Церковные ВѢХИ

Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus. Outside the Church there is no salvation, because salvation is the Church. For salvation is the revelation of the way for everyone who believes in Christ's name. This revelation is to be found only in the Church. In the Church, as in the Body of Christ, in its theanthropic organism, the mystery of incarnation, the mystery of the "two natures," indissolubly united, is continually accomplished. -Fr. Georges Florovsky

ΟΡΘΟΔΟΞΙΑ Ή ΘΑΝΑΤΟΣ!

ΟΡΘΟΔΟΞΙΑ Ή ΘΑΝΑΤΟΣ!
§ 20. For our faith, brethren, is not of men nor by man, but by revelation of Jesus Christ, which the divine Apostles preached, the holy Ecumenical Councils confirmed, the greatest and wisest teachers of the world handed down in succession, and the shed blood of the holy martyrs ratified. Let us hold fast to the confession which we have received unadulterated from such men, turning away from every novelty as a suggestion of the devil. He that accepts a novelty reproaches with deficiency the preached Orthodox Faith. But that Faith has long ago been sealed in completeness, not to admit of diminution or increase, or any change whatever; and he who dares to do, or advise, or think of such a thing has already denied the faith of Christ, has already of his own accord been struck with an eternal anathema, for blaspheming the Holy Ghost as not having spoken fully in the Scriptures and through the Ecumenical Councils. This fearful anathema, brethren and sons beloved in Christ, we do not pronounce today, but our Savior first pronounced it (Matt. xii. 32): Whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. St. Paul pronounced the same anathema (Gal. i. 6): I marvel that ye are so soon removed from Him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another Gospel: which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the Gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you, than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. This same anathema the Seven Ecumenical Councils and the whole choir of God-serving fathers pronounced. All, therefore, innovating, either by heresy or schism, have voluntarily clothed themselves, according to the Psalm (cix. 18), ("with a curse as with a garment,") whether they be Popes, or Patriarchs, or Clergy, or Laity; nay, if any one, though an angel from heaven, preach any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. Thus our wise fathers, obedient to the soul-saving words of St. Paul, were established firm and steadfast in the faith handed down unbrokenly to them, and preserved it unchanged and uncontaminate in the midst of so many heresies, and have delivered it to us pure and undefiled, as it came pure from the mouth of the first servants of the Word. Let us, too, thus wise, transmit it, pure as we have received it, to coming generations, altering nothing, that they may be, as we are, full of confidence, and with nothing to be ashamed of when speaking of the faith of their forefathers. - Encyclical of the Holy Eastern Patriarchs of 1848

За ВѢру Царя И Отечество

За ВѢру Царя И Отечество
«Кто еси мимо грядый о нас невѣдущиiй, Елицы здѣ естесмо положены сущи, Понеже нам страсть и смерть повѣлѣ молчати, Сей камень возопiетъ о насъ ти вѣщати, И за правду и вѣрность къ Монарсѣ нашу Страданiя и смерти испiймо чашу, Злуданьем Мазепы, всевѣчно правы, Посѣченны зоставше топоромъ во главы; Почиваемъ въ семъ мѣстѣ Матери Владычнѣ, Подающiя всѣмъ своимъ рабомъ животь вѣчный. Року 1708, мѣсяца iюля 15 дня, посѣчены средь Обозу войсковаго, за Бѣлою Церковiю на Борщаговцѣ и Ковшевомъ, благородный Василiй Кочубей, судiя генеральный; Iоаннъ Искра, полковникъ полтавскiй. Привезены же тѣла ихъ iюля 17 въ Кiевъ и того жъ дня въ обители святой Печерской на семъ мѣстѣ погребены».
Showing posts with label Renovationism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Renovationism. Show all posts

Monday, February 28, 2011

The Scandal of the Cross

What did ye go out into the desert to see?

The words of the Saviour are poignantly addressed to us, not just those who went out in the desert to hear the testimony of St. John the Baptist. Many times, we answer by our lives that we went out to see ourselves and our self righteousness, our wants and desires affirmed by a Prophet of God and our pride and intellectual cloud castles given divine sanction, no matter the inconsistencies and outright moral and theological contradictions involved. We have gone out to the desert so we must be right!

While what we really are denying is the Cross and Precious Blood of Christ who has born our sins and justifed us before the Father by uniting our nature to Him. All we need is to take up the cross and follow Him, to live a Christocentric life and imperative to holiness to allow freely given grace to be operative within us.

Therein lies the scandal: not carrying our cross but daring to act, that we will return to Cyrene and say that we have witnessed it, even assented to it, but never will do it, for to our pride "it is an unrealistic standard," which to us is unnecessary folly. "We have a better way" we have come up with.

But in actuality WE DON'T. No, we must bear the Cross, for it has borne up our sins and washed them away with His Precious Blood shed on it for our salvation.

So today we have in Moscow (and wherever he is sent) a person so scandalized by the Cross and the Church's witness of the life in Christ that he dares to deride it as "superstition," (No, no, the deifying witness of twenty centuries must be modified by a post Soviet "modernization")as a "war of fanatics against wafers (No for Him, Christ is not the "leaven of life" Who is now the Leaven for the "bread of haste"-TO THIS RENOVATIONIST UNIATE, Christ bears no fulfillment of the Holy Scriptures)," a war of the "spiritually ignorant" against papal erudition (Indeed, Timothy Ware and the higher critics know more than the Saints and even the Canons and the Scriptures /which it turns out, "they didn't really write"/, but somehow it MUST BE IGNORED! WARE's NEO RENOVATIONIST ECUMENISTS have missed how the WAY OF ORTHODOX SAINTS ALONE and their pathes have produced the fragrance of deified Holy Relics or even how they faithfully bear witness to the MIND OF CHRIST and the VOICE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT WHO ABIDES WITH HIS CHURCH EVEN TODAY AND SAYS, "I AM GOD, NOT A DEMIGOD. DO NOT BLASPHEME THE WORK OF HOLINESS AND GRACE-I PROCEED FROM THE FATHER."), a "rebellion against the enlightened authority of modernity," (After all, St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite was an innovator according to Professor Erickson, formerly of St. "Vlad's," while the Holy Canons of the Seven Ecumenical Councils are only the bigotry of antiquity-We must accept that heretics have valid Mysteries for modernity mandates a rending of the Body of Christ to achieve this demonia) all without the Saviour, His Precious Blood and the Redemption on the Cross. What did Metropolitan Alfeev come to the Church to see? Not the Cross, but a papal tiara. Has he even ventured into the wilderness?! No, the only cross a Nikodimite will bear is a stamp on a CPSU passport or a scrawling on a vaunted Order of Lenin and the only wilderness he will suffer is a papal concert hall.

Just recently, the OCA has been confronted with the fruits of pushing a FAILED RENOVATIONIST ECUMENIST agenda to the point of suicide. Thoroughly marginal personae have given way to further cover ups of sexual immoralities in at least the persons of the "resting" Archbishop of Canada and the formerly embezzling, male hustling Metropolitan Theodosius. A SECTARIAN ECUMENIST-RENOVATIONIST priest by the name of Father Leonid Kishkovsky seems to think that even by his very name, he is a "true blue" American native while speaking with a Russian accent. The recession is blamed for further declines in membership, now approaching 85% declines of 1976 total membership (It seems, they can't fit that many Orthodox Christians in their churches, but they sure can fit in the Renovationism, the New Calendar, embezzlements and homosexual hierarchs). Metropolitan Jonah has only presided over an increase in flight from and financial ruin for the OCA while his appeals to Anglicans to "forge concordats" for a "new Christian unity in America" have only been met with curses from the Anglicans and reproofs from those Orthodox faithful to the Holy Tradition. Indeed, the way of New Skete comprehensiveness and veneration of clearly spiritually deluded heretics like Francis of Assisi, John of the Cross, Therese of Lisieux, Rowan Williams et al. has not produced any type of spiritual renewal but only affirmed the evil banality and ineffectiveness of the quieted apostasy of ecumenism. No, St. John of San Francisco was never enough for Metropolitan Jonah. Fr. Seraphim (Rose) bore a "cross of bigotry" he would never bear. His mentor Archimandrite Anastassy (Newcomb) was simply a dupe for the "Russian Bishops" who was "too spiritually immature" to get that the scandal of the Cross was "inessential," because modernity's cross offers cheap grace without the Precious Blood with a modern messiah and a Marin County "enlightenment" channeled by a "new" guru preaching inclusiveness and not the "reaction of the Crucifixion." Joan Baez is singing in Bolinas! The OCA is lost, because it has resorted to such charlatans in cassocks with their ecumenist gimmicks and betrayals of Christ. Ersatz "traditionalists" who worship their delusions to simply allow them to see themselves in a mirror, rather than face the love and salvation of Christ IN FAITHFULNESS TO HIM IN HIS SOLE TRUE CHURCH. They don't want to see the Cross.

Over ten years ago now, the Holy Order of MANS group left quasi Greek Old Calendarism (in counterfeit of ROCOR) for mainly the OCA. Since that time, its communities have increasingly become more "modern" and "enlightened" in the Metropolitan Jonah mould. Gone are the Feasts on the Old Calendar, conferences about piety and fasting, "Synodal services," and in Phoenix, AZ all mention of even Platina. Indeed, Bradley Nasif and Frederica Matthews Green are the new gurus. Pews, flower petals, priests in gym shorts and resident charismatic theologians are all the rage. No, the Cross is not only a scandal, but an antique which will be kept in a photo album while we rap our ways to 21st. century American Orthodoxy without "the interference of the Russian Bishops." All that is missing is Shirley McClain and a service to "Mother Goddess Sophia."

