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



√ OUR PEOPLE IN BULGARIA! NEW CHURCHES - Bp.Foti and New Parishes, SIR Synod - Many PHOTOS/Bulgarian Text http://bulgarian-orthodox-church.org/ch-life/official/parishes/2010southparishes.htm

Diocesan Epistle of Bishop Gregory

To the beloved clergy and laypeople of the South American Diocese
of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad.

Several ukases signed by “Bishop John” were recently sent out and posted on the Internet at the behest of Metropolitan Hilarion from the diocese of the Moscow Patriarchate which calls itself the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. The ukases stated that all clergy in South America, who did not accept the Act of union with the MP, are “interdicted from serving because of leaving their lawful hierarchy and creating a schism,” and further, are in danger of being suspended for their disobedience.

We remind our parishioners and members of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad who are troubled by these misleading declarations, that after joining the ranks of the Moscow Patriarchate, the bishops who comprised the new Synod lost their right by their own volition to address any ukases to us and the ukases therefore have no validity. Since the beginning of 1927, the Church Abroad never considered any of the sanctions from the MP to be valid, as it did not recognize the Moscow Patriarchate or its episcopate. This continues to be true, as the sanctions are being issued by those who knowingly violated the sobornost of the Church and abandoned all earlier synodal declarations and rulings of the ROCA regarding the MP and have for all intents and purposes become a part of the MP.

Sao Paulo, June, 2010
Bishop of Sao Paulo and South America

About the OCA Autocephaly Question

A Clarification
By the Synod of Bishops of the
Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia
Concerning the Question of 
an Autocephalous American Orthodox Church*
June 6/19, 1969

*Excerpts from the full text in Orthodox Russia, 16, no. 12,pp.5-6.  It was issued before the announcement of the Metropolia's "authcephaly" in response to the more general discussion of the issue in the Church press.

In Orthodox terminology the name Autocephalous Church is given to a Church that unites all Orthodox diocese on a given territory and is headed by a Chief Hierarch chosen by its own episcopate, which is independent of any other Church.  Historically autocephaly has been acknowledged for separate Churches satisfying these demands without haste, after their attainment of a certain maturity that leaves no doubts as to their ability firmly to maintain Orthodoxy and independently govern themselves and develop.  This acknowledgment should come first from the Mother Church which established the new Local Church which established the new Local Church and reared it...

The Orthodox population of North America, although it has increased in the past decades, nonetheless comprises a minority and is in large measure scattered.  To a significant degree this hinders the formation of a special "American piety" that would unite it in the same way that in another time there was formed a Greek, Russian, Serbian, or Bulgarian piety that sanctified the life of the separate Orthodox peoples.  On the contrary, the Americanization of parishes does not usually limit itself to the lawful use of the English language in services and sermons, but goes on to become an influence on the order of Church life by the surrounding unOrthodox environment.  Under such conditions the influence of the Mother Churches with established traditions is a valuable factor for the preservation of Orthodoxy...

As for the Russian diocese, in general no kind of final decision regarding them can canonically take place until the restoration of normal Church order in Russia. No part of the Russian Church in America can be acknowledged a Local, i.e. Authocephalous Church without the agreement of the Mother Church, and the latter cannot now express itself.  The Moscow Patriarchate, as being under the surveillance and direction of the atheist power, cannot be acknowledged as a canonical  representative of the Russian Church.  However, out of respect for the suffering of this Church we should not undertake such decisions, which by the canons unconditionally demand her blessing...

√ also see the articles on the Rocor Refugees blog labeled OCA


√ Correction regarding 6/3 post "MP Is Bad Step Sister": The author, Kybihetz21, wishes to clarify that he never was a member of the MP or under the Laurus Synod.   My apologies to the author for this false/impression assumption.

√ See: http://guest-2.livejournal.com  the top newest article:
 Recent beautiful Photos of the clean up, on-going renovation of our new diocesan center/monastery/Arcb. Andronik's residence

√ Another work party is scheduled for July 10 and 11

Attendees of the Recent EACONCA Assembly

And their jurisdictions.
This list is taken straight from the ROCOR-MP website [eadiocese.org]

Archbishop Demetrios, Chairman Constantinople
Metropolitan Philip, Vice Chairman Antioch
Archbishop Justinian, Vice Chairman ROCOR-MP
Bishop Basil, Secretary
Archbishop Antony, Treasurer
Patriarchate of Constantinople
Metropolitan Iakovos
Metropolitan Constantine
Metropolitan Athenagoras
Metropolitan Methodios
Metropolitan Isaiah
Metropolitan Nicholas
Metropolitan Alexios
Metropolitan Nikitas
Metropolitan Nicholas
Metropolitan Gerasimos
Metropolitan Evangelos
Metropolitan Paisios
Archbishop Yurij
Bishop Christopher
Bishop Vikentios
Bishop Savas
Bishop Andonios
Bishop Ilia
Bishop Ilarion
Bishop Andriy
Bishop Demetrios
Bishop Daniel
Antiochian Archdiocese
Bishop Antoun
Bishop Joseph
Bishop Alexander
Bishop Thomas
Bishop Mark
Russian Church
Metropolitan Hilarion
Bishop Job ROCOR-MP Canada
Bishop Gabriel
Bishop Peter
Bishop Theodosius
Bishop George
Bishop Jerome
Serbian Church
Metropolitan Christopher
Bishop Maxim
Romanian Church
Archbishop Nicolae
Bishop Ioan Casian
Bulgarian Church
Metropolitan Joseph
Orthodox Church in America
Metropolitan Jonah
Archbishop Nathaniel
Archbishop Seraphim
Bishop Nikon
Bishop Tikhon
Bishop Benjamin
Bishop Melchisedek
Bishop Alejo 
Bishop Irineu
Bishop Irinee
Bishop Michael
It was pointed out to me yesterday by a friend:

Notice that Constantinople and MP are no longer rivals for world power over all Orthodox.  It seems they have decided to co-exist with defined territories.  The surprising thing is that North America and South America are going to be in Constantinople's territory.  MP gets the Ukraine.  The advantages of this for the MP are not clear to me, all I know for sure is that their motives are evil whatever they do.

