishioners.  Before that, there was Boston, and even before that, the Evlogian and Platonian and schisms, with numerous other disciplinary punishments.  Strange how one can completely forget one's own history.

It is in this spirit, through rumors and without the knowledge of the gist of the matter and everything else, in which her "accusatory" letter is written.

Woe to Matushka- she should be ashamed to write such, and instead should remember the vows that she gave God.  If she has forgotten them, like she has forgotten the history of the Church Abroad, well then, God remembers everything.

Even if all the rumors, which she and others have gathered, suddenly have turned out to be true, and even if this well-known truth contained at the very least, a small fraction of reality- then, anyway, it could not serve as a pretext for a Church schism.  To commit a sin which cannot even be washed away by the blood of martyrdom, one must neither have any faith nor the fear of God.  This is precisely what we should always remember, just as we should remember the history of the Church Abroad.

Metropolitan Agafangel




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




2. PLEASE SHARE! My Open Letter: AND MY RETURN QUESTIONS TO MARK KOTLAROFF: But who?... is the author of this??? www.rocana.org


Dear Mark Kotlaroff, choir director nephew of Vl. Andronik and son of Archpriest Gregory Kotlaroff,  who controls rocana.org:

"SEEK PEACE and PERSUE IT!"


But who? is the author [or both authors?] of this surprising posted exchange , this ..first rational good beginning statement .... and following it, ...this absurd pro-schism  'answer'???

Why such a big secret?

For one thing, this 'answer', this non-applicable quote from the writings of Fr. Michael Pomozansky, has nothing to do  with the unpleasant realities of your schism.

THE reality is: you power-hungry proud mindless schismatics are destroying our little ROCA in N. America!...and separating and setting against each other our ROCA flock, and for what real reason?

To what good end result?

 -to trash  and to crucify Met. Agafangel, [ which is your sole and central stated true reason for you calling for your version of a world-wide 'All-Diaspora Sobor', which would actually be a Stalin-styled 'kangaroo court', phony 'trial' of the  clergy, who then are lead out in front of the execution squad] even to forbid them from being present at their own Death-Trial],  our canonical heads, whom you personally hate?...and seek to make revenge on.

Who do you think you all are fooling! 

What sort of Orthodox CHRISTIANS are you rebels?  Do you even believe that there is a God? You don't act or speak as if you do.

***

In that recent celebrated and much prayed for, [ which most here in North America were happy to learn of],  peace meeting with GOC Met. Demetrios, our Metropolitan and Archbishop George, humiliated themselves, and bowed to your wishes, in order , via ECONOMIA, to stop and heal  your unwarranted  schism, and basically it gave Vl. Andronik, all that you demanded from them, i.e. their lifting of all previous canonical sanctions and granting basic local autonomy,[within ROCA]   which Vl. Andronik signed, [but, was an invisible  loaded gun held to his head to force Vl. Andronik,  to sign, by someone at that meeting?, perhaps by  'dictator' 'as you refer to him as]... Met. Agafangel or Archbishop George or...Met. Demetrios?]  THEN, a very short time later, on your rocana.org site, you Mark, [ and we have no way of knowing if your uncle actually agreed to this removing of his signature,...as we  only read what YOU stated  there! on your rocana.org site] announced, SHOCKINGLY...WITHOUT ANY REAL EXPLANATION AS TO WHY  your uncle, Vl. Andronik suddenly 'rescinded his signature ' i.e. he  went back on his solemn word and name!...on that peace agreement,.. and you gave no justification for this surprising and dishonorable act! NONE!

But then you folks are above the ..'no longer popular canons' of the Church, and are guided rather by  YOUR PERSONAL   'intuition' and 'feelings', [as you have said on your site recently] and you reject  any proper obedience to higher episcopal authority [ instituted  by Christ and His 12 Apostles] and you all are indeed above HONORABLE CHRISTIAN NORMS.

Thus, Vl. Andronik's slippery character and his word are  not to be trusted,  and as with his signature, ..is worthless.