In ROCOR, the mask has fallen away and the masonic forces which led Russia to Golgotha and martyred the Royal Family are now unashamedly the "enlightened masters" of ROCOR's fate. Where a Metropolitan denies participation in this luciferian cult while receiving its patronage in Latin American courts to fight schism. And ROCOR silences any talk of a freemasonic Metropolitan. It toils to shout down denunciations OF A SECTARIAN WHO WORSHIPS AT TWO ALTARS. For them, their "precious blood" is precious even when it comes from a thirty third degree black mass, BUT THIS IS NOT THE PRECIOUS BLOOD OF CHRIST, AND IT IS NOT THE SALVATION OF THE CROSS! Indeed, all those years of Red Bating were a camouflage for the truly inherent evil ROCOR sheltered in receiving the freemasons who SACRIFICED RUSSIA to their dark lord. They kept their secrets safe in order to serve them WHEN THE TIME CAME. With this current scandal of a Metropolitan, their time has come. The demons singing in the trees St. John of Kronstadt heard now give concerts against the Cross outside of Synod.

Just recently, the pathetic Neo-Sergianist Pashkovsky of Odessa began commemorating the DEPOSED Patriarch of Jerusalem. Compounding error with folly. The "Authentic Orthodox" of Greece, Bulgaria and Romania maintain Communion with this DEPOSED churchman, even joining in the chorus of condemnation of "party members in cassocks" while failing to recognize that Pashkovsky IS A VERY REAL ORANGE party member in a cassock. Do they even see the Cross? Do they even recognize the Precious Blood that has cleansed their sins in Christ's Church or are they our twenty first century Tartars of Kazan who are bathing in the Volga trying to wash it off? On the cross of Pashkovsky, Christ is not to be found. On his cross, Stepan Bandera and George Soros have opened a Walmart and a theatre devoted to a Passion play for Neo Sergianist schismatics.

Let us pray for the Holy Spirit to lead us in faithfulness to follow Christ in His Holy Church in witness of the sovereign Love of God the Father, to bathe ourselves in Jesus' Precious Blood and carry the Cross which has born away our sins. Let us convict ourselves and renew our faithfulness to Christ and His Church this Lent. Convict ourselves and reflect on how we must overcome ourselves and put on Christ who has put on and saved our humanity.

For His Cross will even save a vile reprobate like me and His Precious Blood washes my sins away. I believe and I confess that HE ALONE IN HIS ONE TRUE CHURCH, HIS PRECIOUS BODY, IS TRULY THE CHRIST, THE SAVIOUR OF ALL MANKIND. I confess with my intellect, my heart, my body and soul, by my entire being.

We all are sinners, and I am much worse the filth than all I have mentioned and beg Christ to help me repent. I recognize my mistake of going out into the wilderness only trying to catch a glimpse of myself to make my pride and falleness hallowed.

Please forgive me, brothers and sisters. God forgives.

Rostislav Mikhailovich Malleev-Pokrovsky, Tserkovnye Vekhi blog

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Relations between the Orthodox Church in America and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia

OCA Holy Synod of Bishops blesses Joint Statement of OCA, ROCOR Commissions
Posted 12/14

SYOSSET, NY [OCA] -- At their fall session held at the Chancery of the Orthodox Church in America here November 16-18, 2010, the members of the Holy Synod of Bishops gave their blessing to the Joint Statement of the Commissions of the Orthodox Church in America and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, titled "Relations Between the Orthodox Church in America and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia.

The Joint Statement was drafted by members of the OCA and ROCOR Commissions at a their meeting in Sea Cliff, NY October 5-6, 2010. [See http://www.oca.org/news/2289 and http://www.oca.org/news/2285 for background information.] The text was submitted to, and received the blessing of, the OCA and ROCOR hierarchs.

The text of the Joint Statement reads as follows.



Relations between the Orthodox Church in America and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia
Joint Statement of the Commissions

of the Orthodox Church in America and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia

+

October 5-6, 2010
The Orthodox Church in America (OCA) and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR) share a single origin – the local Church of Russia – and a long history on the North American continent. It was the Russian Church that first sent missionaries to America, established the first parishes, sent the first bishops and established the first dioceses. Prior to the Bolshevik Revolution, the North American Diocese of the Russian Church was the principal canonical ecclesiastical authority here, and although there were clergy and parishes of differing cultures and languages, many were in the archpastoral care of the bishop of the Russian Orthodox Church. Therefore, there is no question that the formation of multiple jurisdictions on this continent was largely due to the ecclesiastical chaos that ensued after the Revolution of 1917.

The life and witness of the Russian Orthodox Church in the 20th century was marked by violent persecution at the hands of the totalitarian atheist Bolshevik regime brought to power by the communist revolutionaries in 1917. The decades of persecution included the martyrdom of bishops, priests, monastics, and lay people in overwhelming numbers and in numerous killing fields and gulags. Thousands of churches and monasteries were desecrated and destroyed. The voice of the church was silenced in the public arena. Charitable and educational ministries were made illegal. In the midst of massive anti-religious campaigns and by means of unjust laws religious believers, both clergy and lay, were deprived of their rights and put on the margins of society as objects of derision and discrimination.

The decades of persecution were a time of human suffering and genocidal cruelty. These years were also a time of witness to Christ and faithfulness unto death. What the Russian Orthodox Church endured during Soviet rule affected Church life outside Russia.

In the Diocese of the Aleutians and North America, the loss of contact with the Church of Russia and the loss of support from Russia created confusion and even chaos in the midst of uncertainty. From this turmoil emerged the Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church in America (popularly known as the North American Metropolia), which is today the Orthodox Church in America.

For the millions of refugees fleeing from revolution and civil war in Russia and settling in the Balkans and Western Europe, in Asia and the Americas and Australia, there was need to find comfort and support within Church life under new circumstances.

With regard to the situation of the clergy and parishes of the Russian Church that were found abroad, there were two distinct directions that evolved. The first was the striving for a unified central Church Administration which could oversee the ecclesiastical life abroad until conditions would change in the homeland and the Patriarchate, independent of Soviet control, could be restored. The second was the striving toward the establishment of a completely independent self-administered Orthodox Church in North America.

These two directions are the essence of the conflict between the bishops, clergy and parishes which would become the Orthodox Church in America and the bishops, clergy and parishes which would remain part of a central Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia.

However, even after the rupture of relations that occurred at the 7th All American Sobor in 1946, there were periods of close collaboration and mutual support between the North American Metropolia and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. Even when the close collaboration faltered, support and welcome to the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia was offered by the American Metropolia in the period when the Synod of ROCOR bishops moved from Europe to the United States.

On December 11, 1950, a joint meeting of the Metropolitans Anastassy and Leonty and bishops of the Metropolia and ROCOR was held in New York. As noted in the official Minutes of ROCOR’s Council of Bishops, the Metropolia and ROCOR hierarchs had during their meeting “unanimously recognized that the sad fact of ecclesiastical separation causes significant damage to the holy cause of Christ’s Church: it weakens the preaching of Orthodoxy, undermining Church discipline and a sense of responsibility among clergy of the Church, is a temptation for the faithful, diminishes the prestige of the Church in the heterodox world and makes more difficult its struggle with militant atheism. It was unanimously determined that the Church's unity is necessary.”

Those Minutes also note that: “after the discussion of practical ways for achieving Church unity the hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia in conjunction with the bishops of the American Metropolitan See, accordingly recognized that the most appropriate path for that time was the preservation of the existing organizations of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia and the American Metropolia, which will exist in parallel, but will be in close fraternal cooperation between themselves, periodically calling meetings of hierarchs of both Church organizations to resolve common or contentious issues with a firm hope that further ways to more closely achieve canonical unity with God's help will be provided by life itself.”

After the meeting of the two first hierarchs and members of their Synods, the Great Council of Bishops of the North American Metropolia issued an Archpastoral Epistle dated December 2/15, 1950, which included the following statement:

“Let enmity between brothers be abolished and let mutual respect be established on the basis of our mutual acceptance of the co-existence of two paths for the Church in this country, one permanent and one temporary, which are the result of the exceptional sufferings of our time, full of terrible events, and forebodings, imperiously demanding from all the greatest submission to the Lord, the greatest brotherly love and moral support for each other. This does not break, but further strengthens the historical path of our Metropolia.

“What happened after the close of the Council on December 11, i.e. Metropolitan Anastassy twice visiting our newly elected primate at the Holy Protection Cathedral, and the talk that we bishops had which took place the same evening with the hierarchs of the Russian jurisdiction Outside of Russia who visited us, determines the possibility of peaceful life in parallel, subject to internal mutual respect and clear delineation of our canonical rights and historical foundations. The Russian Church Outside of Russia has its own flock in America as well. She has spread her wanderers’ tent in this country, too. Let the peace of God be with its zealous hierarchs, its kind shepherds and its laity!

“Let brotherly love prevail, and let mutual forgiveness of past wrongs be accomplished. The American Metropolia wishes to live in peace with these brethren as well, based on the temporary presence of their hierarchical administration on the territory of America until the future free All-Russian Local Council.

“No treaties or agreements protect this decision of our Church coexistence. It rests upon the requirements of life itself and the clear precepts of the Savior: "By this shall all men know that you are My disciples, if ye have love for one another" (John 13:35).