The intention, strangely, according to my friend, is that all the world Orthodox parishes in North and South America will be commemorating the EP.  This includes ROCOR-MP parishes.

We are not going to hear much pushing of ecumenism from world Orthodoxy anymore - they have decided to replace the word "ecumenism" with the word "canonical" instead.  There is just too much resistance to ecumenism.  But folks seem to greatly fear being considered "uncanonical" and they will compromise Truth to avoid that label.

The idea is that eventually all the truly canonical Churches will be considered uncanonical and therefore illegal and any rights now given by law can then be taken away.  [Such as the right to buy and sell?]

There is a great push for the [pseudo] 8th Ecumenical Council where they are hoping to unite with Rome, as well.

All this information comes from the official world Orthodox websites, which my friend reads in Russian.

Fragments Begin To Unite

6/16/10  The Most Reverend Iriney, Bishop of Vernensky and Semirechenskiy, has been accepted in our Church and will temporarily head the Diocese of Western Europe.
Bishop Iriney recently accepted into ROCA from RTOC publishes this statement on his website:

After a long time of total silence and inactivity, the long-awaited process of uniting the divided parts of the Church Abroad has finally begun.  Inspired by Bishop Dionisiy’s decision, the Diocese of Western Europe along with its Ruling Bishop, Bishop Iriney, has joined the Church headed by Metropolitan Agafangel.  The decision was made at a meeting in Odessa on June 15\16, which also included Metropolitan Agafangel, Synod Secretary Bishop Georgiy of Bolgrad and Belgorod-Dnestrovsk, and Bishop Dionisiy of Novgorod and Tver, and was approved by all the other bishops.

We fervently believe this union of the fragments that has begun will result in a broad movement towards unification.  Even in its initial phase, our union already presents a threat to the disloyal New York Synod.  What other conclusion can be made, when at the very same time, they issue an absurd decision, three years after signing the disgraceful Act, that makes no canonical sense, to censure in one swipe ten clerics in South America, who, in contrast to them, did not betray the Mother-Church which bore them.  As Francois de La Rochefoucauld said, “Hypocrisy is a tribute that vice pays to virtue.”

We have already pointed out that the time for pleasant smiles in the Patriarchate has passed and that Kirill Gundyaev reveals his usual countenance and steely fist more often.  Our flip-flopping betrayers were clearly incapable of completing the assigned task; to deliver the entire Church Abroad into the Red clutches.  That is why our scattered condition, unable to agree on anything, suited them so much.  That is why the looming possibility of a breakout of union frightens them so much, and why, in the hope of scaring those weaker, they quickly impose pseudo-disciplinary sanctions.

May all those who desire to see a restored Church Abroad again understand the vital necessity of ceasing all baseless rancor among ourselves, the true Émigrés.  We know that each of us can, to the delight of those in the Patriarchate, point out the faults of his neighbor, but is it not more important to look to the future and act in a constructive manner?

Let us remember during the Civil War, when the White leaders called upon the people to band together for the sake of their desecrated homeland and join the ranks of the Volunteer army to rebuff the Bolsheviks.  There were many who commiserated with the White heroes and look up on them sympathetically, but the bulk of the people maintained a wait-and-see attitude.  And they ended up waiting a long time.  Other “ultra-monarchists” refused to take part in the White movement, for the reason that some of the generals did not act honorably toward the Tsar.  The outcome of pretensions of exclusivity and bad policies are well known.  Is it worth it to step on the same rake over and over again?

In conclusion, whether the Church Abroad exists or does not exist today depends on each one of us.  I. A. Ilyin once wrote, “The White effort was not begun by us, nor will it end because of us.”  Let us also state with conviction, the White Church was not begun by us, nor will it end because of us.

Protodeacon Herman Ivanov-Thirteenth
The Secretary of the Western European Diocese 

Is There Grace…?

-from LIVING ORTHODOXY issue # 156 November 2006

Is There Grace…?

We often hear the question posed as to whether or not “there is Grace” — usually in the Moscow Patriarchate.  Wisely, the hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia have never spoken with respect to this question.  One of them, Bishop Daniel of Erie, spoke about it — to say that it was a falsely posed and probably unanswerable question.

The Scriptural response would seem to be quite clear.  The Lord said:  “The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.” [Bear in mind that the Greek word for “wind” is the same as for “Spirit”.]  (John 3:8)

We cannot ever categorically state that the Holy Spirit is not any place — not even outside the confines of what is loosely known as “Christianity”.  Much less can we say that it is not present within the (spiritual) boundaries of what we call the Moscow Patriarchate — or the heretical church of Rome, or any other even marginally “Christian” body.

The question was posed “Is the Grace of God Present in the Soviet Church?” by Prof. I.M. Andreyev in the book of the same title (Monastery Press, Wildwood AB Canada, 2000).  His exhaustive answer reaches a largely (even if not categorically) negative conclusion.

But the question is posed in quite another fashion by Dr. Timothy Clader in the address published in the preceding issue of Living Orthodoxy (#155, XXVI 5, Sept-Oct 2006).  He asks “whether we can say categorically and with God’s authority that the Moscow Patriarchate has grace.”  (p. 21)  To pose the question thus puts it in quite a different light.

We may find the Holy Spirit anywhere, and should always be ready to recognize the “manifest works”, even if in unexpected contexts.  But when it comes to the life of the Church, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Orthodox, we can and must expect far more — that we will find the Holy Spirit present in the Holy Mysteries, without question; that we will find Him present in the legitimate Councils of the Church, despite the sinfulness of the human beings who there serve.

Can we say this of the Church of Rome, even though it has bishops, priests, “sacraments”, and at least in some respects a superficial resemblance to the Orthodox Church.  We cannot.

