Given the pressing need to undo the economic, and more importantly moral and spiritual, damage done during the Soviet era, it is not suprising that the Russian Orthodox Church affirms the right to property. The Moscow Patriarchate in its 2000 document, “The Basis of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church” teaches that private property is essential to both a just civil society and the Church’s own ministries. Property, or more broadly wealth, is “God’s gift given to be used for [our] own and [our] neighbor’s benefit” (VII.2). The right to private property is “a socially recognized form of people’s relationship to the fruits of their labour and to natural resources” that under normal circumstances includes not only “the right to … use property” but also “to control and collect income” from one’s property and “to dispose of, lease, modify or liquidate property” (VII.1). While acknowledging that in a fallen world the creation of wealth and the right to private property can “produce … sinful phenomena” when undertaken in ways that are not “proper and morally justified” (VII.3), the Church stresses that this does not justify the dissolution of property rights or income re-distribution since “the alienation and re-distribution of property” violates “the rights of its legitimate owners” (VII.3). To be clear, property rights are not a panacea – protecting and enhancing private ownership will not cure all that ails us personally or socially. Nor can we separate the exercise of our right to property from the moral law or, for Christians, the Gospel. But Orthodox social thought does I think allow us to make a convincing case that property rights are a key element of human flourishing, a necessary ingredient of a just society, and an aid to Christian ministry. Rooted as it is in human nature, it is also a right that can help us see the dignity of all members of the human family and of the ability that all of us – rich or poor, male or female, young or old – have to serve the flourishing of those around us, our society and the Church. 24 октября 2013 г. ... Смотри также Комментарии Здесь Вы можете оставить свой комментарий к данной статье. Все комментарии будут прочитаны редакцией портала Православие.Ru . Ваше имя: Ваш email: Введите число, напечатанное на картинке Отправить Подпишитесь на нашу рассылку

http://pravoslavie.ru/65172.html

One more thing: reading philosophy and theology still plays an integral role in re-sacramentalizing my vision. The (totally secular) book by philosopher Matthew B. Crawford, The World Beyond Your Head has been helpful recently, as has Boersma’s Heavenly Participation, though written for the Evangelical reader. Even if you are Catholic or Orthodox, if you are an American, you grew up in a nominalist, non-sacramental culture, and this has affected your Christian faith more than you probably realize. It’s true for me. Rod Dreher The American Conservative 26 января 2016 г. Смотри также Комментарии Julien Peter Benney 2 марта 2016, 09:00 One point about fasting and sacramentalising one " s life is that the practice is, really, quite out of place not only in industrial culture, but inherently in the protein-rich, young, reliably-watered and fertile lands of Europe, North and East Asia and almost all the Western Hemisphere. Here, rich food is too abundant to be a gift at all. Orthodox Christianity evolved in a very different environment in the southwest Asian deserts (Australia and Southern Africa are similar). Here rainfall is erratic and low, and soils unaffected by the great Quaternary glaciations, orogenies and loess formations. As high pH reduces their availability, these soils are deficient in phosphorus and several key elements for animal biomass - zinc, copper, cobalt and selenium. As many of the oceans (around Australia and the Mediterranean) have small tidal ranges, and are warm and consequently nutrient-poor, animal food is very scarce. This protein scarcity produces severe taboos upon its consumption, observed not only in Orthodox fasting but also in Jewish kosher laws and the ahimsa of the Dharmic religions. Primitive peoples of Australia and Southern Africa, with soils vastly less fertile still, also had major taboos upon animal food. Здесь Вы можете оставить свой комментарий к данной статье. Все комментарии будут прочитаны редакцией портала Православие.Ru . Ваше имя:

http://pravoslavie.ru/90032.html

One time I read a portion of an article written by one of those authors who spread spiritual infection. He was complaining, saying that he and others like him have been writing and writing, speaking and speaking, but people go to church regardless of what they say! He came to the conclusion that probably people just weren’t reading what they wrote. Well, I would like to answer that person: I call on people not to read you or any writers or journalists like you, so that people might retain their own autonomy, their inner freedom. This is not weakness, but a wise approach to determining with whom we should and should not associate. I think that the example of a healthy person in an infectious disease ward can help us understand the logic of such reasoning even if a person does not particularly wish that believing Christians would refuse to make use of an informational product that carries the bacilli of incurable spiritual diseases. Our way of life depends in many respects upon our social interaction—our choice of friends, acquaintances, spouse, and upon what we read and watch. Our times require an especially thoughtful, shrewd, and wise view of the world around us. Without this it is hard to form a virtuous way of life—that very way of life, which leads people not to ephemeral happiness, not to the trinkets that are foisted upon us as if they were authentic valuables, but to the real, authentic values of existence, to those values that God desires to share with us, having created us in His own image, and having called us to be like unto Him. Amen. For an audio recording of this homily in Russian, see Pravoslavie.ru . His Holiness Patriarch Kirill Translation by OrthoChristian.com 26 марта 2013 г. Подпишитесь на рассылку Православие.Ru Рассылка выходит два раза в неделю: В воскресенье — православный календарь на предстоящую неделю. Новые книги издательства Сретенского монастыря. Специальная рассылка к большим праздникам. Комментарии Kuksha Winter 10 марта 2014, 23:00 Beautiful.