“The clear and unconditional definition of our own canonical path, made at the 8th All-American Sobor, requires us to have an attitude of brotherly love toward those who, while wishing to preserve their temporarily separate ecclesiastical administrative organization next to ours, are our brothers in Christ.”
Despite these mutual efforts toward establishing brotherly relations, the paths of the Church Outside of Russia and the American Metropolia continued to be separate.

In 1970, by recognizing the self-governing status of the Metropolia with the granting of the Tomos of Autocephaly, eucharistic communion between the Russian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate) and the American Metropolia was restored and reconciliation was achieved.

At the beginning of the 21st century, the deep and extensive changes in Russia with the renewal of church life, the restoration of thousands of churches and monasteries, the freedom to bear public witness to the Gospel in Russian society, a process of dialogue between ROCOR and the Moscow Patriarchate led to the restoration of canonical unity through the Act of Canonical Communion in 2007.

It is now time for the Orthodox Church in America and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia to declare together in the spirit of mutual repentance and mutual forgiveness that we are committed to living together as brothers in Christ and as sister Churches, and to sharing a common witness to the Gospel of Christ and the Holy Orthodox Faith. This common witness should most clearly and most fully be expressed in eucharistic communion.

In addition, we see the need to work together in harmony on joint projects, such as pastoral education, parish schools, student outreach, translations of services, ministering to the poor and needy, and missionary efforts. To work in harmony we will need to reflect together on theological, pastoral, and liturgical issues which we face in our ministry in North America. We also affirm the need to examine together and develop a common understanding of the historical record concerning our churches. These hopes and endeavors can be encouraged and advanced through periodic meetings of our first hierarchs, bishops, clergy and laity to discuss matters of mutual concern, including those theological, liturgical and pastoral issues.

We are committed to the processes and goals expressed in the Chambesy accords of June 2009, specifically the active participation of both our Churches in the regional Episcopal Assembly as we strive to achieve Orthodox unity on this continent.

The following text from the Epistle of the Holy Apostle Paul to the Ephesians is addressed to us, and therefore to the believers of the Orthodox Church in America and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia: “I … beseech you to walk worthy of the calling with which you were called, with all lowliness and gentleness, with longsuffering, bearing with one another in love, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in you all” (Ephesians 4: 1-6).

We ask for the intercession and blessing of the Holy Hierarch Tikhon, Patriarch and Confessor of Moscow and Enlightener of North America and all the saints who have shone forth on this continent as we labor “for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ” (Ephesians 4: 12).

OCA Commission

Bishop TIKHON of Philadelphia
and Eastern Pennsylvania (Chair)

Archpriest Leonid Kishkovsky
Archpriest Alexander Garklavs
Archpriest John Erickson
Igumen Alexander (Pihach)
Alexis Liberovsky (consultant) ROCOR Commission

Bishop GEORGE of Mayfield (Chair)

Archimandrite Luke (Murianka)
Archpriest Alexander Lebedeff
Archpriest David Moser
Priest Peter Jackson
Archpriest Seraphim Gan (consultant)

A Russian translation of the text may be found at http://www.synod.com/synod/2010/12rocorocastatement.html."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



http://www.oca.org/news/2353



Tserkovnye Vekhi Responds:

Christ is Born! Give Ye Him Glory!

Beloved Brothers & Sisters in Christ,

We should be thankful to the Mother Church for coordinating this new era of pan-Russian Orthodox unity in North America. Such events as the restoration of Communion between Russian Orthodox brothers are blessed occurences, even when the auspices and personages associated with these events are less than ideal. While such an event inspires us to not only support such a step at unity but to broaden its scope to include other jurisdictions functioning in North America. Great opportunities for the Russian Orthodox mission await.

As a rejoinder to the OCA commentary on this joyous occasion, it is necessary to note that, no, the FICTION of an OCA feverishly seeking to derussify itself and create an American fiction out of a Russian (or post Russian) immigrant reality is shockingly appalling to read "as an official history" here YET AGAIN. While it is true that the ultimate goal of the Russian mission was and is A NORTH AMERICAN LOCAL CHURCH (As opposed to an "autocephaly" seemingly annulled with the latest concordats with the Phanariots), it must be reiterated that these things don't artificially transpire or "spontaneously coalesce by a fiat declared in conjuncition with Nikodimites" but are the result of a natural process of RETENTION of the core of believers of ones missions and the broadening of their ranks with native populations (and generations) on the missionary territory on which they function.

Disparaging RUSSIAN HERITAGE MUST STOP IMMEDIATELY IN THE OCA, and this occasion should be taken to not only ratify a better relationship with ROCOR but with the entire RUSSIAN Orthodox (AND "Orthodox Traditionalist" or "Authentic" or "Catacomb" or "Old Rite," etc.) immigrant community, within and without the OCA, to express regrets for the disturbingly unwarranted "Americanizations" which only engendered the most myopic of russophobias and created a climate of alienation which has resulted in the nullification OF THE MISSIONARY ROLE the Mother Church has assigned to its NORTH AMERICAN DAUGHTER. Loss of ones core of believers and 80%+ (and still declining!) of its membership is something for the OCA to lament and overcome. An embarassing era of OCA "nativism" has cost the Orthodox mission in this nation, on this continent, and it must be addressed satisfactorily if the OCA is to survive.

With ROCOR, many historical issues of cessation of intercommunion with the OCA still remain in regularizing the North American mission:

1). Renovationism, liturgical, canonical, theological, Patristic, Scriptual and otherwise. It must be cemented in the minds of all THAT THE SEVENTH ECUMENICAL COUNCIL SPECIFICALLY ANATHEMIZES ALL INNOVATIONS (it also condemns musical instruments in Orthodox worship).
2). Ecumenism and sectarian "dialogues" with the heterodox which have resulted in HERETICAL ecclesiological "concordats," crypto-Uniatism (Something the OCA was initially created to combat), HERETICAL ecclesiologies and endorsements of such SECTARIAN documents as the WCC's BEM, and a general denominationalist approach to Orthodox identity and purpose in North America. It is not without reason that the OCA has blunted its message and become BANAL in proferring a model of an "ACCEPTED POST RUSSIAN AMERICAN (RUSSOPHOBIC) DENOMINATION" "adapting to the American religious mainstream" which SECTARIANs like Fr. Kishkovsky (and Fr. LebedeV) envision as a "fellow denomination."
3). Not only a spiritual immaturity, but a total immaturity in approach to catechizing and churching both "cradle" and "convert" Orthodox Christians. The OCA as it has imploded has disastrously lost what resources and institutions it even had. Moreover, it remains a "post Russian" (not ethnically American!) body primarily as opposed to a LOCAL expression of Orthodoxy. There is no American Orthodoxy even in sight. Sadly, the OCA offers no acceptible paradigms for its advent.
4). New Calendarism. Lack of liturgical unity and rejection of the Holy Canons of Nicea for the ROBBER SYNOD of 1923, which even the Greek churches have in actuality abrogated (viz. RESTORATION OF THE JULIAN PASCHALION, REJECTION OF SECOND MARRIAGES FOR PRIESTS AND DEACONS AND A MARRIED EPISCOPATE, RETENTION OF BEARDS, CASSOCKS, ORTHODOX FASTING, FOREGOING DENIGRATION OF MONASTICISM, etc.) emphasizing that this 1923 Phanariot convention of Greek Renovationists is at best DUBIOUS by the very fact the Greek Robbers have themselves UNILATERALLY "uncanonically" altered and postponed its decisions. If they don't even respect their schismatic and heretical innovations, how can we?! There are no canonical grounds for the IMPOSITION of the Calendar Reform in the OCA while the fact the Mother Church retains the Orthodox Calendar makes this act at very least quasi-schismatic.

Yes, it is true that St. Tikhon felt it both possible and even necessary to implement a "new calendar" for Western missions, but when he learned the auspices of the way the current GREEK calendar reform was implemented, he ANNULLED the adoption of it by the Russian church and condemned it as "uncanonical" and an "INNOVATION WHICH PRECIPITATES SCHISM." The witness of such luminaries as St. Alexis Mechev is clear in relating the Russian church's reasons for non-adoption and condemnation of the GREEK calendar reform. The theological writing and acumen of St. Seraphim of Bulgaria cements it.

Likewise, the OCA with its first hierarchs from Metropolitan Platon to Metropolitan Leonty to even Metropolitan Ireney were at best "UNCOMFORTABLE" with the prospect of a calendar reform and generally patently opposed to it as something which "promoted unnecessary disharmony and divisions" (ie schism). It must be noted that when it was propagandized in the OCA in the late 1970s and early 1980s, that noteable hierarchs like the Bishops of S. Canaan and of Alaska openly called it "UNWARRANTED" and "SCHISM."

Thus its implementation has proven UNCANONICAL, SCHISMATIC, ruinous and unscrupulous in the OCA. It has failed in its stated goal of "Americanization." While honouring the American federal holiday of Christmas in nowise means that a given community becomes illegitimate in observing the Orthodox celebration of this Feast on the Orthodox Calendar. Such an observance does not necessarily embody a celebration of "two Christmases," but merely a broadening of what in the West is usually understood as a festive season of "Christmastime." Moreover, simply instructing parishes to be sensitive to Orthodox observance of the Nativity by OFFERING Christmas services on the 7, January AS WELL (at a minimum) in no wise causes acrimony with a Western religious custom which observes Christmas until the 6, January traditionally. One more day only preserves the joy and sacredness of Christmas in the West. If anything, with the rise of a new militant secularism in North America, it acts as a statement for Christ and Christmas and aids in reaffirming the sacredness of the Christmas season FOR ALL AMERICANs. Just as a variant Paschalion for Orthodox Christians exists without any great stress on the missionary witness of Orthodoxy, so too Orthodox observance of Christmas can only make it holier FOR ALL!