Could the true Church have said this of those parts of herself which fell into separation in the Aryan heresy, teaching that Jesus the Christ was not in truth the Son of God, but only the greatest of God’s creation?  Decidedly not.

More to the point at the moment, can we say it of the “Russian Orthodox Church”, of which the “Moscow Patriarchate” is the administrative entity — and, at least in principle, the spiritual authority and guide.  Both Prof. Andreyev in his writings a half-century ago and Dr. Clader in the recent past feel compelled by the data to answer in the negative: we cannot be assured of the universal presence of the Holy Spirit, the Grace of God, in this body conceived and nurtured and controlled, until very recently, by an atheistic, God-hating state, which oversaw its every appointment and “consecration”.  It is precisely those who were put in place by the Soviet state who continue to direct the policies of the Moscow Patriarchate, to make decisions as to who shall be appointed and “ordained” to what office.

Can this change?  Yes, by the Grace of God.  Has it changed?  We have no convincing evidence to that effect.
God help us!

The Truth About OCA Autocephaly

[This is the exact same story as the ROCOR-MP union.  Just substitute the word "union" for "autocephaly" and Lebedeff/Whiteford/Shaw for Schmemann/Meyendorff.  -jh]
-from The OrtHOdoX Word #30 Jan-Feb 1970 

Orthodoxy in the Contemporary World
Strong Protests Greet The Metropolia's "Autocephaly"

The Russian Metropolia in America, which in December let it be known that it hoped to receive early this year the blessing of the Moscow Patriarchate to become the Local Orthodox Church of America, has run into opposition of a totally unexpected degree, both from within its own flock and from other Orthodox Churches.  The strongest non-Russian response was that of Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople, who has been followed by his American Exarch, Archbishop Iakovos, several other hierarchs on the American "Standing Conference," and the Churches of Greece and Bulgaria.

 it was negotiating for the "reestablishment of regular relations" with Moscow

In a letter of January 8 to Patriarch Alexy of Moscow [Comrade Blackbird -jh] [English text in the Rumanian newspapers Credinta, January, and Solia, Feb. 15], Patriarch Athenagoras made known what had already been widely suspected: that the Metropolia had not at all informed its "brother bishops" of other jurisdictions in America that it was negotiating for "autocephaly" [it informed Constantinople only that it was negotiating for the "reestablishment of regular relations" with Moscow], and he states the obvious fact this unilateral move is the cause of "upsetting inter-Orthodox relations" and unity.  As a result Constantinople "will neither recognize this action nor enroll this Church in the Diptychs or in the Sacred Catalogue of the Holy Orthodox Authocephaolous Churches.  We would label as uncanonical this Church which you would chose to proclaim autocephalous. In this connection also, this Throne will take any other action needed to secure canonical order,"  apparently even including the possibility of excommunication.

Patriarch Alexy has as yet given no response, but the Metropolia has made it known that it plans to go through with its coup, with or without the approval of other Churches; the other jurisdictions in America will simply have to join it if they with to belong to the "Orthodoxx Church in America."  The ideological basis for this stand has already been set forth in the official publication of the Rumanian Diocese under the Metropolia, Solia --which before this article did not even inform its readers that any plan of "autocephaly" was being considered.  Solia declares [Feb. 15] that "Constantinople does it again!"  This letter "just follows a well worn pattern... The Ecumenical Patriarchate gas always opposed the creation and the functioning of any church independent of herself... Time has always proved that Constantinople was wrong."

One need not be any partisan of Patriarch Athenagoras, whose anti-Orthodox ecumenism is well known, to agree that an autocephalous American Church cannot logically or realistically be formed by a self-willed minority -- even if that minority were not as ecclesiactically immature as the Metropolia obviously is.  But this argument by no means touches the whole case against the Metropolia's "autocephaly."  Another crucial criticism was directed, chiefly by the Synod and members of the Russian Church Outside of Russia, against the uncanonical and indeed anti-Christian character of the authority that is granting the "autocephaly" -- the Patriarchate of Moscow.

Strangely enough, from the arguments of the Metropolia over the "autocephaly" one would not even suspect --apart from a few derogatory references in the Russian language press -- that  such a thing as the Russian Church Outside of Russia even exists -- the Church of which. until 1946, the Metropolia itself was a part!  This surely is even more a blow against Orthodox unity than the slap against the Greeks, for it concerns brothers not only by faith but even by blood.  The response of the Synodal bishops, alike in the decrees of the Synod and the Christmas Epistles of separate hierarchs in America, was immediate and decisive:  full of sorrow and righteous protest, it nonetheless expressed concerned love and a sincere desire for the restoration of unity with bishops still regarded as brothers.

Still more telling, however in its testimony against the Metropolia's actions has been the response of its own flock.  The Russian press since the Metropolia's announcement has been full of open letters and protests by concerned laymen in the Metropolia -- including the American-born of the second and third generations -- expressing sorrow and pain and decisive protest, and vowing to leave the Metropolia if this act of "sacrilege and shame" is fulfilled.  Some have already left, seeing the Metropolia's already betrayal by unprincipled behavior.  Alexandra Tolstoy of the Tolstoy Foundation [daughter of the [excommunicated -jh] novelist], after publishing a full page protest in Novoye Russkoyo Slovo [Dec. 20]. left the Metropolia for the Russian Church Abroad, bringing with her the "Tolstoy Farm with its St. Sergius parish.  The Tolstoy Foundation is described in the 1970 Metropolia Year Book as "the sole and exclusive secular representative of the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of North America [Metropolia] for migration and legal assistance as well as welfare for the communicants of this Church in Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America" -- the Metropolia thus, being now suddenly "American," cutting itself off from its own refugee organization!  And a leading Metropolia priest, Fr. Alexy Ionov, until recently editor of the Metropolia's official Russian-language publication, The Russian American Orthodox Messenger, and head of the Metropolia's Committee for the canonization of Father Herman of Alaska and for writing his Life, has also come to the Synod together with his parish in Sea Cliff, Long Island, which on February 22 voted unanimously to follow him.  At least two of the few remaining monks in the Metropolia have also come to the Synod.

