| Arhiva Preafericitul Patriarh Kiril s-a întâlnit cu delegaia Republicii Kazahstan 23 martie 2012 15:10 La 23 martie 2012 la reedina Patriarhal i Sinodal de la mnstirea stavropighial de clugri Sfântul Daniil de la Moscova, Preafericitul Patriarh al Moscovei i al întregii Rusii Kiril s-a întâlnit cu delegaia Republicii Kazahstan. Din partea Kazahstanului la întâlnire au participat trimisul special al Preedintelui Republicii Kazahstan, akimul oraului Astana I.N. Tasmagambetov, Ambasadorul Extraordinar i Plenipoteniar al Republicii Kazahstan în Federaia Rus Z.K. Turisbekov, preedintele Ageniei pentru religie a Republicii Kazahstan K.K. Lama arif. Biserica Ortodox Rus a fost reprezentant la întâlnire de conductorul Districtului mitropolitan al Bisericii Ortodoxe Ruse în Republica Kazahstan mitropolitul de Astana i Kazahstan Alexandr, preedintele Departamentului sinodal pentru relaiile dintre Biseric i societate protoiereul Vsevolod Ceaplin i vicepreedintele Departamentului sinodal pentru relaiile dintre Biseric i societate protoiereul Gheorghii Rocin. Salutând oaspeii, Preafericitul Patriarh Kiril, în special, a menionat: „Am pstrat cele mai plcute impresii în urma vizitei mele în Kazahstan – în primul rând din motivul c în ar se soluioneaz problemele de ordin interreligios i interetnic. Este evident c i pentru Kazahstan, i pentru Rusia, cât i pentru alte ri ale lumii problema relaiilor interreligioase i interetnice este o tem principial, de la a crei soluionare în multe privine depinde viitorul a însei statelor, a însei societilor multinaionale. Noi trim în epoca globalizrii, când torentele migratoare amestec popoare, culturi, religii, când diferite moduri de via vin în contact în acele aspecte, unde aceasta nu se înfptuia niciodat. Sunt nite provocri noi pentru omenire, care, dup cum tim, uneori sunt însoite de manifestri bolnvicioase ale radicalismului, naionalismului, intoleranei. De aceea elaborarea unui model de colaborare interreligioas i interetnic, respectul fa de tradiiile religioase, fa de dreptul grupurilor religioase de a-i pstra identitatea sa este, dup opinia mea, cheia pentru soluionarea problemelor de care vorbim. |
| Aa a fost în trecutul secol al XX-lea, în timpul celor dou rzboaie mondiale îngrozitoare i în perioada postbelic. Împreun cu reprezentanii religiilor tradiionale noi am participat în acea vreme la activitatea pacificatoare. Astzi noi aplicm toate eforturile posibile nu doar pentru încetarea imediat a conflictelor militare sângeroase, care au invadat începutul secului al XXI-lea, dar i pentru acordarea de ajutor victimelor acestor confruntri, indiferent de confesia i etnia lor. Biserica Rus a devenit iniiatorul colectrii i expedierii ctre poporul suferind sirian a unor partide de proporii mari de ajutor umanitar. Noi ne aflm în corelaii permanente cu liderii religioi din regiunea Orientului mijlociu, de la care aflm despre situaia real în zona de conflict i despre necesitile populaiei panice suferinde, care a devenit ostatic al acestei situaii. Cu acest prilej a vrea s aduc mulumiri Societii imperiale ortodoxe pentru Palestina pentru lucrul mare depus privind organizarea convoaielor umanitare în Siria i pentru conlucrarea Societii cu organizaiile religioase ale Rusiei. Un alt exemplu sunt eforturile Bisericii noastre în reglarea problemelor din Karabahul de Munte. Aciunile noastre sunt orientate nu doar asupra contactelor bilaterale cu activiti religioi i politici din Armenia i Azerbaidjan, dar i asupra organizrii tratativelor directe în format trilateral. Consiliul Interreligios al Rusiei, vreau s mai subliniez odat, este un teren pe care se desfoar evenimente foarte importante pentru societatea noastr. Este un loc de colaborare constructiv a comunitilor religioase, care împrtesc responsabilitatea pentru bunstarea Patriei. Îmi exprim sperana sincer c al nostru Consiliu va urma i în continuare vocaiei sale înalte i îi va aduce contribuia la furirea pcii interreligioase i interetnice, precum i a concordiei civile în ara noastr. V mulumesc pentru atenie i înc odat v salut cordial. Serviciul de pres al Patriarhului Moscovei i al întregii Rusii Календарь ← 20 februarie 2022 19 aprilie 2020 |
| Mankind is coming once more to an acceptance of the possibility of contact with “another world.” Further, this “other world” itself seems to be opening itself up more to a mankind that is eager to experience it. The “occult explosion” of recent years has been produced by – and in turn has helped to produce – a spectacular increase in actual “paranormal” experiences of all kinds. “After-death” experiences are at one end of the spectrum of these experiences, involving little or no conscious will to contact the “other world”; the activities of contemporary witchcraft and satanism are at the other end of the spectrum, involving a conscious attempt to contact and even serve the powers of the “other world”; and the myriad varieties of today’s psychic experiences, from the “spoon-bending” of Uri Geller and parapsychological experiments in “out-of-body” travel and the like, to contact with and abductions by “UFO” beings – fall somewhere in between these extremes. Significantly, a large number of these “paranormal” experiences have been occurring to “Christians,” and one kind of these experiences (“charismatic” ones) is widely accepted as a genuinely Christian phenomenon. 52 In actuality, however, the “Christian” involvement in all such experiences is only a striking indication of the extent to which the Christian awareness of occult experience has been lost in our times. One of the foremost authentic mediums of the 20th century, the late Arthur Ford – whose increase in respectability among “Christians” and unbelieving humanists alike is itself one of the “signs of the times” – has given a revealing hint as to what the increasing acceptance of and susceptibility to occult experiences means: “The day of the professional medium is about over. We’ve been useful as guinea pigs. Through us, scientists have learned something about the conditions necessary for it (contact with the ‘spirit world’) to happen.” 53 That is: the occult experience hitherto restricted to a few “initiates” has now become accessible to thousands of ordinary people. |