http://pravoslavie.ru/60383.html

We need to acknowledge that Byzantium is gone, and that in the words of the old song, “It’s Istanbul, not Constantinople”.  More importantly, we need to acknowledge that many if not most of the people in the world around us in North America are not Christians.  Some might object to regarding nice secular people as tainted or unclean (in the same way as third century Christians regarded the non-Christians surrounding them), but this objection simply reveals how far we are from the mindset of the early Church.  The cry of “The Doors! The Doors!” was originally a diaconal call to the doorkeeper to guard the doors against secular intrusion, and served as a kind of verbal dividing line between the Church and the World.  In Byzantium it eventually came to have the same anachronistic meaninglessness as the prayer for and dismissal of the by-then non-existent catechumens, since the assembled church no longer needed protection against hostile intrusion.  Perhaps the retention today in the Liturgy of that ancient cry may yet prove providential.  The line between the Church and the World, blurred in the heyday of Byzantium, has once again come to the fore. The fine liturgical details resulting from this acknowledgment are less important than the acknowledgment itself.  The World is once again a place of sin, rebellion, and spiritual danger in a way that it was not when Christendom and Byzantium were still standing.  Becoming Orthodox must be seen as a renunciation of this World with its perverted values and as an entrance into a completely different moral universe.  Christians are fundamentally different from the society around them, and this difference must be insisted upon canonically (i.e. by excommunicating blatantly worldly behaviour) and possibly expressed liturgically as well.  It is no good pretending that western society around us is Christian and that we may therefore follow its norms.  Through God’s grace and baptism, we are different from the society in which we now live.  We need to realize that we belong no longer to the World, but to the Kingdom of God, and to close the spiritual doors to worldliness.  Byzantium is long gone, and once again we live as exiles and aliens in the world around us.  Let us hearken to the ancient diaconal cry, and set our faces away from the World and toward the coming Kingdom.  In words of a very old prayer, “Let grace come, and let the world pass away”—even the world which flies the national flags we so often see around us.  Our ultimate allegiance lies elsewhere.

http://pravmir.com/the-doors-the-doors/

The Roman Church " s current official teachings about papal privilege and power that are unacceptable to the Eastern Orthodox churches are the dogma of the popés infallibility when speaking officially «from the chair of Peter (ex cathedra Petri)» on matters of faith and morals «from himself and not from the consensus of the church (ex sese et non ex consensu ecclesiae)»; the binding character of the popés infallible decrees on all (Catholic) Christians in the world; the popés direct episcopal jurisdiction over all (Catholic) Christians in the world; the popés authority to appoint, and so also to depose, the bishops of all (Catholic) Christian churches; and the affirmation that the legitimacy and authority of all (Catholic) Christian bishops in the world derive from their union with the Roman see and its bishop, the Supreme Pontiff, the unique Successor of Peter and Vicar of Christ on earth. The revolutionary advances in technology in the last century that coincided with such traumatic events as the world wars, the rise and fall of communism, the Jewish holocaust, the most severe and widespread persecution of Christians in history, and the inner decay of Christianity, especially Protestantism, under the various secularizing forces of Western society, strongly contributed to the Pope of Romés position as the leader of Christianity in the modern, and now post-modern, world. The papacy as we know it is not simply the result (as Marshall McLuhan would have it) of the invention of the phonetic alphabet in the Graeco-Latin world shortly before Christ " s birth that shaped early Western Christianity, and the later invention of the printing press that produced the Protestant Reformation in the West, and so, also, the Counter-Reformation that solidified the «imperial» papacy that was theologically and politically created by such popes as Gregory VII in the 11th century (Dictatus Papae), and Innocent III and Boniface VIII (Unam Sanctam) in the 13th. It is also the direct result of the immediate impact of the modern technology and electronic media that served to bring the Roman popes of the last half century, especially the remarkably gifted and charismatic Pope John Paul II, out of their Vatican enclosures and directly and immediately into the daily lives of people all around the world.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Foma_Hopko/rom...