Others in the Metropolia are awaiting the next turn of events before taking any decisive action.  It has become common knowledge that not only the laymen of the Metropolia, but many priests and bishops as well, have been kept largely uninformed of what was going on; at least one bishop with his clergy has found out more about the "autocephaly" from the publications of Fr. Neketas Palassis of the Synod than from the Chancellor's office of the Metropolia!

a certain group ... has led this whole secret work

All that has been made known thus far about the "autocephaly" tends to confirm the suspicion of a layman of the Metropolia, Dr. Michael A. Grishkov of Detroit, expressed in an Open Letter to Met. Ireney [Novoye Russkoye, Feb 5], that "it is not you, but a certain group in the Metropolia that has led this whole secret work, not having the courage to answer the laymen honestly."  The Metropolia defends itself by saying that each Diocesan Assembly has met and approved the "autocephaly."  But these assemblies were approached more in the manner of a military campaign than anything else: The two brilliant stars of the Metropolia, Frs. Schmemann and Meyendorf -- who are apparently the chief promoters of the whole scheme -- conducted a blitzkrieg campaign, going to these assemblies one after the other and using their prestige and "theology" to convince them of the necessity and benefits of the "autocephaly." In the meantime, any mention that such a things as negotiations with the Soviet Patriarchate was being conducted was scrupulously kept out of the newspapers and the Metropolia's publications, so that there was no general awareness of what was going on and no opposition could thus be organized.  Finally, the public announcement was made, in the belief that the coup was already successful.   The ensuing protests from inside and outside the Metropolia indicate that not all the faithful are so easily fooled, after all.

such a veil of secrecy must hide something that will not bear scrutiny in broad daylight

It is therefore surely an understatement when even The Russian Orthodox Journal [Feb.], which favors the "autocephaly," admits that "the Metropolia has done a poor job of informing its faithful that negotiations were proceeding."  The faithful can only suspect that such a veil of secrecy must hide something that will not bear scrutiny in broad daylight, and the arguments of the spokesmen for "autocephaly" only tend to reinforce this impression.  The replies in the religious and secular press so far have not even tried to answer the heartfelt -- and quite logical -- protests that have been made, but rather attempt to counter them with outright name-calling joined to the vaguest kind of emotional effusions over the newly-attained "freedom" and "canonical status" [what? was the Metropolia before this not free?  not canonical?].

To the question:  Why didn't you consult the other Orthodox jurisdictions in America, including the much larger Greek Archdiocese?  -- the answer is:  "Constantinople does it again, it is again on the wrong side" [Solia, Feb. 15] --a reply that can only inspire the counter-exclamation:  The Metropolia does it again, its fourth proclamation of "autocephaly" in 45 years, the first three of which it had to back down on!

To the question:  How can you derive canonicity from the agents of atheistic Communism?  -- the answer is: "An outright slander, not deserving refutation" [The Russian American Orthodox Messenger, Jan., p. 16] -- but the published proof that Metr. Nikodim [Comrade Adamant -jh] is indeed working to promote Communism and destroy the Church and faithful will not simply vanish because you do not wish to look at it!  The propaganda of the Metropolia strangely assumes that "the end justifies the means," that no matter how or with whom the agreement was reached, the end -- "autocephaly" -- justifies it and puts an end to any influence of Moscow in America.  But does it?  Fr. Meyendorff is so naive as to declare [in the Washington Post] that

"We do not know why this new freedom would come to us at a time when the existence of the church there is much more dangerous than it was even before... For some reason the Church in Moscow was enabled to act now.  It is certain that it had to have the approval of the Communist government in order to do his."  

But if one even admits that the Communist government is somewhere behind the "autocephaly," is it really so difficult to see the benefits which it obtains?  It obtains recognition for its puppet church from a large group of free Russians abroad.  It gains a foot hold in every Orthodox church in America that accepts the "autocephaly," for its ecclesiastical representatives will be able to serve and preach there while it keeps the long-disputed St. Nicholas Cathedral in New York and any parish of the Exarchate that chooses to remain under Moscow.  It gains control of the Church of Japan.  It tightens the noose around the neck of the Russian Church Abroad, the last free voice of conscience in the Russian Church.  It crushes those few brave souls inside the USSR who have dared to protest openly against the persecution of Orthodoxy by the hierarchs of the Soviet Church.  The layman Boris Talantov, for example, writes that  

"a full unmasking of what Metr. Nikodim and the Patriarchate are doing would mean the end of his undercover enterprise.  The time has come to reveal how delegates from the Moscow Patriarchate have betrayed the Church Abroad..."

[quoted in The Russian Review, Oct. 1969, p. 420].  Will the hierarchs of the Metropolia dare to agree with this courageous fighter for Orthodox principle inside Russia, or will they not rather back up their benefactor, Metr. Nikodim, who says that Talantov is now justly imprisoned for "political" statements?  [Most likely of all, to be sure, they will simply maintain a prudent silence and let the Soviets do what they want, which is perhaps the chief purpose of the "autocephaly."]  By means of the "autocephaly" the prestige of the Soviet Church is increased, and its "favors" bind a whole Church to it by the tightest invisible bonds.  Moscow, indeed, knew exactly what it was doing when it threw out its bait to the Metropolia: it loses only a single uninfluential Exarch, while world Communism and its puppet church gain propaganda and espionage benefits which they could not have purchased for millions!