It must also be remembered that the US federal holiday DOES NOT RECOGNIZE THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST but merely honours Him (and Christmas) as a profound moral teacher with universal secular significance. That is all. Thus, the christological implications for associating Orthodox worship with artificial standards of such "patriotism" become shockingly evident. Arius would cringe.

It is understood that in all cases restoring the Orthodox Calendar (at least summarily) could indeed cause unnecessary upheavals in a thoroughly failed OCA. But gradual restoration (at least for the OCA "post Russian" dioceses) by episcopal observances and monastic mandates could provide a better approach to settling this unnecessary division. Dioceses and parishes should be generally allowed to return to the Orthodox Calendar while statements should be issued that 1). The Mother Church views the calendar innovation as too controversial to implement & 2). The Mother Church awaits resolution of this issue when a future Synod of Ecumenical Character can address it. THUS 3). Prudence is dictated in both having the OCA favour the Orthodox Calendar, its restoration, BUT as an act of pastoral economy, retention of the GREEK calendar reform can be observed by ECONOMY by communities who otherwise would become divided by its abolition. BUT the issue is not settled and awaits an Orthodox consensus.

5). Freemasonry in North America, although condemned by both the OCA and ROCOR (and the Russian church as a whole), should be better addressed and further rejected, especially when there are even hierarchical temptations and scandals which have arisen in regard to its evil influences and doctrine.

6). Both the OCA and ROCOR (and the Patriarchal /MP/ Administration) should use this occasion to restore a COMMON organism of North American Orthodox unity. While a Russian emphasis may indeed be at best only marginal in necessity today, a need for a Traditional Orthodox mission remains and needs to be reinvigorated in ONE institution. This institution must act and act quickly to normalize its missionary work, its work in catechesis and churching of American Orthodox.

The Russian mission in North America needs to, yes, appreciate the historical identity of Russian Orthodoxy not as an "Eastern Slavic Orthodoxy" or phyletism, but a church at its outset which united Scandinavians (who ruled Rus'), Slavs (of all regionalisms), Finns, Balts, Khazars, Bulgars, Turks, Tartars, Avars (Hungarians), Roma, Caucasians even Germans in one common religious and cultural identity, respectful to the ethnic traditions of these people with a thrust to not "reinforce Russian cultural imperialism" but Rus' as a unifying center (post tribal, not at all "nationalist") affirming the fundamental Truth and doctrine of Orthodoxy AS THE ONE TRUE CHURCH.

That is what is fundamentally meant by Russian Orthodoxy (or its multi ethnic model which was observed in other historical churches such as the Church of Byzantium, Antioch, Alexandria, even Bulgaria). So Russian Orthodoxy IS NOT concerned with "preservation of the /Great/ Russian ethnos" but exists as a unifying force for disparate peoples in affirming Orthodoxy. In 988 AD, Rus' was a Russo-Scandinavian state, and multi-ethnic/cultural and lingual. So too an American outgrowth of Russian Orthodoxy as it is blessed by God and matures into a local church, which all of us Russian Orthodox in North America are called to accomplish TOGETHER. This means not an absorption into an ethnic Russian Orthodoxy, but, rather, an adaptation of its model of multi-ethnic unification and heritage. We need not be ashamed of SS Vladimir and Olga ever, Metropolitan Jonah! Nor do we need your venerations of Francis of Assisi, Therese of Lisieux or John of the Cross to be "legitimately" Western and Orthodox!

No, we need our OWN Cyrils and Methodiuses and our OWN holy rulers and ascetics and even martyrs and confessors HERE, ORTHODOX (not HERETICAL!) Saints. Metropolitan Jonah, Orthodoxy IS NOT CALLED TO SOME ECUMENIST AND "QUIET" UNIA /ANGLICAN COMPREHENSIVENESS/ AS YOU ADVOCATE AS AN UNCONVERTED SECTARIAN! Orthodoxy is called to be the ONE TRUE CHURCH FOR ALL MEN ALONE, the beauty, light, love and joy of the world.

Where Russian Orthodoxy is specifically a MORE FIT MODEL for America lies in the fact of its model of multi-ethnicity as opposed to the MODERN "neoGreek" model of cultural, political (and even racial) exclusivism. Yes, OCA propaganda was correct in assessing that cultural assimilation generationally makes ethnic subcultures unenduring paradigms BUT WRONG IN ASCRIBING THAT IDENTITY TO ITS RUSSIAN ORTHODOXY, ITS SHAME AT OUR COMMON HERITAGE. Thus, THE PRESCRIPTION OF THE AMERICANIZERS HAS DESTROYED THE OCA BASED ON AN IGNORANCE ROOTED IN A FALSE PREMISE. It is sad that most of the Americanizers in the OCA were at least partially of Russian heritage. Pathetic.

No, the ROCOR paradigm of a messianic diaspora is not realistic either. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with being Russian until it intrudes on being Orthodox and converting the communities which surround our parishes into Orthodoxy. No Orthodox Church, inner city or rural or in Fr. Meyendorff's "ethnic ghettoes," CAN BE PERMITTED TO CLOSE but must simply spread the light of Christ where it is shining and welcome all with a loving embrace, in Russian, Romanian, Ukrainian, or even English, Spanish, French or Vietnamese.

A common language has to be found for all, and a common language for theology, Patristics and liturgy must frame its basis. English (or Spanish) is the natural language of the majority and must be respected and presented in a dignified form in traditional worship. While the challenge of our seminaries and scholars is to forego Orthodoxy in Russian and Slavonic(Romanian/Serbian/Bulgarian, etc.) translation but to find a mode of instruction of Patristic Greek /Katherevousa/ in providing a universal tongue of scholarship and liturgy for our NATIVE Orthodoxy. Instead of Russo-Byzantinism, we are called to mature to an Amero-Byzantinism. There is nothing wrong with ethnic heritage, but we must realize that we are not building or restoring Russia (or any other faraway nation or empire). We are building and restoring Orthodoxy to the West and specifically to North America.

Thus we are called to consider ending ethnic divisions amongst the "jurisdictions" as well as overcoming "political" ones and continuing the work of ENDING the religious counterfeit of UNIA. That means calling what is left of certain communities to a COMMON and SHARED SINGLE mission in North American Orthodoxy:

1). Russians and Russian Dissidents.
2). Carpatho Russians, all Rusins.
3). Byelorussians.
4). Ukrainians (or "Little Russians").

But also:

5). Serbs.
6). Macedonians.
7). Bulgarians.
8). Albanians.
9). Romanians, Moldavians, Georgians, etc.

And also:

10). Uniates parasitizing Orthodox local churches and "jurisdictions" of every stripe. UNIA must be brought to an end, either by its TOTAL absorption by the Latins in its papal depravity or by the return of Uniates to the ONE TRUE CHURCH, Orthodoxy.

One church and ONE unity is necessary now, one TRADITIONAL AMERICAN LOCAL ORTHODOXY IN FORMATION. ONE NORTH AMERICAN LOCAL CHURCH.

While the approach of the Antiochians and their inclusion with us in ONE MISSION must be greeted with a special favour where 2nd., 3rd., 4th., 5th., 6th., etc. generations as well as new North American converts must be reached with a "kerygmatic" or "evangelical" activism coupled with traditional Orthodox churching and life. We aren't called to make America ethnic but to make America Orthodox and to frame a North American cultural and religious identity in Orthodoxy. The Antiochian approach can not only make us stronger but help us to reach those generationally lost for whatever reason and establish for us not only an "acceptance" but a "significance" and positive influence for all the peoples and governments of North America. A new symphonia and a more Apostolic model of Church-state interaction is not only necessary but possible for North America.

These observations are written to appreciate the restored intercommunion between "branches of the Russian church" and tempered by a love of and well wishing for a common and shared success for Orthodoxy in the West. Orthodoxy is the Pearl of Great Price, the Body of Christ, mystically redeeming the world in Him in the eschaton. It is the sole True Church and outside of it there can be no salvation, for salvation is the Church, is the thenthropic, mystagogical justification of humanity in Christ Jesus in the Eighth Day. Fr. Florovsky's words and emphasis ring ever more true and requisite for us and especially for the future today. Let us celebrate intercommunion and develop a new unity and a stronger missionary Orthodoxy. Let us celebrate this restoration of brotherhood and look forward to a future Feast of one North American Orthodoxy culminating in not only an autocephalous North American local church, but even a majority North American local church.

ORTHODOXIA I THANATOS!

Rostislav Mikhailovich Malleev-Pokrovsky, Tserkovnye Vekhi Blog

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Beneath Contempt ( A Second Open Letter To Fr. Andrew Phillips & The Clerics Of ROCOR)

Otche Blagoslovite.

It has now been nearly a month since my initial correspondence to you. You have as yet not responded. On your website, Orthodox England, you have felt it necessary to provide your readers with a Russian history lesson and a list of Russian freemasons, which curiously omits many of the ne'er thee wells of the last Duma as well as the Provisional Government and Army, not to mention the former Imperial House, viz. the "Nikolaevichi" and "Vladimirovichi." Pathetically, you also fail to mention YOUR OWN Metropolitan in that list and his Latin American "concordats" which have resulted in certain "juridicial advantages" for a ROCOR unwanted and morally compromised in the eyes of Latin American believers.