| GREGORY PALAMAS (c. 1296–1359): ON REDEFINING DOCTRINE Like Peter, Gregory Palamas 349 was also the inheritor of a rich theological tradition – but the controversies in which he became embroiled demonstrate that, for all its broad-based stability, this tradition was neither mechanical nor hidebound. For instance, Palamas drew heavily from the Fathers to offer his theological account of and defence for the claims of certain Athonite monks about their life of prayer (known as hesychasm). These monks were accused of heresy by Barlaam the Calabrian for claiming that they physically experienced an encounter with God. Palamas insisted to the contrary that when humans experience the activities (or «energies») of God, they thus come into direct contact with God; or, to put it negatively, God " s energies are not created effects that mediate between God and creatures. Divine energy is itself »ineffable, uncreated, eternal, timeless, unapproachable, boundless, infinite, uncircumscribable, invisible to angels and men; it is the archetypal and immutable beauty, the glory of God, the glory of Christ, the glory of the Spirit, a ray of divinity, and so forth " 350 – and as such, to contact it is to contact God. Consequently, the Hesychasts affirmed that our material bodies can directly experience contact with God. Now divine energies were already a theme in Greek theology, but Palamas articulated a position that met the needs of contemporary debates in a way that developed on earlier writings. But Palamas " s defence provoked further controversy, this time from Gregory Akindynos. Akindynos criticised Palamas sharply – not without some justification – for his interpretation of the Fathers. 351 The fact that a competent theologian, well versed in the Fathers, challenged Palamas " s patristic argument indicates that Palamite theology is not a simple recapitulation of classical doctrine. 352 In his Discourse before Patriarch John XIV , Akindynos presents an alternative solution to the debates on Hesychasm that is sympathetic to Hesychastic practices and at the same time more doctrinally conservative with respect to the Fathers than Palamas " s argument had been. |
| We intend to continue the salvific service to God and to the people of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. 5. How do your parishioners in America view the Russian Orthodox Church? Do they have enough information to independently form their own opinions? The image of the Russian Orthodox Church is one of the martyrs and confessors of Russia gradually rising out of the ruins of the Church. This is exactly how many think. Although there is more than enough information about church life in Russia, not all the older immigrants have access to the internet, where such materials are published. That is why I would say that they do not have enough information, but most of all they lack the living contact with clergymen and people of the Church in Russia. Without that it is difficult for people to form an objective opinion. That is why we ask that you come to us, as we for several years have been coming to Russia. 6. In your view, what are the perspectives for further developing contact between the Church Abroad and the Orthodox parishes in Russia? What spiritual and practical ecclesiastical benefits could such contacts bring? There are two prime areas where parishes abroad can cooperate with those of the Fatherland to their mutual benefit—first of all, in the area of church schools and work with youth, and secondly in establishing parishes and parish life. I envision joint summer children’s camps, youth choir competitions, visiting parish schools, etc. There has already been an exchange of textbooks: the Law of God, by a priest of the Church Abroad, Fr Seraphim Slobodskoy, is now distributed everywhere in Russia today, and the teaching of Russian language, literature and history abroad is now unimaginable without teaching materials from Russia. For more effective cooperation, we need living contact between parish priests, the exchange of experiences. Conferences for priests of both the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia and the Moscow Patriarchate, joint youth conferences, these are projects that we should take on. |