Many of the ascetics of the 18th and 19th centuries looked upon the time of their lives as a period of calm be­fore the storm for the Church of Christ. We must not for­get that all this was said by them in times of complete ex­ternal prosperity. Monasteries not only existed, but were well endowed; new monastic communities were constantly being formed; new churches were built; ancient ones were restored, renovated and rebuilt; and the relics of saints were revealed. The Russian people were praised as guardians of purity in Orthodox faith and genuine piety. No one could have ever perceived that the Church was in a critical state and the end was not beyond the hills. Only those who had come to the knowledge of the Kingdom of God, possessing it in their hearts, could perceive otherwise. With a heavy heart they beheld all that went on around them and, not finding the life given by Christ in what they saw, they predicted a final catastrophe. " Only a special mercy of God can stop such a thing for a short time, " said Bishop Ignatius Brianchinininov. The mercy of God did hold it back. Before being extinguished, the lamp started to emanate a brighter light. This is what happened to the Russian Church. During the last century, the genuine light of [inward] Christian activity began to be kindled in certain monastic centers; and from them, as in the past, in the time of Saints Anthony and Theodosius of the Kiev Caves and Saint Sergius of Radonezh, this light began to shine upon the world. There began a return to the long-for gotten path of God-awareness, which had been followed by the great ascetics of the past. Certain monasteries—with Optina Hermitage at the forefront—not only collected, translated, studied and published the patristic writings, but upon their experience they built almost a new monastic art. Bishops Ignatius Brianchininov and Theophan the Recluse not only read the ancient ascetics, but they themselves contributed to Christian literature, having understood the essence of Christian experience. Misunderstood, mocked, condemned as for some sort of novelty, monks proceeded to defend the experience of the ancient Fathers against the corruption of Christianity by worldliness. Monasticism again received the spirit, the fire was again lit where only recently there had been but a spark. The long-forgotten writings of the Fathers were were made into handbooks. The monks of ancient Egypt, the Thebaid, Palestine and the Syrian deserts were made teachers of life. The flame of the active Christianity of the new creation was spread from the monastics into the world. Many flocked to the renewed monastic centers which possessed eldership, and through these centers they partook of the way of ascetic experience.

http://pravoslavie.ru/51799.html

“It happened every time when the interstate relations were complicated: The Churches of Russia and Britain were the bridge that connected our two peoples,” he said. That approach was shared by many on the British side too. Paul Bickley, director of the political program at Theos, a Christian think tank in London that deals with social and political issues, said in a telephone interview that while the atmosphere of the visit was characterized by “anxiety,” many saw it as a “useful way to keep the conversation going.” “While the political channels are clearly clogged up and relationships between London and Moscow on the political level are frosty, it was a good way to keep the friendly diplomatic relations on another level. There is a spiritual and cultural relationship even where the political relationship is frosty,” Bickley told Russia Direc t. He also noted that the meeting with the Queen – although it was carried out in her capacity as the Supreme Governor of the Church of England – could not have taken place without the consent of the Cabinet. “The Queen and the Prime Minister have to work hand in glove, of course, in a constitutional monarchy,” he said. Religious issues There are also some rather dramatic and purely religious matters that Patriarch Kirill’s visit brought attention to. One is the internal development of the Russian Orthodox Church in Great Britain. The Diocese of Sourozh in the United Kingdom was founded by an epic figure in 20 th century Russian Church history – Metropolitan Anthony Bloom. Born in Switzerland to a family of a Russian diplomat of Scottish origin, he was a doctor in the French Resistance during World War II until moving, as a monk and priest to London, where he came to lead a unique community combining Russian tradition with openness to present-day European realities. His brand of Orthodoxy not only appealed to many Brits who joined his church, but had a following among Russian Orthodox intellectuals back in Russia. Yet around the time of his death in 2003, which was also the time of massive new immigration from the Soviet Union, the community became divided largely along the lines of “old-timers” and “newcomers” and a number of Metropolitan Anthony’s followers eventually left for the Patriarchate of Constantinople, while the Diocese of Sourozh under the current leadership of Archbishop Elisey Ganaba was increasingly conforming with the standard practices of the Moscow Patriarchate. At some point, even the ownership of the cathedral itself was contested in the court of law. The refurbishment and re-consecration of the cathedral is thus seen within the church as the ultimate victory of Moscow and the newer trend in the overall style of the community.

http://pravmir.com/patriarch-kirills-vis...