To the question:  Why do you turn your backs on your own brothers, the clergy and faithful of the Russian Church Abroad, and even on those within your own ranks who beg you to stop before you completely Orthodoxy and the faithful?  -- the answer is:  our explanations "will be heard by all except incorrigible fanatics who... wish to bring political warfare into the Church's enclosure" [Messenger, Jan., p. 12].  Archbishop John Shahovskoy, indeed, in a letter to a layman which was published as a paid advertisement in Novoye Russkoye Slovo [Jan. 18], accuses Alexandra Tolstoy and others who oppose the "autocephaly" of writing "demagogic-emotional" protests and dismisses the entire "so-called Russian Church Outside of Russia" as being in a state of "delirium, hatred, and pharisaical pride"!  Therefore, it follows, one does not have to stop to listen to what they say, even if it may be true!

What is one to think of such incredibly irrelevant and callous answers to genuine questions?

What is one to think of such incredibly irrelevant and callous answers to genuine questions that demand straightforward answers?  They only serve to reinforce the widespread impression that the whole "autocephaly" scandal is a political trick which a small group is trying to force upon a flock whom they must consider abysmally ignorant.

And what of this suffering flock of the Metropolia, so often already misled by its leaders?  Already deprived of communion with their Russian brethren abroad, are these faithful now supposed meekly to accept the blessing of the agents of Communism who, on February 20 [New York Times, Feb. 21], removed the last barrier to the Unia with Rome by announcing that the Moscow Patriarchate will now give communion to Roman Catholics?  Will the large Carpatho-Russian population in the Metropolia, which returned to Orthodoxy in America from the enforced Unia with Rome, accept this in silence?  One of their number, Joseph Zelenyak, a delegate to the Detroit Sobor in 1924, had the courage to refuse to sign the "autocephaly" decree of that Sobor and to inscribe this note in the minutes:

"Minneapolis has always waged war for Orthodoxy against the papacy, and now it will wage war against the autocephaly."

But now the battle against "autocephaly" is joined to the battle against papalism, and the remaining elements of sound Orthodoxy in the Metropolia have come to a critical choice: to turn back to the Russian Church Abroad, in leaving which the Metropolia set out on the path which ends now in its total disgrace and shame; or to follow its "leaders" to the next stage in the continuing 20th-century martyrdom of Russian Orthodoxy.  There is no need to accuse these "leaders" of consciously betraying Orthodoxy; they seek only the recognition and applause of the world, and this has blinded them to the Apostolic truth that the friendship of the world is enmity with God [St. James 4:4], and they thus cannot even see the enormity of the evil which they are trying to force upon American Orthodoxy. May the sound conscience of the faithful lead them on the right path -- the narrow path, despised by the world, of genuine and principled Orthodoxy.

[Unsigned articles in The Orthdox Word are "the responsibility of the editors," Eugene Rose &/or Gleb Podmoshensky.  The sentence structure and subject matter are definitely characteristic of Fr. Seraphim, but would Eugene have been keeping up with all the foreign news periodicals that are cited?  After the end of the article there is a clue to where those cites came from - it says:
Further important information and comment on the "autocephaly" question, including an Appeal by Holy Transfiguration Monastery to the clergy and faithful of the Metropolia, and a 100-page study by John Dunlop of the recent activities of the Moscow Patriarchate, may be obtained free of charge by writing to St. Nectarios American Orthodox Church in Seattle.  -jh]

RECENT ACTIVITIES OF THE MOSCOW PATRIARCHATE ABROAD  AND IN THE USSR  by John B. Dunlop.  First published in 1970, this reprint of the 1974 edition covers the history of the Moscow Patriarchate and its activities through the 1960’s with documentation from contemporary Russian and non-Russian sources. The Appendix contains the account of the trial of B. V. Talatov and the 1972 letter of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn to Patriarch Pimen.  A valuable historical document.  147pp.  Paper/Wire  $17.00 
A  HISTORY OF THE RUSSIAN CHURCH ABROAD AND THE EVENTS LEADING TO THE AMERICAN METROPOLIA’S AUTOCEPHALY:  1917-1971   Long out of print, we have reissued this book as a historical document in light of the recent reunification of the Russian Church Abroad with the Moscow Patriarchate.  109pp.  Paper/wire bound.  e$15.00.

Both books are out of print (again).  Here is one:

√ also see the articles on the Rocor Refugees blog labeled OCA

Memory Eternal

One of the disappearing generation of noble Russian emigrants, who helped to build the Russian Church Abroad in North America. And, brother Yakov Popov also refused that dishonourable 'union' with the enslaved MP.    MEMORY ETERNAL!
From: Archbishop Chrysostomos, Etna
Sunday of the New Martyrs
31 May/13 June 2009
I am sorry to inform our clergy, faithful, and friends that I learned this morning of the repose, last evening, of YAKOV POPOV, one of the original founders of Holy Trinity parish in Oxnard, California.

Funeral arrangements for the funeral are now being made. I would ask all of the clergy, in the meantime, to conduct a Memorial Service for Yakov and to commemorate him in Liturgy for forty days. Thank you.
Least Among Monks,
+ Archbishop Chrysostomos

YAKOV, 102 years of age, was a refugee from the Bolshevik Revolution and a dedicated Orthodox Christian. He was born in Kharkov, Ukraine, in 1908. He received his university degree in agronomy and did pioneering research in what was then the new science of developing natural rubber.

Forced to do labor in Germany during the World War II, he and his wife, Olga, whom he married in 1935, were placed in a camp for displaced persons in Germany, as were millions in the aftermath of the war. They were fortunate to emigrate to the U.S. in 1949, where they worked as citrus laborers until Yakov was finally employed in a professional capacity by the County of Ventura, California.

In the difficulties of resettlement in the U.S., Yakov dedicated himself, along with other Russian refugees, to establishing an Orthodox Church in Oxnard, California. It is thus that he helped found the beautiful Holy Trinity Church, which he and others built at their own expense and with their own labors.

Yakov was a remarkable example of a disappearing generation of people to whom we all owe an inestimable debt and whom we could not even hope to emulate. He leaves as his legacy a parish that was founded, as a plaque outside the Holy Trinity Church states, by Orthodox Christians who were "delivered...from oppression" and who with gratitude acknowledged that they were "blessed" by their "beloved new homeland, the United States of America."