| “The development of relations with the Islamic world today is of particular importance also because attempts to impose false values, especially in the family sphere, are a common challenge for us and for them. We have many topics to work with together, and we must use the common interests arising from the social, political, cultural context in which we all find ourselves today. Therefore, it seems necessary to develop interaction with Islam both in the countries of canonical responsibility of the Russian Orthodox Church and throughout the world. We have created an Expert Council on Interaction with Islam, and I hope that today we will be able to discuss everything that concerns our relations with the world of Islam in more detail. “Certainly, international conflicts pose a challenge to interreligious harmony. They cannot but affect interreligious relations, and often there is a threat of transferring these conflicts to the religious plane. In this regard, I cannot avoid mentioning the escalation of the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, where blood was shed, but thanks to the actions of religious leaders, it is possible to prevent this conflict from being redirected from the political and interethnic to the inter-religious channel. I was in constant contact with both the Catholicos of All Armenians and the Supreme Mufti of Azerbaijan, and I must say that this lively, natural contact contributed to the fact that religious leaders as much as possible for them (after all, they are also under the strong pressure of their environment), nevertheless entered into a certain contact, and by the grace of God it was again possible to prevent the filling of the political conflict with religious content. All this became possible as a result of many years of peacemaking efforts with the participation of the Russian Orthodox Church. Of course, all these actions did not resolve the conflict, but they put an obstacle on the way of its transformation into a religious war. Our maximum goal is to stop any conflict, to breathe a peaceful spirit into people, but it is not always possible to do this in a short period of time. But the specific goal – to prevent the conflict from escalating into a religious war – was set and, by the grace of God, achieved. |
| A century after the fall of the Roman empire to the Ottomans, a Greek deacon named Demetrius came in contact with Philipp Melanchthon, one of Luther’s closest collaborators and systematic theologians of the early Protestant Reformation (ca. AD 1558). Like Luther, Melanchthon believed that their “reformed” faith — as a “peeling away” of the numerous developments and supposed abuses of the Latin Church over the centuries — would be virtually one and the same as the faith of the “Greeks” in the east. To that end, the leading “Lutheran” theologians of the day had their Augsburg Confession translated into Greek, and sent with their new-found friend in Demetrius back to the Patriarchate of Constantinople (ca. AD 1559). Melanchthon died the next year, and so his successors in the reformation movement were able to continue in the effort. When the Patriarch (Joasaph II) received the letter, the doctrines within were seen as “embarrassing” and “heretical” by Orthodox standards (Ernst Benz, Wittenberg and Byzanz , pp. 73ff), and so no reply was given. It was believed at this time in history that it is better to “be friendly” by giving no reply (pretending that it was never received) than to reply with condemnation and no-doubt spoil any potential friendship with the Germans. Demetrius himself, having no reply to bring back to the Lutherans, journeyed to Transylvania where he eventually reposed. The first effort at both friendly contact and ecclesiastical fellowship between the Lutherans and the Orthodox came to an abrupt end. In 1570, a German ambassador named David von Ungnad arrived at Constantinople, accompanied by a Lutheran theologian named Stephen Gerlach, and he became friends with the chief secretary of the new Patriarch, Jeremias II. Incidentally, Jeremias II is considered to be one of the greatest Patriarchs and theologians of the Patriarchate during the Ottoman captivity, and so the Lutherans were rather fortunate to have made contact with him. A Greek-speaking German named Martin Kraus (a.k.a. Crusius) from Tübingen was appointed by Gerlach to carry on a theological “dialogue” with Jeremias II. |
| At first Monroe’s “journeys” were to recognizable places on earth – nearby places in the beginning, then places farther away – with some successful attempts to bring back actual evidence of the experiences. Then he began to contact “ghost-like” figures, the first contact being as part of a mediumistic experiment (the “Indian guide” sent by the medium actually came for him! – p. 52). Finally, he began to enter into contact with strange landscapes seemingly not of earth. Taking detailed notes on his experiences (which he recorded as soon as he returned to the body), he categorized them all as belonging to three “locales”: “Locale I” is the “here-now,” the normal this-worldly environment. “Locale II” is a “non-material” environment seemingly immense, with characteristics identical with those of the “astral plane.” This locale is the “natural environment” of the “Second Body,” as Monroe calls the entity that travels in this realm; it “interpenetrates” the physical world, and its laws are those of thought: “as you think, so you are,” “like attracts like,” in order to travel one need only think of one’s destination. Monroe visited various “places” in this realm, where he saw such things as a group of people wearing long robes in a narrow valley (p. 81), and a number of uniformed people who called themselves a “target army” waiting for assignments (p. 82). “Locale III” is a seemingly earth-like reality that is, however, unlike anything known on this earth, with strangely anachronistic features; Theosophists would probably understand this as just another more “solid” part of the “astral plane.” After largely overcoming his initial feeling of fear when finding himself in these unknown realms, Monroe began to explore them and to describe the many intelligent beings he encountered there. On some “journeys” he encountered “dead” friends and conversed with them, but more often he found strange impersonal beings who sometimes “helped” him but just as often failed to respond when he called, who gave vague “mystical” messages that sound like the communications of mediums, who might shake his hand but were just as likely to dig a hook into his offered hand (p. 89). Some of these beings he recognized as “hinderers”: beast-like creatures with rubbery bodies that easily change into the shapes of dogs, bats, or his own children (pp. 137–40), and others who tease and torment him and merely laugh when he calls (not in faith, it is true, but only as another “experiment”) on the name of Jesus Christ (p. 119). |