But you do make one curious statement which reads roughly, "Of course, it is well known that the freemasons were responsible for the overthrow of the Russian monarchy." Then you leave it at that. No mention of Arthur Ransome's DIRECTED role in the Rasputin slander of the Holy New Martyr Tsarina Alexandra and the martyred Tsarevny, DIRECTED BY AMBASSADOR BUCHANAN AND THE BRITISH FOREIGN OFFICE (BFO). You curiously fail to mention how that BFO directed the strikes and Duma reaction to them in those days of late february. You fail to mention that that BFO essentially appointed the "provisional" (USURPER!) governments, be they that of Lvov or especially that of Kerensky. You fail to mention that that BFO encouraged the "dual rule" which transpired as a result of the February White Treason and had a hand in the various soviets as well as their orchestration of an "arrangement" with Lenin and the Bolsheviks as a result of the "July Days" of the FREEMASON AND TRAITOR (The Bolsheviks were ARMED by Kerensky at the suggestion of Arthur Ransome through the BFO), General Kornilov. You also curiously fail to mention that the White Movement was started by these same Russian freemasons and that they WERE IN NO WAY INTERESTED IN RESTORING THE LEGITIMATE RULER OF ALL THE RUSSIAs, BUT WERE, FOR ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES, ATTEMPTING TO ORGANIZE A WESTERN FREEMASONIC PLEIBESCITE AGAINST THE BOLSHEVIKS, WHO VACILLATED BETWEEN BRITISH & PRUSSIAN PATRONAGE. After all, Arthur Ransome relayed intelligence to the Bolsheviks and Trotsky at the behest of the BFO, in turn receiving intelligence on Prussian activities in Russia. Arthur Ransome, who was so ever present at meetings of Bolshevik soviets, even in the aftermath of the April Theses of 1917.

Perhaps, you weren't so fully aware of these things and the role of your VILE nation, Britain, a nation increasingly GODLESS BY POPULAR VOLITION and a pioneer in the "renunciation of baptism" movement poisoning the "New Europe," in the savagery and atrocities YOUR GOVERNMENT SET IN MOTION on Russian soil. Or is guilt for the martyrdom of old Russia something you wish to "politely ignore"?! How +Kallistos Ware of you. Enough of your cowardice and presumption. You have entered the Russian church and are beholden TO THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX people and not vice versa. YOU WILL NOT IGNORE THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX PEOPLE IN DIASPORA OR TREAT THEM WITH CONTEMPT. HOW DARE YOU?!

Did you miss that the Russian church hierarchy GREETED FEBRUARY AND TRIED TO INGRATIATE ITSELF TO THE VARIOUS PROVISIONAL, "WHITE" (FREEMASONIC!) GOVERNMENTS OR THAT YOUR OWN METROPOLITAN IS AT VERY LEAST "ASSOCIATED WITH THE CRAFT" IN LATIN AMERICA?! Is it not BENEATH CONTEMPT to have a Metropolitan associated with the VERY PEOPLE you admit responsible for the Russian February Revolution and the horrors that befell Russia in its aftermath?! Is it not BENEATH CONTEMPT to allow a person COMPROMISED BY LUCIFERIAN ASSOCIATIONS to be your ruling hierarch without so much as a dot of spittle from your refined and "traditionalist" ROCOR "loyal opposition"?! Or is worship of Lucifer "a perfectly acceptible English avocation" in "some circles"?!

Moreover, have you managed to notice that the ROCOR website, managed by such (in-)credible Judases as Fr. Seraphim Gan, Fr. Alexander Lebedev, and Bishop Jerome (The former Fr. John Shaw, who, AFTER OVER FORTY YEARS AND EPISCOPAL CONSECRATION, STILL HAS NOT BEEN BAPTIZED IN THE ORTHODOX CHURCH, the UNA SANCTA. Since when did ROCOR adopt the WCC's BEM?!) has perpetuated your folly with wrath, albeit with more honesty. Metropolitan Alfeev's odious and sectarian FILTH is something they cherish there, calling him their "beloved Metropolitan Ilarion." It seems they want to distinguish between their freemasonic Hilarion and their crypto-Uniate, Renovationist, HERETIC "Ilarion." They do so ever enjoy parading images of photo opportunities between Anglican HIEROSODOMITES and your ROCOR Archbishop of San Francisco. The images that stirs of the "faithful" he ministers are appallingly inappropriate. Is this his "Christian concession" to "San Francisco values"?! The ROCOR site even relishes photo ops with a pretender to the Throne of All the Russias, whose direct ancestors were freemasons and at the gates of the Winter Palace in 1917, threatening the Tsarevich, the Tsarina and the Tsarevny. It seems they like association with such unrepentent ENEMIES OF THE RUSSIAN MONARCHY AND THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE. After all, the Grabbes and Rodziankos were/are "esteemed" churchmen of ROCOR, are they not?! Or is Fr. Potapov's matushka "not to blame" for pursuing the SAME COURSE OF BETRAYAL AND MARTYRDOM OF RUSSIA her grandfather perpetrated with abandon and revolutionary fervour?

Where is your "history lesson" for them, Father?

I personally attended seminary with the man who is now Fr. Seraphim Gan. He was a boy then fresh out of high school, all of eighteen years when he entered. I noticed then a proclivity to slavish fealty to the various cliques which surround ROCOR hierarchs and their "agendas" along with a thorough awe of Russian officialdom, often at the expense of even a modicum of understanding of fundamental Orthodoxy or Russian history. At that time, when Jordanville was still baiting the "Paris school" (Which you still perpetuate), this FRAUD, who was to become Fr. Seraphim Gan, "cultivated" by a certain hierarchical clique, found it so very "Russian" and "sophisticated" to "try" to ruminate on the "Russian theology" of Fr. Sergius Bulgakov, Nicholas Berdiaev, Anton Kartashev and other personae of the Paris school, always failing to mention its more sober representatives like Archimandrite Kiprian (Kern) and speaking with disdain for traditionally Orthodox churchmen like Fr. Georges Florovsky and Vladimir Lossky, who at one time or another had some association with the Institute of Saint Sergius. When it was brought to his attention on occasion that Fr. Bulgakov and his teaching was condemned by ROCOR and the MP as HERETICAL, Fr. Gan found that to be "typical" of the "old school" and intimated its "boorish lack of enlightenment" in hushed conversation. Witnessing where he has piloted ROCOR's website has only confirmend appreciation for the contempt this cleric has for Russian Orthodox traditional theologians and traditional Russian Orthodoxy.

His grandfather, being of a confessor temperament, would disown this Judas as a bareheaded Renovationist, something which he considered even more vile than a "sergianist." Alas, his grandson has demonstrated his esteem for TRUE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX THEOLOGY AND TRADITIONALISM. Sic transit gloria mundi.

Curiously, where has your "variance" with the ROCOR website and certain ROCOR "personae" been, Fr. Phillips? Where were your words when Fr. Lebedev UNILATERALLY vacated the decisions of the San Francisco ROCOR sobor, which predicated reunion with the Patriarchate only after ecumenical activity was renounced and cessation of participation in the WCC called upon to be permanent?! Why did you not cite your "traditional Orthodoxy" and "fidelity to the Russian historical church" then?! Where are your words today when your Archbishop Arndt is praying with heretics and also pursuing freemasonic associations in the "New Europe"?!

To be an Orthodox cleric and yet so disingenuous and dishonest is, frankly, beneath contempt, but ever so +Kallistos Ware in modus operandi, quite dishonestly English.

Of course, by now you have become aware of Elder Raphael's call to act to safeguard the Russian church from (neo-)Unia and the Nikodimite orientation which is threatening Russian Orthodox renewal and perverting it as this correspondence is typed. Why is it you choose to ignore it in your +Kallistos Warean "confessorship"?! Why is it you choose to ignore that the HERETICAL Metropolitan of Volokolamsk has been instructed to advance the RENOVATIONIST agenda of the "Eighth Ecumenical Council" with the UNIATIZING EP, an agenda which includes not only an imprimatur for the New Calendar but a new paschalion, recognition of "papal primacy," formal adoption of "Two Lungs Ecclesiology" (Wasn't this condemned at the 2000 Moscow Sobor as "unacceptible and heretical ecumenism"?!), recognition of Latin "sacraments," second and third marriages for Priests and even Bishops, and the list goes on and on?! Perhaps, your +Kallistos Wareanism and its intentional deception and hypocrisy finds comfort in this orientation and its celebration by the ROCOR website. After all, it would allow you to not jettison your Anglican baggage (along with your Bishop Jerome and your Archbishop Arndt), would it not and be a triumph of the "comprehensiveness" of your (former?) Anglican "denomination"?!

Tell us, Father, how you reacted to the deposition of Bishop Diomid and condemnation of his anti-ecumenism by your European ROCOR Bishops, who then proceeded to vote for the election of a Nikodimite and his curia to rule the Moscow Patriarchate?! Perhaps, the neo-Nikonianism inherent in such betrayal of Russian Orthodoxy is what attracted you to silence and "appreciating the foresight and propriety" of such Iscariotism.

Tell us, Father, have you ever encountered the Russian expression "GOD IS NOT MOCKED!"?!

No, Father, your deception and BETRAYAL of Orthodoxy, historical Russian Orthodoxy in this instance, is beneath contempt.

These correspondences are being addressed to you, Father, for you presume to "wear the mantle" of Orthodox Traditionalism in the New ROCOR. While, your fellow ROCOR clergy are also addressed in commensurate condemnation of their betrayal of Orthodoxy in a spiritual counterfeit they are perpetrating with you. Your lack of shame, of honesty, of fundamental Christian decency is hatefully beneath contempt; while the ROCOR flock is being informed of YOUR COMPLICITY in the Nikodimite ruin that is overshadowing the Russian church today.