And of course, you want your easy-going and always eager to please everyone,  your uncle, to be the sole-bishop head for N. America, as Vl. Andronik will never say no to anything  you  rebels demand of him, or ORDER HIM  to bless, [ or for you to put his signature on your  composed ukazes?, with or without his knowledge?],  while  difficult 'dictator' Met. Agafangel says , no, to many of your church-harming and impious schemes. You cannot tolerate him for being a normal Orthodox BISHOP...who needs to be respected and to be OBEYED! ...because he cares for the welfare of the whole church.

So, how can we who stay in the canonical ROCA, [ which you are leaving], and thus still loyal to our legitimate head, Met. Agafangel and our ROCA Synod, have any prayer or communion [ visible or invisible, in the present time or in the future] with you schismatics, you malicious and misguided church destroyers- How?

Is this the clever wording , this pathetic fanciful 'answer', is it  from  your fellow co-worker, highly intelligent Fr. Nikita Grigoriev?...or who?

I have become most disappointed with Fr. Nikita, whom I used to highly respect and admire, [ as I also used to feel about your uncle, Vl. Andronik too,]... Fr. Nikita who seems to speak out of both sides of his mouth, and is 'neither hot nor cold'.

Both he and you all, need to simply REPENT! and back away from your groundless schism, which is giving only joy to the MP and those in Moscow who control 'their captive...church'.

***Why don't you ALL travel to Odessa, [ FASTING day and night, in  small uncomfortable leaky row-boats and  then walking bare-foot across all of Europe] wearing rags -made from old & dirty burlap potato sacks is preferable, with wood-ashes poured on your faces and heads, and in Odessa, at St. Michael's, fall on the ground, making many great poklons,  in front of Vladyka Agafangel and our entire Synod, and BEG their Christian forgiveness for your terrible slanders and lies against them, and against our entire ROCA, world-wide,  faithful people, and for your impious efforts to destroy our church, and ...our very souls?

And this goes also for your co-leader, who also apparently tells Vl. Andronik what to think, to  do and to say, that lamentable pro-Putin loyalist, Sofrony Musienko too. *[and tell him to leave behind his newly constructed  white metropolitan's klobuk at his monastery, as it will never be needed, well not in our ROCA, but perhaps in the MP, where he belongs, and which seems to be where he gets his marching orders from].

Why not make,  all of you schismatics, SOON,  such a penitential pilgrimage/polumnitshistvo  as this, which would be a much better replacement for your... witch-trial,  "All-Diaspora-Sobor"?... which false  'sobor',  cannot ever happen!  And if it did, you could not be permitted to even attend it or to vote in it, yourselves.

Rd. Daniel in Oregon

From: dutikow@juno.com
To: dutikow@juno.com
Subject: FW: www.rocana.org
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 11:39:41 -0400

From: letmish@aol.com [mailto:letmish@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 12:49 AM
To: letmish@aol.com
Subject: www.rocana.org


www.rocana.org

September 23, 2016

Question and Answer section of the VI All-Diaspora Council page, on: <http://www.rocana.org>,  has been updated with the following stated question:
Statement: (a very good statement): Even if it’s true that you are not leaving of your own free will, but the Metropolitan is ridding himself of you, you will still end up outside of the Church.


Answer:....( ***Such grand 'answers'  as this text, below, a taken out of context quote, from Fr. Michael Pomazansky,  using it, deceitfully, in wrongfully defending  the schismatics' anti-canonical position, is simply non-applicable to your internal schism..... Rd. Daniel in Oregon)

Our bishops will most probably be censured at the Council of Bishops in October, 2016, in Odessa.  Therefore, they and the priests that commemorate them will no longer have the ability to serve with the clergy remaining in the jurisdiction of Metropolitan Agafangel.  This will be very painful for us, though such an administrative division cannot be called dividing the Church or separating from the Church.