Yakov, whose wife reposed a year ago, is survived by two daughters, Victoria and Tania, a son Boris, eight grandchildren, and one great-grandson. He is also survived by all of us who love and find solace in the Holy Trinity parish, which is a haven for those of good spirit and good will.

It is my hope and dream that what Yakov and his co-founders established will continue as a Church serving a pan-Orthodox community of believers who have been similarly blessed, as American-born Orthodox Christians, by this country and its freedom. I also hope that we will always call to mind how benefited we have been by these wonderful founders, who, emerging from the most horrible persecution in their former homeland, have left us a place to worship in freedom of conscience and free from foreign influence.

Again, as I said, we owe men such as Yakov, a hero to our Faith, to his former homeland, and to this nation, a debt that can never be paid. May his reward be immense and inestimable in Life Eternal, as I know that it will be, and may we be made worthy to emulate, again, even in a small way, his great sacrifice and his indomitable spirit.

I offer my condolences to Yakov and his family, asking that they remain always true and loyal to his example and to his spirit.

Beychnaya pamyat'. Aionia e mneme. Memory Eternal. How privileged we are to have known such men!

Helping Hands Needed

Invitation to a Work Party 
Our new property in New York is having a work party next weekend June 19/20

Mountain View
2781 State Route 145
Middleburg NY 12157

Apparently this is a BYOEverything, including water.
To request an email invitation with more details email:


- notes from The Sword and the Shield, Chapter 28
"The Penetration and Persecution of the Soviet Churches"

-Since 1943, when Stalin was forced to either reopen some churches or lose the war, the CRA [Council for Religious Affairs] worked in close cooperation with the NKVD and its successors to ensure the subservience of Church to State.  Both Patriarch Alesksi I and Metropolitan Nikolai of Krutitsky joined the World Peace Council, the Soviet front organization founded in 1949, and were highly valued by the KGB as agents of influence.

-In 1961, with the KGB's blessing, the Orthodox Church joined the WCC.  At that very moment Krushchev was in the midst of a ferocious anti-religious campaign which re-closed down many of the churches, monasteries and seminaries, and disbanded half of the Orthodox parishes.  The KGB was simultaneusly seeking to strengthen its grip on the churches which remained.  According to a secret KGB directive given in 1961:

Up to 600 individuals are studying in the two ecclesiastical academies of the MP and five ecclesiastical seminaries.  These must be exploited in the interests of the KGB.  We must infiltrate our people among the students of these ecclesiastical training establishments so that they will subsequently influence the state of affairs within the Russian Orthodox Church and exert influence on the believers.

-Since the Russian Orthodox delegates to the WCC were carefully selected by the KGB and the CRA, it is scarcely surprising that they denied -- often indignantly -- all reports of the persecution of their Church by the Soviet state.  According to a KGB report of August 1969:

Agents ALTAR, SVYATOSLAV, ADAMANT, MAGISTER, ROSHCHIN and ZEMNOGORSKY went to England to take part in the work of the WCC central committee.  Agents managed to avert hostile activities ]public criticism of Soviet religious persecution]...

The most important agent at the WCC was ADAMANT [Met. Nikodim] whose meteoric rise through the Church hierarchy was by itself unmistakable evidence of KGB approval.  In 1960, at age 31, Nikodim was the youngest bishop in Christendom.  A year later he was put in charge of the MP foreign relations department, and in 1964 he was appointed Metropolitan of Leningrad.  Nikodim ensured that there was no reference in the WCC to member churches either to the invasion of Czechoslovakia or to religious persecution in the Soviet Bloc.

-The KGB reported that, at the Canterbury conference, its agents had also succeeded "in placing agent KUZNETSOV in a high WCC post."  This is Alexi Sergeyevich Buyevsky, lay secretary of the MP foreign relations department.  Throughout the 70's and 80's he played an active role in the work of the WCC helping to draft policy statements on international affairs.

In 1975, Episcopal priest Richard Holloway told the WCC assembly:

I have observed there is an unwritten rule operating that says that the USSR must never be castigated in public.  Nevertheless, it is well known that the USSR is in the forefront of human right violations...

-In 1989, the Centre claimed that, following the secret implementation of  "a plan approved by the KGB leadership,"  the WCC  adopted 8 public statements and 3 messages which corresponded to the political direction of Communist/Socialist countries.


√ http://picasaweb.google.com/vishegorod.ru/kmycI
Extensive photos of our ROCA church life, in Archb. Sofrony's diocese-many photos!

√ Fotos da peregrinação do grupo da diocese Sul-Americana à Jerusalém:
You may find in the following links some pictures of a group from our South American ROCOR diocese who are on a pilgrimage in the Holy Land. It's worth noting that Vladyka Andronik, with some people from North America and Australia (if I'm not wrong), as well as some brothers from Russia, have joined the group in Jerusalem:
Pedindo vossas orações,
Asking for your prayers,
(Reader) Roman

Action and Inaction by the WCC

Always subservient to the Left & Anti-American 
A 'religious' tool of the KGB

Fellow Orthodox, 
the main point of this is about the consistent leftist political actions of the WCC, and why it has always been a tool of the world-wide communists.  Some of us may differ as to whether or not we approve of this recent unfortunate violent incident here described.  As Orthodox, many of us do have much  sympathy for the sufferings of the Palestinians.  But, the WCC's statement about it,  is but another disgusting piece of evidence, as to who they serve.
For instance, as Archb. Chrysostomos here comments, why do they NEVER protest the communist persecution  (past and present) of Orthodox Christians in Russia? or Romania, or Serbia, or elsewhere?
And, by the way, there is plenty of evidence that the KGB folks, helped to create the WCC from it's beginnings.
Now, it's enslaved MP is taking an ever visible role in it.
Rd. Daniel Everiss

"Such stories indicate exactly why the MP continues to remain in the WCC for their political reasons."