You, Father, along with those clergy who walk your path of betrayal with you, will not relish reformation of the Orthodox Church. You will be held to account and stopped.

Of course, an explanation for your willful betrayal of Christ's Church and the Russian local church would be appreciated. Perhaps an understanding as to why your "Traditionalism" lacks such consistency and why the Anglican petticoat shows even upon a cursory examination of your misdeeds. Please explain for the ROCOR faithful (and those of the Russian church as a whole) just what exactly you are trying to accomplish with your "confessorship." Can it be that your "sin by silence" is something not fully understood and appreciated even by yourself?!

Do tell us, Father. Do condescend from your Warean perch to enlighten the "unwashed" (Yet Bishop Jerome celebrates he truly is unwashed?!) and explain to us the contradictions inherent in your "Orthodox pastorship."

Perhaps, your fellow ROCOR clerics can also explain why they tolerate freemasonry establishing itself amongst the ROCOR higher clergy and their acceptance of the Alfeev-Lebedev neo-Mysteriology and its accompanying ecclesiology.

They are your contemporary St. Cyprians of Carthage it seems.

That is, of course, when you can emancipate yourself of the notion that you are "above the Russian Orthodox flock" and "don't have to answer to them."

No, Father, in a good year, your silence and haughtiness would be a disgrace to Russian Orthodox clerics and a statement of false "traditionalism," but in this Nikodimite season of neo-Unia, you and those ROCOR clerics with you have become reminiscent of the handful at Brest in 1596 who proclaimed a "submission to the Holy Father" they had already made in 1595 at the behest of the Polish crown.

The holy memory of such Russian confessors as St. Athanasius of Brest and St. Germogen of Moscow sits in judgement of those ROCOR "traditionalists" like yourself. Perhaps, you might mention them in your next Warean "history lesson" and explain to us why the House of Romanov was chosen to rule Russia in 1613 in the face of Polish attempts at conquest and unia.

This correspondence is written, Father, for the benefit of the Russian flock that they see you and your compatriots for who they are, that they begin appreciating the threat your quiet betrayals and ommissions foreshadow. You ROCOR clerics are betraying Orthodox Russia and the Russian land and people in your feigned "traditionalism."

ORTHODOXIA I THANATOS! (Have you encountered the Lives of the Holy Martyrs of Zographou yet?)

Rostislav Mikhailovich Malleev-Pokrovsky, Tserkovnye Vekhi Blog

Saturday, June 19, 2010

"Православную Русскую Церковь можно сейчас потерять".

Открытое обращение афонского старца Рафаила (Берестова) к архипастырям и пастырям РПЦ МП


Дорогие Архипастыри и пастыри Русской Православной Церкви, обращаюсь к вам я, убогий монах Рафаил (Берестов).

Враги нашего спасения, враги Божии, решительно перешли в наступление и готовят унию и решительными действиями хотят направить Православную Церковь на путь погибели, на путь унии.


В наше время действуют разные ложные учения и ложные толкования богословские, потому что мы, все человечество, повреждено прелестью. Это великая прелесть, когда хотят стереть догматы, стереть границы церковные, это величайшая бесовская прелесть и сейчас совершенно не видят этих границ и не подчиняются ни канонам, ни догматам церковным, утвержденных на семи Вселенских Соборах, и которые суть столп и утверждение истины (1 Тим. 3,15). Идет война, духовная война, война сатаны с Богом, через Церковь, чтобы исказить истину и чтобы Дух Святый, Дух Истины ушел из Церкви, когда она соединится с еретиками. Для этого и готовят сейчас унию, это только первый этап, чтобы соединит Святую Православную Церковь в унию с еретиками-католиками и признать папу главенствующим над Святой Церковью. Еретика, чтобы он главенствовал над Святой Церковью?!em>


Это ересь - католическая, папистская! И она поведет за собой то, что Дух Святый, Дух Истины уйдет из Церкви, и все кто примут это и будут поминать папу, они уже не будут православными, а будут еретиками- католиками. Или это сделают лукаво. Скажут: "поминайте Патриарха вашего", а Патриарх будет поминать папу. Это тоже лукавство. Если Патриарх будет поминать папу, значит он католик, а не православный. Мы же, православные, не будем поминать патриарха- католика.

Я обращаюсь ныне к вам решительно, господие мои, митрополиты, архиепископы и епископы РПЦ, пришел час, когда уже нельзя молчать, а надо твердо заявить свое НЕТ: НЕТ - экуменизму! НЕТ - унии! НЕТ - папизму! НЕТ - католицизму! НЕТ - глобализму! НЕТ - сергианству! НЕТ- обновленчеству и новообновленчеству!

Я вам предлагаю созвать свой Поместный Собор Русской Церкви, без иерархов, которые заражены ересями и осудить все ереси, которые накопились у некоторых представителей церковных. Церковь свята, поэтому в ней не могут содержаться мнения ложные.

То что официальные представители Церкви хотят на этом этапе соединится с папизмом и признать папу во главе Церкви, это только начало падения. В дальнейшем они - враги Божии, враги нашего спасения, не остановятся, они непременно будут соединятся со всеми, будто бы христианами. Но когда соединятся со всеми протестантами, униатами, всякими монофелитами, монофизитами, баптистами, будто бы исповедующими христианство, они не остановятся. Они готовят "церковь" сатаны, они будут соединятся с мусульманской религией, с иудейской сатанинской религией, с буддистской и даже с сатанистами всяких толков и с шаманами, как они это уже практиковали на экуменических сборищах.

Итак, решительно вас призываю, господие мои, Преосвященнейшие РПЦ, встать за истину церковную, дальше молчать нельзя. "За нами Москва - отступать некуда!", дальше пятится, значит погибнуть. Вы знаете, Православную Русскую Церковь можно потерять, как потеряла вся Европа Православие. Православие уйдет в катакомбы, оно останется, само учение Православия непобедимо.


Церковь Христова - непобедимый столп (1 Тим. 3,15), но сколько людей сколько миллионов попадут в лапы бесов... Представляете..?

Итак, я призываю вас, дорогие Архипастыри, встать на защиту веры Православной против всех ересей и расколов. А если будете молчать, с вами будет судиться Серафим Саровский, и Христос страшно вас обвиняет, если вы не встанете на защиту Православия:


"Мне, убогому Серафиму, Господь открыл, что на земле Русской будут великие бедствия. Православная вера будет попрана, архиереи Церкви Божией и другие духовные лица отступят от чистоты Православия, и за это Господь тяжко их накажет. Я, убогий Серафим, три дня и три ночи молил Господа, чтобы он лучше меня лишил Царствия Небесного, а их помиловал. Но Господь ответил: "Не помилую их: ибо они учат учениям человеческим, и языком чтут Меня, а сердце их далеко отстоит от Меня"...

Всякое желание внести изменения в правила и учения Святой Церкви есть ересь... хула на Духа Святого, которая не простится вовек. По этому пути пойдут архиереи Русской земли и духовенство и гнев Божий поразит их..."

Покайтесь, пока Господь терпит.


И русский народ вас в отступничестве не поддержит, вы будете как изменники, как предатели, как иуды. И только те Архиереи, которые останутся верны Церкви и Христу, будут в Церкви святой, Православной.

Православный Поместный Собор необходимо собрать, если официальные представители согласятся с "волчьим" 8-м Собором и примут еретические мнения о соединении с католиками, признают главенство папы и экуменизм, и если будут нарушать Апостольские постановления о том, что священник муж одной жены, и нельзя быть священнику дважды женатым.


Этот собор созовут три епископа, или десять, или двадцать... Это уже будет Церковь гонимая, но мы будем свидетельствовать о ней, все православные христиане. Верующие и любящие Иисуса Христа останутся в Церкви.

На святом Соборе мечем веры очистятся все ереси, эта Церковь будет святая, истинная, очищенная Православная Христова Церковь. А еретики будут осуждены и изгнаны вон вместе со всеми ересями. Это строимая отступниками "церковь" сатаны, которая не смирится со святым Собором и все же признает папу главенствующим в Церкви, а не Христа, она будет соединятся с другими конфессиями. Это "церковь" антихриста, или та самая блудница, которая сидела на звере (Откр. 17,3). Вот до чего скатываются официальные представители Церкви, куда они уходят - к сатане.

Православный Собор, собранный из епископов, священников, диаконов, монашествующих и мирян, является канонически правильным инструментом Церкви. Он скальпелем веры очищает все наносные раковые опухоли на теле Святой Православной Церкви. Святой Собор должен осудить все ереси и все повреждения в человеческом сознании: и сионизм, и масонство, и социализм, и коммунизм, и демократию как безбожные, наносящие огромный вред человечеству.

Исторически мы знаем, что Православное Самодержавие не наносило вреда для Церкви и человечества, а содействовало расширению государства и укреплению Церкви. История показывает, что Самодержавие - это патриотическая и полезная для Церкви форма управления. В России Государи были священными лицами. Государь - хозяин в своем доме, и он созидал, а не наносил вред и не создавал хаос в своей стране.

Дорогие наши Архипастыри, мы православные священники, монахи и миряне будем с вами, когда вы станете на защиту истины и будем вас поддерживать.

