ROCOR -- ecumenist from the beginning; Arch. Auxentios & St. Matthew

[Justice]

d9popov,
Apparently, Met. Rafail of Russia was aided in his works not only by HOCNA's laity and clergy (in the English Translation), but also by the deposed Bishop Gregory (formerly of ROAC). I still do not trust Met. Rafail unless I see some sign of retraction or repentance. I believe that Met. John of New York has been gravely misinformed.

I don't think he's been mislead at all, Bishop Irineos has told me that it was communication issues that destroyed communion between the two synods. Where did you find this information about Met. Raphael?

[Barbara]

d9popov, I have to reread your post to make sure I understand completely [ my mind seems to be working slowly ]. But let me ask you a few small questions to clarify.

When you said the Russians are going to great lengths to protect the legacy of St John Maximovitch, do you mean the Russians in the MP ? Or the Rocor-Mp ? Or Russian laypeople in the RF and Ukraine ?

Then, the reasoning about the visit by an Old Calendar Bishop refers to St John's pastoral visits, right ? That does seem a little bit of stretch if the rest of the year reverts to New Calendar.

Next, where do you see that St John was fallible ? That's an important question which does not take away from his marvelous sanctity, but it's a help to see WHERE he may have made controversial moves.

Thanks for explaining that no one really knows WHY the great Wonderworker took on the NC Romanian parishes [ do we know about how many there were ? ]. I always uncomfortably feel there are major gaps in the information which made it to the public. That's where it's helpful to delve into the truth of these various matters : just to arrive at a more full understanding of confusing events. I guess the Dutch were at that time limited to one Church, comprised of the former Benedictine monks.

[ Aside : I read an article from a few years ago about a convent in Holland. I don't recall any mention of St John's endeavor there, or maybe a figurative footnote. I felt sad that the interviewer, Mother Cornelia [Rees], seemed to 'celebrate' the fact that the Abbess was in the MP. I didn't enjoy the article at all, though I had wanted to learn what happened to Dutch Orthodoxy. Now I am having a hard time recollecting anything from it except that the Abbess had become a nun in Greece and spent some years there before returning to her native land and founding this MP convent. If I have mixed up any facts, it's because the article dragged for me due to the tone of enthusiasm for the MP as a valid and praiseworthy organization. ]

About the rebuke of Abp Averky by Metropolitan Philaret regarding the Coptic celebration in Jordanville's Cathedral, yes, I had heard that Met Philaret was quite angry about that. As I recall, Abp Averky didn't much apologize, either.

And about the need to kowtow to the JP by Rocor, that seems so tragic to me that the JP should have held so much power over the Russian Holy Places rightfully owned by the White emigres. How could there have been any debate about that fact when the Red Soviets didn't believe in God, let alone in Saints, like St Mary Magdalene, or in the Ascension of the Lord ? Nor did they venerate the importance of the Oak of Mamre or Jericho, both of which were to become the scene of lawless takeover by the MP in their usual ruthless, thuggish way ? No one was able to stop them from their evil monastery grab.

[Agios_Irineos]

d9popov,
Apparently, Met. Rafail of Russia was aided in his works not only by HOCNA's laity and clergy (in the English Translation), but also by the deposed Bishop Gregory (formerly of ROAC). I still do not trust Met. Rafail unless I see some sign of retraction or repentance. I believe that Met. John of New York has been gravely misinformed.

I don't think he's been mislead at all, Bishop Irineos has told me that it was communication issues that destroyed communion between the two synods. Where did you find this information about Met. Raphael?

I think former Bishop Gregory did visit Met. Rafail, and moved on rather quickly. That much is true. The only English "translations" I ever saw of anything by Met. Rafail were machine translations. That started the error in translations, which was compounded by an inability of Met. Rafail and Met. John to speak directly. I am not sure why anyone would think Met. John has been mislead when he sat across the table from Met. Rafail and had the ability to inquire into everything that was of concern to him. I do not believe Met. John is the type who would restore communion without being assured that his concerns have been addressed.

[jdigrande]

To D9popov:

I just want to respond to part of your post concerning Met. Antony Khrapovitsky who was very good friends with the Mason Joachim III.

In 1902 Joachim wrote an encyclical which was the first major statement to promote the heresy of ecumenism. It is certain that this was read by Met. Antony and the whole Greek Church.

What was his response? Did he post a rebuke to this detailed statement?

I do not read Russian. Was there any rebuke from any part of the Orthodox Church 18 years before this statement was repeated almost verbatim in 1920?

Did Joachim III perform the ordination of Meletius Metaxis as Metropolitan of Kition (Cyprus) in 1910, the year after Meletius became a Mason in Constantinople when and where Joachim III was the "Patriarch."

I have seen many photos of this thread of St. Tikhon with Anglicans where all of them are in their liturgical vestments. Does that mean that they met and concelebrated?

The essay by Zissis maintains that 75% of the bishops and priests of the Anglican Church were Masons during this period. The present state of the Anglican Church shows me that the percentage of Masons has probably grown. Who in their right mind would want to pursue union with such a "church."

Does anyone have the full text of the 1902 statement by Joachim III in English?