| Thomas E. FitzGerald 7. THE CHALLENGE OF THE NEW WORLD The political developments in the Soviet Union and the Balkans, as well as ethnic rivalries, continued to have a profound impact upon certain elements of the Orthodox in America in the period following World War II. Yet, at the same time, both external and internal factors were also forcing many within the Orthodox Church in the United States to move beyond these divisive tendencies and to take more seriously the pastoral needs of the younger generations, as well as its missionary responsibilities within the wider society. The changes in demographics, the need for new avenues for religious education, the need for liturgical renewal, and the dialogue with the Christian West were powerful challenges that could not be easily ignored. Despite the presence of divisive tendencies, many Orthodox boldly sought to address these challenges. A CHANGING MEMBERSHIP The various immigrant groups who were related to the Orthodox Church had a number of characteristics in common with other immigrant groups in the United States during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The immigrants in most major cities formed an insulated subculture. Within this subculture, the language of the fatherland was spoken, and the ethnic customs were preserved. While the immigrants usually had jobs outside their ethnic neighborhood, their social contact with the wider society was limited. They lived in their own «society» and seldom had much contact with persons from other ethnic backgrounds. As a result of this, interethnic marriage outside one " s ethnic group was uncommon and generally frowned upon. For the Orthodox immigrants of the various ethnic backgrounds, the parish church was central to their subculture. Normally, the parish church was at the geographical heart of their neighborhood. The immigrants could easily walk to the church for the liturgical services not only on Sunday and feast days but also at other times. The music, ritual, and especially the language of worship not only nurtured their spiritual development but also heightened their emotional contact with the Old World. |
| I know of no estimate of how many people have ‘become Christians’ through academic contacts and programmes. Nevertheless, I feel there is a dynamic and remarkably wellsupported movement which is bound to make a huge difference to China in the generations ahead. I see evidence for this in the annual conferences in which the Chinese Academy of Social Studies’ Institute on World Religions draws together many of the leading figures in this whole movement; in my own experience of a one-off seminar such as I spoke at in the University of Languages and Culture in Beijing; and in the lists of names in the quarterly Journal of the Institute of Sino- Christian Studies (almost entirely theological) in Hong Kong, to and from which there appear to be significant numbers of professors and doctoral students moving to and from tens of different universities in mainland China. This movement will become all the more important as and when the organised churches provide the space and energy for some of their best educated ministers to make contact and share in activities and projects with the academics. The Catholic priest (the former Selly Oak student) at the ‘Northern Cathedral’ in Beijing has for several years devoted part of his time to a Beijing Institute for Christianity and Culture Study, with a journal and the Sapientia book publishing house attached to it. Among the Protestants, the Nanjing Seminary, which offers university-level qualifications, has just this year moved to a new set of buildings close to, if not directly part of, the Nanjing University campus, with a view to developing close contacts and interaction with leading figures there. So, hopefully, through both these initiatives, a great deal more contact and mutual encouragement will be generated. Some Suggestions How can I round off such a vast topic? What better way than to invite you to start discovering for yourselves the endlessly varied and interesting people about whom I have been writing. Join the Friends of the Church in China (FCC Secretary: Mrs Jean Gronset, 17 Rosetrees, Guildford, Surrey, GU1 2HS, jgronset@dsl.pipex.com. The FCC has kindly provided all the photographs for this article) which concerns itself with both Protestants and Catholics in China; make full use of the books page on its website (www.thefcc.org); ask one of the chaplains at your nearest university to introduce you to Chinese post-graduate students or academics on sabbatical there, and invite them to your home; and sooner or later go to China yourself, and visit whatever churches you can find. Above all, rejoice in the Lord! Give thanks to God for his unfinished but now active work in today's China, and pray for comparably lively and fascinating new beginnings among us in Europe. |
|
|