Итак, вам решительно говорю, господие мои, дорогие епископы, наконец, если хотите спастись сами, противостаньте, созовите Поместный Собор в нашей Русской Православной Церкви. Пусть это будет даже тайно, но чтобы было несколько епископов, несколько священников, диаконов, монашествующих и мирян. Хорошо, если будут представители печати, кинооператоры, люди верные Православию, чтобы засвидетельствовать и рассказать об этом Соборе всем православным христианам.

Простите, дорогие Ваши Преосвященства, меня грешного.

16 июня 2010 г.

убогий монах Рафаил (Берестов)

Источник: информационно-аналитический портал "Москва - Третий Рим"

http://portal-credo.ru/site/?act=news&id=78373

Thursday, June 10, 2010

Н.С. Трубецкой о национальном самосознании и украинском национализме. Часть 2


Свою статью «К украинской проблеме» Н.С. Трубецкой написал в 1927 году, когда на Украине уже отгремела трагическая череда смены властей и прочно установилась советская власть (за исключением западной части Волыни и Галиции, которыми владела Польша, вновь проводившая полонизацию малорусского населения). Советская власть насильственно украинизировала малорусов. По замечанию Н.С. Трубецкого, она потворствовала «культурному сепаратизму для того, чтобы этим обезоружить сепаратизм политический». Он объясняет стремление Украины к культурному сепаратизму также «наплывом галицийской интеллигенции, национальное самосознание которой совершенно изуродовано как многовековым приобщением к духу католицизма, так и польским рабством и той атмосферой провинциально-сепаратистской национальной (точнее языковой) борьбы, которая всегда была так характерна для прежней Австро-Венгрии»[1].


Стараясь абстрагироваться от политики, говоря только о народной культуре, Н.С. Трубецкой с потрясающей проницательностью предсказал все, что сейчас происходит в получившем независимость Украинском государстве.

Прежде всего, ученый еще раз повторяет и тщательно обосновывает свой тезис о том, что современная русская культура не есть великорусская, а есть именно общерусская, потому что петровские преобразования привели к смерти отдельной великорусской культуры и созданию новой общерусской, которая является «органическим и непосредственным продолжением не московской, а киевской, украинской культуры»[2]. «Таким образом, на рубеже XVII и XVIII веков произошла украинизация великорусской духовной культуры. Различие между западнорусской и московской редакциями русской культуры было упразднено путем искоренения московской редакции, и русская культура стала едина»[3]. Это было сделано с целью европеизации России.



Справедливость данного утверждения наглядно прослеживается, например, в иконописи. Нездешность, прозрачность, особые пропорции и перспектива, символичность в изображении, часто ощущение детской веры – то, что было свойственно древнерусским иконам, в послепетровское время заменилось портретизмом, иногда даже с некоторой смачностью.

Н.С. Трубецкой выделяет в общей народной культуре «этажи» – нижний, обращенный к народному этнографическому материалу, и верхний, служащий для удовлетворения высших духовных запросов. Эти «этажи» непременно должны взаимодействовать для развития культуры.

В результате петровских реформ получилось, что «нижний этаж», обращенный к народным корням, был очень мало приспособлен к конкретным чертам русского этнологического типа и потому плохо выполнял свое назначение; вследствие этого человек «из народа» мог приобщиться к культуре, только вполне (или, в лучшем случае, почти вполне) обезличившись, подавив в себе и утратив некоторые существенные именно для «народа» черты. Наоборот, «верхний этаж» общерусской культуры, обращенный к высшей духовной и умственной жизни, развит был настолько, что вполне удовлетворял духовные потребности русской интеллигенции»[4].


Если возможно предположить, что новосозданная украинская культура сможет приспособиться к народным низам, говорит Н.С. Трубецкой, то очень маловероятно, что она выдержит конкуренцию с общерусской культурой у квалифицированной интеллигенции, а тогда, «лишенная сотрудничества этой наиболее ценной части украинского народа», эта культура будет обречена на смерть. За вполне самостоятельную украинскую культуру и против общерусской будут оптировать только бездарные творцы, боящиеся конкуренции, или же узкие краевые шовинисты. «Они сделаются главными адептами и руководителями этой новой культуры и наложат на нее свою печать – печать мелкого провинциального тщеславия, торжествующей посредственности, трафаретности, мракобесия и, сверх того, дух постоянной подозрительности, вечного страха перед конкуренцией. Эти же люди, конечно, постараются всячески стеснить или вовсе упразднить самую возможность свободного выбора между общерусской и самостоятельно-украинской культурой. Но и этого окажется недостаточно: придется еще внушить всему населению Украины острую и пламенную ненависть ко всему русскому и постоянно поддерживать эту ненависть всеми средствами школы, печати, литературы, искусства, хотя бы ценой лжи, клеветы, отказа от собственного исторического прошлого и попрания собственных национальных святынь. Ибо если украинцы не будут ненавидеть все русское, то всегда останется возможность оптирования в пользу общерусской культуры. Однако нетрудно понять, что украинская культура, создаваемая в только что описанной обстановке, будет из рук вон плоха. Она окажется не самоцелью, а лишь орудием политики, и притом плохой, злобно-шовинистической и задорно-крикливой политики. И главным двигателем этой культуры будут не настоящие творцы культурных ценностей, а маниакальные фанатики, политиканы, загипнотизированные навязчивыми идеями. Поэтому в этой культуре все: наука, литература, искусство, философия и т.д. – не будет самоценно, а будет тенденциозно. Это откроет широкую дорогу бездарностям, пожинающим дешевые лавры благодаря подчинению тенденциозному трафарету, но зажмет рот настоящим талантам, не могущим ограничивать себя узкими шорами этих трафаретов. Но главное, можно очень сомневаться в том, что эта культура будет действительно национальна. Полно воплощать в культурных ценностях дух национальной личности могут только настоящие таланты, работающие вовсе не для каких-то побочных политических целей, а лишь в силу иррационального внутреннего влечения. Таким талантам в описанной выше злобно-шовинистической обстановке не окажется места. Политиканам же нужно будет, главным образом, одно – как можно скорей создать свою украинскую культуру, все равно какую, только чтобы не была похожа на русскую. Это неминуемо поведет к лихорадочной подражательной работе: чем создавать заново, не проще ли взять готовое из-за границы (только бы не из России), наскоро придумав для импортированных таким образом культурных ценностей украинские названия!»[5].


Посмотрим, что же творится сейчас в украинской культуре. Предоставим слово лояльным украинским гражданам.

Г.И. Солоиденко, старший научный сотрудник отдела библиотековедения Национальной библиотеки Украины им. В.И. Вернадского: «Языковая ситуация, сложившаяся на Украине в области обеспечения библиотечной науки и практики соответствующими терминами и понятиями, далеко не идеальна. В советские времена библиотечная Украина использовала исключительно русскую терминологию… С начала 90-х годов XX столетия в библиотечной терминологии наблюдается стремление специалистов восстановить национальную идентичность на всех языковых уровнях: лексическом, словообразовательном, морфологическом и синтаксическом. <…> Современная украинская терминология развивается и активно пополняется новыми единицами, преимущественно заимствованиями из английского языка. <…> Несмотря на то, что украинский язык частично ассимилирует чужие слова, большое количество англицизмов все же создает угрозу для национальной терминосистемы. Существует и глобальный взгляд на эту проблему: когда в языке имеется до 72–85 % заимствований, так называемых терминов-интернационализмов, то имеем ли мы право говорить о существовании этого национального языка?»[6].


А.И. Белодед, доктор филологических наук, М.Ю. Корнилов, доктор химических наук: «Заметим, что в последнее время наметилась тенденция возрождения украинской терминологии… Но посмотрим правде в глаза: для лучшего понимания и восприятия информации, идущей от украинских ученых, последние говорят на русском языке, ибо он входит в шестерку наиболее распространенных языков в современном мире. А опубликовать свою продукцию стараются на английском. И ничего плохого в этом нет. <…> Полистайте англо-, франко-, немецко- и даже польскоязычные издания – вы почти не найдете там ссылок на украинские научные труды. <…> Не в обиду будь сказано нашим российским коллегам, что на Украине наблюдается более эффективное приближение научной терминологии к международным стандартам. И это несмотря на явные стремления отдельных “патриотов” внедрить только им понятные “конвенции” и термины, базирующиеся на местных диалектах и фольклорных жаргонах»[7].

Наконец, просто название статьи харьковского профессора, доктора технических наук Михаила Гинсбурга: «Как сделать украинский язык государственным де-факто?»[8].

Из приведенных примеров следует, что научным работникам дана установка: выработать украинский научный язык, причем такой, который был бы не похож на русский. Прав был Н.С. Трубецкой: «Украинский научный и высоколитературный язык до сих пор являлся главным образом орудием отмежевания от общерусской культуры. Усвоенный интеллектуальной верхушкой украинского движения способ созидания и выработки научной терминологии, абстрактного и специфически высоколитературного словаря не может быть оправдан никакими соображениями внутренней целесообразности, кроме стремления во что бы то ни стало отмежеваться от русской культуры, как можно более затруднить общение и взаимное ознакомление между образованными украинцами и великороссами»[9].


А вот что пишут на сайте «Твоя мова»: «Любое присутствие России на Украине даже в вопросе ассимиляции будет способствовать этой самой ассимиляции не в украинскую нацию, а напрямую в российскую. Развитие же украинской культуры при таком раскладе будет направляться в русло российской, как и прежде, с постоянным напоминанием нам, что украинцы – это часть русских и/или выдумка Австрии и т.п.… И напротив, иностранцы на Украине способны трезво выделить (или отделить) украинскую культуру от российской (провести границу, так как им далеки бредовые идеи славянского единства) и на этом контрасте показать нам самим нашу самобытность, древность, величие и, если хотите, неповторимость и полноценность нашего этноса, нашей культуры, ее не российское, а прямое древнерусское происхождение».