Casting the First Stone
Posted by Mark D. Tooley on Jun 4th, 2010 and filed under FrontPage. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Mark Tooley is President of the Institute on Religion and Democracy (www.theird.org) and author of "Taking Back the United Methodist Church."
The Geneva-based World Council of Churches (WCC) has yet really to condemn the Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia 35 years ago.  Or the Marxist orchestrated famine in Ethiopia that killed almost as many during the 1980’s.  It never directly condemned the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.  Saddam Hussein’s hundreds of thousands of murdered victims also failed to arouse the WCC’s concern across 25 years. Nor has the multitude of crimes by Iran’s theocracy across 30 years interested the WCC.  North Korea’s slave state for the WCC is a place of pilgrimage but not criticism.  Even North Korea’s recent unprovoked torpedoing of a South Korean ship, killing 46 sailors three months ago, has not caused the WCC to peep.
 But the WCC needed less than 24 hours to condemn Israel’s “deplorable” interception of a “peace” flotilla trying to bust the blockade of Hamas-ruled Gaza.  The 9 anti-Israel “peace” activists killed after the Israelis were resisted with metal poles and other weapons, were apparently more sacred to the WCC than the millions of victims slain by communism, Islamists and other anti-Western tyrannies over the last 4 decades.
 “It is with great distress that the World Council of Churches received the news that the Israeli naval forces stormed a Gaza-bound vessel carrying humanitarian aid in international waters before dawn on Monday, killing at least 10 civilians and injuring many more,” immediately bemoaned WCC chief Olav Fykse Tveit.  A Norwegian Lutheran theologian, Tveit seems steadfastly committed to the WCC tradition of bashing only Israel and America.  ”We condemn the assault and killing of innocent people who were attempting to deliver humanitarian assistance to the people of Gaza, who have been under a crippling Israeli blockade since 2007.”

From: Saint Gregory Palamas Monastery
Subject:  Re: Action by the WCC
The WCC and the Soviets for many years favored the same practitioners of genocide and left-wing, anti-American regimes. It should strike everyone that the MP, the WCC, and "Russia" are now aligned in the exact same way. Telling.
Least Among Monks, + AC

Open Letter from Moldova to MP Kyrill

June 2, 2010
CAUTION OPEN LETTER Moldovan Orthodox believers to His Holiness Patriarch Cyril (Updated, added video and subscription)
Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia
Holy Synod
Russian Orthodox Church

Your Holiness!
With dignity to Pervosvetitelskomu rank, with an aching heart, appeal to you, we, the Orthodox believers in Moldova. Throughout the year, we expect that your actions will follow the channel of the patristic tradition, and you will lead the flock of God entrusted to you on the path of salvation. But unfortunately this did not happen, the participation of the ROC MP in the ecumenical movement over the last year significantly stepped up. You have become a political leader and not pechalnikom Russian Land. Your Summit on vsevozvozhnyh conferences on international religious summits pursue another alien to the Orthodox people of goal that you expressed while still a Metropolitan in 1991, the General Assembly of the World Council of Churches in Canberra. Then, denoting the role of the WCC, you said: 
"The World Council of Churches is our common home, and the fact that the Orthodox see it as their home and want to make this house was the cradle of one Church reaffirms the special responsibility for the fate of Orthodox WCC" 
and advised the participants in this "take or suffer to myself, to convey to his people" what happened in the Assembly. Your approval of the then sounded in full harmony with the mission of the WCC, which calls for "co-create the apparent unity of the Church of Christ in one faith and one eucharistic fellowship. Thus, your current actions and utterances are the result of the Russian Orthodox Church in the World Council of Churches and embody the principle enunciated by you then, whose purpose - the creation of a united church, in our understanding of the Church of the Antichrist.

Your Holiness!
We, the undersigned Orthodox believers, being and remaining members of the Russian Orthodox Church, declare that distance ourselves from all your statements on international religious assemblies, meetings and summits in Canberra, Yerevan, Moscow, Baku, etc., all taken by you in the past time steps violate the canons of the Holy Orthodox Church.
We testify that you have no idea, and all of your statements at international meetings do not represent fully the Russian Orthodox Church, as is your personal opinion, and those who share it.
So, not wishing to be complicit in the works of darkness, in the creation of "one church", we demand:

1. Output of the Russian Orthodox Church from the World Council of Churches;

2. Cessation and sentences violate the canons of the Holy Orthodox Church, you and the other hierarchs of the Church and your personal repentance.
Also testify that all those bishops and priests who do not raise their voices in defense of the Mother Church from the evil acts involving her in the heresy of ecumenism, leading to the path of destruction, are themselves advocates of this heresy, and her accomplices, because silence is betrayed by God.
Forward this letter through the Metropolitan of Chisinau and all Moldova Vladimir, a permanent member of the Holy Synod of the ROC.

P.S. So as not able to deliver a letter to Metropolitan Vladimir prior to the meeting of the Holy Synod will send it by registered mail DHL and openly publish.

The appeal was signed on the day of discussion on this issue, May 25, 2010 - 24 clergy and 352 lay.
List of signatories published below.
We call upon all Orthodox Christians, indifferent to the fate of our Mother Church and the long-suffering homeland - Holy Russia, put their signatures under this Open Letter.

Dear brothers and sisters!
Revision Portal drawn upon you to actively disseminate this information and a link to this news, so that more people could subscribe to this letter. Once this open letter was published on the website of the Moldovan newspaper "Toaka" because the site was immediately blocked by our ill-wishers. This once again confirmed the close relationship of the clergy ROC MP, including and the patriarch, with apostasy rulers of this world. 
Yes ban them Lord!

More news on the topic: 
 The website "Our Moldova" can subscribe to an open letter to the Moldovan ...
 Orthodox believers have signed an appeal to the patriarch, offer soslat ...
 "It hurts to see it all"
  A year has passed ... The offensive continued on all fronts
  Metropolitan of Montenegro and the Seaside Amfilohy elected mestoblyustitel Serbian ...
Google Translation from Russian  *click *

Preserving True ROCOR History

In the #2 issue of Missionary Leaflet there is an interview with Mother Agapia where she says:

...Sadly with the union between ROCOR and the MP much of the history of the the ROCOR is being distorted to fit a particular agenda. 

