The Battle for the Russian Orthodox Church
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE BATTLE FOR THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH Vladimir Moss © Copyright: Vladimir Moss, 2010 FOREWORD ................................................................................................................3 1. WHERE IS THE MOSCOW PATRIARCHATE GOING? .................................4 2. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CATACOMB CHURCH IN CONTEMPORARY RUSSIA ...................................................................................13 3. THE FREE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH................................................24 4. THE SERGIANIST CONQUEST OF JERUSALEM..........................................59 5. THE RIGHT WAY OF RESISTING APOSTASY: A REPLY............................71 6. THE CHURCH THAT STALIN BUILT .............................................................75 7. ORTHODOXY, THE STATE AND RUSSIAN STATEHOOD........................79 8. WHEN DID THE MP APOSTASISE? ..............................................................112 9. EMPIRE OR ANTICHRIST?..............................................................................122 10. THE TRAGEDY OF THE RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH ABROAD 132 11. IN SEARCH OF NEVER-LOST RUSSIA .......................................................141 12. TWO ROBBER COUNCILS: A SHORT ANALYSIS....................................164 13. CAN THE LEOPARD CHANGE HIS SPOTS?.............................................174 14. LAZARUS SATURDAY, THE CHICAGO DIOCESE AND THE MOSCOW PATRIARCHATE....................................................................................................184 15. THE FORKED TONGUE OF ARCHBISHOP KYRILL................................189 16. THE SPIRITUAL DARWINISM OF FR. ALEXANDER LEBEDEV...........200 17. ON TRUE AND FALSE MARTYRS ...............................................................207 18. THE CANONICAL POSITION OF THE RUSSIAN CHURCH ABROAD ....................................................................................................................................213 19. “OIKONOMIA” AND THE MOSCOW PATRIARCHATE........................221 20. ROCOR AUTONOMY – A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE? ...............................236 21. A PROPOSAL TO THE MAY, 2006 SOBOR OF THE RUSSIAN CHURCH ABROAD..................................................................................................................240 22. “THE SACRED LIE”.........................................................................................245 23. METROPOLITAN ANASTASY, THE NAZIS AND THE SOVIETS.........252 24. A DOGMATIC-CANONICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ROCOR-MP UNIA 268 25. HOW THE MP FELL UNDER THE 1983 ANATHEMA.............................291 26. LESSONS IN RUSSIANNESS FROM A SOVIET POLITICIAN ................320 27. THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION .........................................................327 28. ROCOR AND THE SUNDAY OF ORTHODOXY .......................................338 29. “DEMONIC GRACE” AND METROPOLITAN SERGIUS ........................340 30. JUDAS, PILATE AND ROCOR.......................................................................356 31. OPEN LETTER TO PROTOPRESBYTER VALERY LUKIANOV..............359 32. THE CATHOLIC ASSAULT ON RUSSIA ....................................................364 33. 1945 AND THE MOSCOW PATRIARCHATE’S “THEOLOGY OF VICTORY”................................................................................................................379 APPENDIX 1. COMRADE DROZDOV - THE THIEF OF HEBRON ..............396 APPENDIX 2. PATRIARCH ALEXIS II AS A CHURCH FIGURE..................399 APPENDIX 3. A LIFE OF METROPOLITAN PHILARET OF NEW YORK ..408 2 FOREWORD This book is a collection of articles written during the last twenty years on the crisis enveloping the Russian Orthodox Church. As the Soviet Union began to collapse in 1989-1990, its faithful ecclesiastical slave, the Sovietised Moscow Patriarchate (MP), also began to break up. The Catacomb or True Orthodox Church, which had always refused to recognise Soviet power or its “Soviet church”, emerged from the underground, and the Russian Church Abroad (ROCOR) created parishes on Russian soil into which both “catacombniks” and former members of the patriarchate entered. It was a time of great hope for the resurrection of Russian Orthodoxy. Tragically, those hopes have not been fulfilled. From the mid-1990s, and especially since KGB colonel Putin’s arrival at the height of power in 2000, the MP has recovered its position in society while its opponents have warred amongst themselves and fragmented. Most recently, the Russian Church Abroad led by Metropolitan Laurus has joined the MP, thereby betraying the Orthodox Faith and the ecclesiastical