На сайте «Я розмовляю украiнською» помещен удивительный плакат: лицо украинской девушки (в венке и монисто) обмотано колючей проволокой, а внизу надпись: «Росифiкацiя – геноцид Украϊны».

Еще есть сайт, который называется «Лінгвоцид (мововбивство)», здесь достается и полякам, и русским.


Из выступления в Международный день родного языка (21 февраля 2008 г.) кандидата филологических наук, доцента кафедры украинского языка Национального университета «Львовская политехника», члена ВО «Свобода» Ирины Фарион: «Язык будет иметь праздник только тогда, когда в стране будут нормальные люди. Сегодняшняя ситуация с украинским языком просто катастрофическая. Его может спасти только сила и вера. Каждый человек органически способен развиваться только в своей культуре, традиции и языке. Но, к сожалению, у нас страна потерянных людей, дезориентированных во времени и пространстве… В стране пять миллионов украинцев считают родным языком русский. Они душевнобольные, их нужно лечить»[10].

Это типичные примеры украинской националистической истерии. Крайние случаи типа «Украина – родина изобретения колеса» рассматривать не будем. Надо полагать, художникам, композиторам и архитекторам на Украине творить легче, чем ученым и писателям. Хотя и в этих искусствах можно усмотреть идеологически не выдержанные русские мотивы.

Такое впечатление, что вожди украинских националистов прочитали процитированные выше строки из статьи «К украинской проблеме» и восприняли их как программу действий.


Н.С. Трубецкой предупреждает, что в случае, если украинская культура пожелает заменить общерусскую, ее ожидают следующие перспективы: «В этой культуре демагогическое подчеркиванье некоторых отдельных, случайно выбранных и в общем малосущественных элементов простонародного быта будет сочетаться с практическим отрицанием самых глубинных основ этого быта, а механически перенятые и неуклюже применяемые “последние слова” европейской цивилизации будут жить бок о бок с признаками самой вопиющей провинциальной ветоши и культурной отсталости; и все это – при внутренней духовной пустоте, прикрываемой кичливым самовосхвалением, крикливой рекламой, громкими фразами о национальной культуре, самобытности и прочем. Словом, это будет жалкий суррогат, не культура, а карикатура…»[11]. Для того чтобы избежать такого плачевного будущего, «украинская культура должна стать индивидуализацией культуры общерусской»[12].

Как лингвист, Н.С. Трубецкой исследовал все имеющиеся славянские языки и в статье «Общеславянский элемент в русской культуре» поместил свое заключение о церковнославянском, русском и украинском языках: «Итак, церковнославянский язык русской редакции есть единственный живущий до сего дня прямой потомок старославянского языка святых славянских первоучителей. Этот же церковнославянский язык русской редакции лежит в основе и светского русского литературного языка. <…> Русский литературный язык в конечном счете является прямым преемником староцерковнославянского языка, созданного святыми славянскими первоучителями в качестве общего литературного языка для всех славянских племен эпохи конца праславянского единства… Хотя народный украинский язык является ближайшим родичем народного языка великорусского, тем не менее украинский литературный язык примкнул не к русскоцерковнославянской, а к польской, то есть западнославянской литературно-языковой традиции»[13]. «Никакой необходимости создавать особый специально украинский литературный язык не было… Современный украинский литературный язык должен быть отнесен к литературным языкам западнославянской (чешско-польской) традиции»[14].


Итак, Украина постаралась отгородиться от России языком, искажением собственной истории (сказки о славном казацком прошлом, возведение в национальные герои Мазепы и Бандеры и т.п.), выбором европейских приоритетов. Здесь хочется привести строки Ф.И.Тютчева:

«Как перед ней ни гнитесь, господа,
Вам не снискать признанья от Европы:
В ее глазах вы будете всегда
Не слуги просвещенья, а холопы
».

А на Западе сейчас в ходу теории про воображенность наций. «Воображаемые сообщества» Б. Андерсона уже упоминались. А как такое высказывание: «Национализм порождает нацию, а не наоборот» (Геллнер. Э. Национализм и современность)?[15]


Почитаешь о такой теоретической базе и поневоле задумаешься об искусственном происхождении, например, украинского национализма. А если еще вспомнить серию «оранжевых» революций… Какое уж тут национальное самопознание, когда все взбаламучено, извращено, куплено…

Так что же, неужели нас, русских, ничего не объединяет?

Н.С. Трубецкой отвечает и на этот вопрос: «Для того чтобы русская культура, несмотря на краевую и племенную дифференциацию в нижней своей части, все же была единой системой, необходимо одно главное условие: в основе как единого “верхнего этажа”, так и всех краевых вариантов “нижнего этажа” здания русской культуры должен быть положен один и то же организующий принцип. Таким принципом, одинаково родным для каждой племенной индивидуации русского народа, заложенным в глубине русской души и в то же время способным стать основой и для ценностей верхнего запаса, рассчитанных на квалифицированных носителей высшей общерусской культуры, является православная вера. Некогда именно этот принцип был жизненным нервом всей русской культуры, и именно благодаря ему западнорусская и московская индивидуации русской культуры оказались способными вновь воссоединиться»[16].

Но власти Украины прямо-таки спят и видят свою карманную поместную церковь. Появляются сообщения, что и в УПЦ МП есть немало сторонников Украинской автокефалии…

Принцип вождей украинского национализма, очевидно находящихся вне Украины, стар и действен: «Разделяй и властвуй» (лат. divide et impera). Это принцип власти, согласно которому лучший метод управления – разжигание вражды между подчиненными.


Если на Украине будет устранено это мощное объединяющее нас начало – Русская Православная Церковь, хозяйничать там будет очень просторно тем самым силам, которые разжигают национальную рознь, и, похоже, этими хозяевами будут не украинцы.

Н.С. Трубецкой определяет основной и главный грех европейской цивилизации: «Ломая своеобразные духовные устои жизни и культуры каждого отдельного народа, она не заменяет и не может заменить их никакими другими духовными устоями и насаждает только внешние формы быта, покоящиеся лишь на материально-утилитарных или рационалистических основаниях. Благодаря этому европейская цивилизация производит небывалое опустошение в душах европеизированных народов, делая их в отношении духовного творчества бесплодными, в отношении нравственном – безразличными или одичавшими. В то же время непомерное пробуждение жадности к земным благам и греховной гордыни является верным спутником этой цивилизации. Она с неминуемой последовательностью идет к новому вавилонскому столпотворению»[17].

Неужели наша Церковь будет потворствовать губящим души настроениям ее чад? Автокефалия не уврачует и религиозный раскол на Украине. Потому что эти раскольники не боятся Бога.

Украинская культура, говорит Н.С. Трубецкой, ценна для нас тем, что, несмотря на все исторически неизбежные уступки Западу, она в XV–XVII веках сохранила верность Православию. А «ту часть украинского народа, которая не удержалась в Православии, мы считаем культурно и духовно изуродованной»[18].

Так или иначе, но особая украинская культура уже создается. Какими путями пойдет она, взяв обидно неправильный старт?


Н.С. Трубецкой, не отрицая правомерность создания украинской культуры, не совпадающей с великорусской, повторяет, что правильное направление ее – «быть особой украинской индивидуализацией русской культуры». Что же касается общей русской культуры, то она «должна стать в идеале оцерковленной сверху донизу. Православие должно проникнуть не только в народный быт, но и во все части здания русской культуры, вплоть до высших вершин этого здания. Только тогда каждый отдельный русский человек будет находить в русской культуре полное успокоение и удовлетворение для всех самых глубинных потребностей своего духа, и только тогда русская культура будет сверху донизу единой системой, несмотря на внешнюю свою краевую и племенную дифференцированность»[19].




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Трубецкой Н.С. К украинской проблеме. С. 179.

[2] Там же. С. 365.

[3] Там же. С. 367.

[4] Там же. С. 372.

[5] Там же. С. 373–374.

[6] Солоиденко Г.И. Проблемы и перспективы развития библиотечной терминологии в Украине. http://www.nbuv.gov.ua/articles/2005/05sgibtu.html .

[7] Белодед А.И., Корнилов М.Ю. Россия–Украина: научное информационное пространство: настоящее, будущее. http://www.niurr.gov.ua/ukr/dialog_1999/beloded.html

[8] Гинзбург М. Как сделать украинский язык государственным де-факто? http://www.zn.ua/3000/3100/46128/

[9] Трубецкой Н.С. Ответ Д.И. Дорошенко. С. 404.

[10] См.: http://zik.com.ua/ru/news/2008/02/22/126942

[11] Трубецкой Н.С. К украинской проблеме. С. 374.

[12] Там же. С. 375.

[13] Трубецкой Н.С. Общеславянский элемент в русской культуре. С. 174–183.

[14] Там же. С. 185–189.

[15] Цит. по: Кокшаров Н.В. Этничность. Этнос. Нация. Национализм. http://credo-new.narod.ru/credonew/04_02/7.htm

[16] Трубецкой Н.С. К украинской проблеме. С. 377–378.

[17] Трубецкой Н.С. Вавилонская башня и смешение языков. С. 331.

[18] Трубецкой Н.С. Ответ Д.И. Дорошенко. С. 394.

[19] Трубецкой Н.С. К украинской проблеме. С. 378.

Наталья Лебедева


10 / 07 / 2008

http://www.pravoslavie.ru/jurnal/1387.htm