It is important that we do what we can to collect and archive ROCOR materials (journals, magazines, books, photos, memoirs) in order to present and remind people what those luminaries in Jordanville (Archbishop Averky, Archbishop Vitaly, Fr. Konstantin Zaitsev, Fr. Michael Pomazansky, Ivan Andreyev, etc) said and wrote. Their unvarnished legacy is one that is most important for coming to a real understanding of Orthodoxy and its significance for today’s world.   With Metropolitan Agafangel’s blessing we plan to build a library here on the Convent grounds first to collect in one place as many of these materials as we can and then to catalog and present them in such a way that the library can become a real learning center.  Already faithful have begun to send such books and magazines to the Convent and we have begun to sort and catalog them in our residence. It is hoped within a year construction of a separate library can begin. 

If you have extra copies of books and magazines, please send them to the convent.  Also, maybe, will your library to the convent.

Also if you have old editions of books from Platina - there could be in them indications that Fr. Seraphim Rose was definitely NOT headed towards world Orthodoxy, as Platina would like us to believe and has many people believing.  These indications might be found in introductions Fr. Seraphim wrote, or in appendices, or even in the text.  New Platina has edited them out in newer editions. An example is here:


Missionary Leaflet #2
Available in pdf. form by email

This issue is 8 pages and includes convent news, an interview with Mother Agapia, color photos, a writing of Blessed Justin, and more...

MP Is The Bad Step Sister

This is a recent post taken from the Euphrosynos Cafe forum.  It appears that polite discussion about the ROCOR-MP union is still being monitored by pro-unionists positioned in strategic places on the internet.

Re: ROCOR and Moscow Reunification [sic]
by Kybihetz21 » Sun 30 May 2010 9:07 pm
This is a short article I quickly wrote for another site [another forum, not Euphrosynos Cafe forum] where the main administrator had changed the name of the group to reflect a more "lukewarmness" stand (either consciously, or as I am prone to believe, rather unconsciously) toward the MP:

"With all due respect to the group administrator, it is my personal opinion that the title of this group should have remained the same, to show the antagonistic stand of its members. Some will say but why should there be such antagonism against the MP and its past and present members?  Hadn't the ROCA always taught that once the powers of evil left Russia we could unite with the Russian Church in the Fatherland? I will briefly explain my position, quite exhausted but yet firm, on this issue. 

Archbishop Nikodim of Richmond of blessed memory once said that "better no Church than the soviet church". How right and wise were his words. Already for a hierarch that lived during the times when some of the hierarchy of the MP was still comprised of former members of the pre revolutionary Church of Russia (Rossiskaia Tserkov), it was quite apparent that the irreconcilable experiences created by those who chose to betray Christ and His Church were a stumbling block for even any talks of union or communications. 

Some have said that the ROCA's position was not hard enough against the MP until the 70s and 80s, and that afterwards that position returned to the previous, more conciliatory position of the early years. The fact is that, whether for good or bad, any hopes for union with the newly created organism called the MP were solely based on economy toward the faithful, and let's us be honest, nostalgia toward the fact that most of the bishops participant on it were former members of the Russian Church, and in many cases, personal friends. It was quite a shock to those early hierarchs of the ROCOR to see their former fellow brothers in the episcopate act and behave with such an animosity toward them, and offer their entire submission to Belial, not Christ. The hopes that, as done after the Renovationalist schism, some of them were to repent, never died in many of those early hierarchs of the Russian Church in Exile, something which is clearly demonstrated in the return of some of them to the former Russian land after the end of the WWII. 

Eventually, it became quite clear the inner aspect of the newly formed “church”, and as the older hierarchs died out, the newly consecrated episcopacy of the ROCA took upon themselves the task of not only preserving the spirit of the former Church of Russia, but to carry it all over the world, as a light in the darkness of the land of Western heretical thought and syncretistic and neo pagan teachings. It was not until those bishops themselves started to die, than a new nostalgia appeared among those who were being born into the ROCOR. 

I have personally been told by many of the “hard liners”, those that left right after the revolution and the 20s, how it was moot for them to return to a land that was “no longer theirs, no longer Holy Russia”. It was understandable to see how they had realized, very early, the changes that the demonic powers had brought upon the land of their fathers. But then you have those that left the Soviet Union in the 40s and 50s, who had already been diluted with the spirit of the “new man” created by Lenin and Stalin, and who knew no better. Many of them educated their children on the hopes of returning to the “Motherland”, the non existing Holy Russia.

The MP is nothing but the bad step sister, brought in the middle of the night by evil doers and enemies of Christ to replace the suffering and almost dying ancient Church of the All Glorious Orthodox Empire, with the aims to fool and confuse both the clergy and the faithful.

That, along with the influx of thousands of new comers in the 90s, along with the blinding luxuries of the now all powerful MP, convinced many of the need to “unite” with the “Mother Church”, under any circumstances. The newly formed “church” that now rules and governs the needs of the Russian people is not the Russian Church of old. It is not a mother, a sister, a daughter, or any sort of blood relative, of the former Church of Russia, nor of the former, now destroyed, ROCA. The MP is nothing but the bad step sister, brought in the middle of the night by evil doers and enemies of Christ to replace the suffering and almost dying ancient Church of the All Glorious Orthodox Empire, with the aims to fool and confuse both the clergy and the faithful. 

It has not won, but its victory will be apparent, as long as there are some among us that will think of this government organization as a “church” we must look up to, either with the hopes of change, or as the successor of that church that once gloriously gave Russia its Holy name."

Antichrist is within everyone who tries to destroy and divide the Church of Christ (the Orthodox Church).

√ The author, Kybihetz21, clarifies that he never was a member of the MP or under the Laurus Synod.