course of the Russian Church Abroad throughout its history. These essays reflect that process by one who participated in it both inside and outside Russia. Since writing these essays, I have changed my attitude towards some of the church figures mentioned in them. However, I have decided to make only minor editorial changes to the texts, insofar as I believe the arguments set out in them remain valid. Although the picture here drawn may be depressing, the purpose of this book is constructive. It is hoped and believed that by studying the history of the last eighteen years, we, the True Orthodox Christians of Russia may repent of our sins and learn from our mistakes and unite again on a firm basis of faith and love. Then, through the prayers of the Holy New Martyrs and Confessors, Holy Russia will rise again from the ashes of the present neo- Soviet catastrophe, to the glory of Christ and the salvation of very many throughout the world! May 16/29, 2010. The Apodosis of Pentecost. East House, Beech Hill, Mayford, Woking, Surrey. England. 3 1. WHERE IS THE MOSCOW PATRIARCHATE GOING? Can two walk together if they are not in agreement with each other? Amos 3.3. Forty years ago, the well-known scientist and theologian, Professor Ivan Andreyev, who had been a confessor of the faith in the Solovki camps, posed the question: does the Moscow Patriarchate have grace – that is, the grace of true and valid sacraments? After a thorough examination of the question from a dogmatical and canonical point of view, he gave a clear and categorical reply: no.1 It goes without saying that the majority of Russian Orthodox Christians today do not agree with this judgement. However, many believers, especially from the intelligentsia, now agree that during the Stalin period the Moscow Patriarchate underwent a very serious fall, a sickness close to death, from which it must recover if the Russian Church is destined to survive. The aim of this article is to pose the question: has anything changed in the last 40 years that would force us to return again to the question of the status of the Moscow Patriarchate. In other words: has the Moscow Patriarchate recovered from its fall, is it beginning to get better, or is this sickness incurable? Let us look at Andreyev’s main argument. In 1927 the Moscow Patriarchate under the leadership of Metropolitan Sergius declared that the joys of the Soviet government are the joys of the Church, and its failures – the failures of the Church, and entered into a pact with the government, condemning and persecuting all those who refused to recognize Sergius and his declaration. In the opinion of Andreyev, this was the sin of Judas who betrayed Christ, in the given instance the betrayal of His Body on earth, the Church, into the hands of His worst enemies. This sin, in the words of Hieromartyr Victor, Bishop of Glazov, was “worse than heresy”; it was complete apostasy. Moreover, sin his Holiness Patriarch Tikhon had anathematised the Soviet government in 1918, the Moscow Patriarchate was now bound by this anathema; for the text of the anathema clearly forbade the children of the Church from having anything to do with the condemned government. It is necessary to emphasise that this opinion was shared by almost all the leaders of the Russian Church who rejected the declaration of Metropolitan Sergius. Thus on July 22, 1928 (Old Calendar), Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky) of Kiev declared that the hierarchs of the Moscow Patriarchate were apostates and had to be submitted to the same canonical punishments as the apostates of ancient times, the libellatici – that is, fifteen years’ deprivation of communion after their repentance and return to the Church. Within Russia, 1 English translation: I.M. Andreyev, Is Grace Present in the Soviet Church? Wildwood, Alberta: Monastery Press, 2000. 4 one of the leaders of the Catacomb Church who admitted that the sergianist church might still have grace was Metropolitan Cyril of Kazan: “The sacraments performed by the sergianists who have been correctly ordained are undoubtedly saving sacraments for those who receive them with faith and simplicity, without reasonings and doubts about their validity, and who even do not suspect anything wrong in the sergianist organization of the Church.” But at the same time Cyril pointed out that “they serve for the condemnation of those who perform them and of those who approach them well understanding the unrighteousness existing in sergianism and who by their non-resistance to it reveal a criminal indifference to the mocking of the Church. That is why it is necessary for an Orthodox bishop or priest to refrain from communion with the sergianists in prayer. The same necessity exists for those laymen who have a conscious attitude towards all the details of Church life.”2 Four main changes have taken place since that time. First, the attitude of most of the foreign Orthodox Churches