The USA, keen to see American-style democracy in Russia, therefore encouraged the Revolution. It soon regretted it, having created for itself the Soviet enemy. Thus, there later began a Cold War lasting some forty-five years, during which the world cowered from the threat of nuclear holocaust. As for other non-Russian inhabitants of Imperial Russia, at first many, like the Ukrainians or the Latvians, welcomed the Revolution, but these small minority peoples were soon to regret it. The Latvians suffered, first from Hitler and then from Stalin. Ukraine was depopulated by the terrible artificial famine of Stalin, in which 20th century Europeans were reduced to cannibalism. However, few suffered as much as the Poles. Having re-established Poland, they began oppressing the minority peoples in the new Poland, having learnt nothing from their own sufferings. Notably, after the Russian Revolution, the Polish State dynamited some 400 Orthodox churches before their own nemesis came, in 1939, in the shape of Hitler from the west and Stalin from the east. For the Poles, World War II was to end as it had begun, occupied and ravaged by a murderous dictator. As regards the liberals and freemasons who had fomented the Revolution of March 1917 and forced the Tsar to abdicate, they too were punished. By November 1917 they were being forced into exile. Great sections of the Orthodoxy-hating aristocracy and liberal intelligentsia, often with German names, went into exile, mainly in Paris, where their only comfort was the freemasons’ lodges they founded there. The list of sufferings caused around the world could continue and we could speak of the Communist genocide in China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Cuba, Africa and among all the other naive victims of the Communist delusion around the world. The point is, however, that whatever the faults of Tsarist Russia, and there were many, they were as nothing when compared to the faults that were to follow under the satanic and suicidal regimes of Lenin and Stalin and their followers. From this we can, at least, learn never to destroy something, if we do not first have something better to put in its place.

http://pravmir.com/russian-destinies/

Over the past year, especially in view of the escalation of tensions around Aleppo and Mosul, the Supreme Authority of the Russian Orthodox Church at various meetings with leaders and representatives of the USA and Western European countries constantly raised the issue of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East and of the persecution of Christians in the region, emphasizing that combined efforts within one coalition were needed to oppose terrorism. In this regard I would like to mention the visits of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia to Great Britain and France in the end of 2016, during which His Holiness met with top government officials, discussing with them the Middle East problem. A positive step in promoting inter-church cooperation and supporting the Christian population of the Middle East was a visit to Lebanon and Syria of a group of representatives of the Russian Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Churches on April 6–7, 2016. The consultations with local confessions held during the visit are to contribute to drawing up the further joint projects aimed at rendering aid to our brothers and sisters in distress. Several major tasks were outlined that will be necessary to tackle in order to achieve the overarching aim of the preservation of the Christian presence in the region. These tasks include the restoration of churches and monasteries, traditionally serving as centres of consolidation of Christian communities, the employment security for the local population, especially young people, and the rebuilding of Syria’s economic infrastructure. In all these matters the Syrians expect from the world community the full-scale assistance as soon as the war in their country comes to an end. A short while ago, on 9-12 January 2017, the 5 th European Catholic-Orthodox Forum was held in Paris. The meeting is organized every two years by the Council of the European Bishops’ Conferences in cooperation with the Local Orthodox Churches. This year the forum focused on the threat of terrorism – the problem directly connected with the situation in the Middle East and affecting everyone these days.

http://mospat.ru/en/news/48716/

Literally following the decisions of the Moscow Sobor, the American Russian Diocese elected its Primate, Metropolitan Platon (+1934), one of the senior Bishops of the Church of Russia who, having served in America before World War I, knew the needs of the Church here and could assure the continuity of her life. The Church, weakened by the Revolution, gathered around Metropolitan Platon and began its new growth. Under his successors, Metropolitans Theophilus (+1950) and Leonty (elected in 1950), new dioceses were created so that today the former Diocese had developed into a great Metropolitan District with nine dioceses. It has theological schools, a system of religious education, etc. It is governed, according to the canonical tradition of the Orthodox Church, by a Synod (Council) of Bishops, led by the Primate, and by a regular triennial Sobor with the participation of clergy and laity. It maintains close relations with all other Orthodox Churches in America and abroad. Unfortunately, the genuine canonicity of the Metropolia, its organic continuity with the whole growth of Orthodoxy in America, its faithfulness to the very spirit of the Moscow decisions of 1917-18, are not understood and accepted by all. Two other Russian ecclesiastical groups maintain a separate existence, breaking the much needed unity of the Church. One takes its stand on a purely formal “canonicity.” This is the Exarchate of the Moscow Patriarchate, organized in 1933 after the arrival of Archbishop Benjamin from Europe. Its claims are unacceptable to the Metropolia which wants to be in communion with the Orthodox people of Russia, but which cannot depend on a Church administration totally controlled by the Communist regime. The other is the Russian Church in Exile grouping mainly the political emigrants and deeply conditioned in its life by their political ideologies. The past of the Russian Church in America justifies its present and indicates the direction for the future: faithfulness to all eternal values of Russian Orthodoxy, among which the most essential has always been that of a missionary zeal, the desire to incarnate and to fulfill the Orthodox faith wherever God wants us to be His servants.

http://pravmir.com/the-orthodox-church/

  001     002    003    004    005    006    007    008    009    010