We believe that the Church is one.  Serving the liturgy together is but one of the visible manifestations of the unity of the Church, but it is not that unity in of itself.  In some cases, this outward display may be lost, but the oneness of the Church is not damaged by this.  Archpriest Mikhail Pomazansky in his book, “Orthodox Dogmatic Theology,” explains it thusly:



  "The unity of the Church is not violated because of temporary divisions of a non-dogmatic nature. Differences between Churches arise frequently out of insufficient or incorrect information. Also, sometimes a temporary breaking of communion is caused by the personal errors of individual hierarchs who stand at the head of one or another local Church; or it is caused by their violation of the canons of the Church, or by the violation of the submission of one territorial ecclesiastical group to another in accordance with anciently established tradition. Moreover, life shows us the possibility of disturbances within a local Church which hinder the normal communion of other Churches with the given local Church until the outward manifestation and triumph of the defenders of authentic Orthodox truth. Finally, the bond between Churches can sometimes be violated for a long time by political conditions, as has often happened in history. In such cases, the division touches only outward relations, but does not touch or violate inward spiritual unity.”





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


An honest truthful explanation of this quote-deception:

Dear Daniel,
     Here is what I wrote just now regarding the lengthy quote from Fr. Michael Pomazansky which occurred in THIS  recent article on the schismatics' rocana.org web site:

{A WARNING ABOUT THIS PARTIAL QUOTE FROM FR. MICHAEL POMOZANSKY's writings, BEING MIS-USED and TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT! by these  dishonest schismatics:...which miss-use of quotes from saints or holy people,  of old official edicts, or from Holy Scripture even,  the schismatics OFTEN resort to, in their desperation to mock and attack.. and to destroy,  our ROCA and its Head, Vladyka Agafangel!}


     The long quote, here, taken from Fr. Michael Pomazansky has been completely misunderstood by the author of this article recently posted on the rocana.org website. It is quite clear that Fr. Michael was writing about relations between local churches and about differences and divisions that may occur between local churches for a variety of external reasons, such as occurred between Constantinople and the Bulgarian Church from 1872 to 1945. But Fr. Michael was not writing about divisions and schisms within a local church, such as are currently being fomented within the ROCA. Certainly divisions between local churches are most unfortunate and always lamentable; but it is precisely divisions and schisms that occur within a local church that are highly destructive and are universally condemned by the canons and the fathers.

The concept of “administrative division”, if understood correctly, may be a useful concept. For example, during the Russian Civil War, when many dioceses could not be in contact with the central church administration, one could say that an “administrative division” did occur due to external factors beyond the control of the Church. But this has nothing to do with the willful rejection of ecclesiastical authority and the breaking of church unity that we are currently witnessing with Archbishop Andronik and his followers.


xxx


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



The miss-applied and non-applicable quote here, ....explained above,  being applied wrongfully to  our current internal schism situation, regarding this quote from the writings of  Fr. Michael Pomozansky:


"The unity of the Church is not violated because of temporary divisions of a non-dogmatic nature. Differences between Churches arise frequently out of insufficient or incorrect information. Also, sometimes a temporary breaking of communion is caused by the personal errors of individual hierarchs who stand at the head of one or another local Church; or it is caused by their violation of the canons of the Church, or by the violation of the submission of one territorial ecclesiastical group to another in accordance with anciently established tradition. Moreover, life shows us the possibility of disturbances within a local Church which hinder the normal communion of other Churches with the given local Church until the outward manifestation and triumph of the defenders of authentic Orthodox truth. Finally, the bond between Churches can sometimes be violated for a long time by political conditions, as has often happened in history. In such cases, the division touches only outward relations, but does not touch or violate inward spiritual unity.”

(***Again, this does not apply to this schism nor can it justify it, in any way.)

1 comment:

  1. Both the question and the answer are seem absurd to me. "Even if it were true..." What an absurdity to accuse Vl. Agafangel of wanting to "get rid of" somebody and force them to supposedly "voluntarily" leave the ROCA. Only the 2nd half of the question makes sense: you will still end up outside of the Church.

    The answer does not apply to the situation. Fr. Michael Pomazansky clearly was speaking of "Churches" or, rather, jurisdictions. About one whole Church breaking communion with another whole Church. We do not have that situation here. Kotlaroff schism is not a Church, local or otherwise – and it never will be.

    ReplyDelete

Anonymous comments are unlikely to be published.