Widespread Errors of the Moscow Patriarchate
Widespread Errors of the Moscow Patriarchate
With detailed explanations from an Orthodox perspective
Issued with the blessing of Most Reverend Archbishop Vladimir
Thirty years ago the fourth First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCA) of blessed memory, Metropolitan Vitalii (Ustinov), issued a brochure entitled "Before God's Judgement" in which were collected several documents of church history that revealed the essence of the relationship of ROCA to what eventually would be called the Moscow Patriarchate (MP).
From the time this brochure was printed much has changed in the world. Church life also changed. The relationship of many people to this important question has also changed.
However, as before, the clergy and lay people of ROCA often have to meet the history and confessions of the MP with puzzlement . The questions that relate to the history of the Church as a whole and also to ROCA and the Catacomb Church are especially important to us.
We put together several basic questions or arguments that come up very often in discussions about Russian church history of the last few decades and answered them in a generalized manner.
Naturally, the collected questions and our answers to them only scratch the surface of the problem; yet, for those who are not indifferent to the Truth, the present brochure can aid in sorting out these important questions for Russian Orthodoxy.
For those who are interested in a more detailed study of this question one can turn to the references cited in the footnotes.
We are purposely printing this brochure in the Russian version using the new orthography which is not usual for our brotherhood so that the reading of it would be made easier for those to whom this publication is primarily intended. (After the revolution of 1917 the communists deleted two letters from the alphabet and replaced them with two others already in existence that sounded the same and the use of a third letter was greatly reduced. The pre-1917 method of writing is referred to as the old orthography and post-1917, in use today, is the new orthography - trans).
The Historical Church
The Moscow Patriarchate (MP) is historically the Mother-Church and all who do not recognize her as such are schismatics.
The MP does not start its history from ancient times but from 1927 when Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky), not having any canonical right to do so, convokes an illegal synod together with the NKVD (one of the former names of the soviet KGB - trans) which in the name of the whole Russian Church signed an apostolic "Declaration" which later became known as the "Declaration of loyalty to the Soviet government".I
The great majority of the bishops of the Russian Church and also the most senior one, the locum tenens of the patriarchal throne metropolitan Peter (Krutitsky), who was in jail at the time, were against the issuance of this heretical “Declaration" as well as the formation of the synod.
Just as metropolitan Sergius had been, some of the other members of this synod had previously been in various schisms: renovationist, priests changing dioceses on their own with no bishop releases, and so forth.
Then, again going against the canons, this synod became permanent and Sergius now headed a new organization which was formally recognized by the godless authorities.
In 1943 by order of J. V. Dzhugashvili (Koba, Stalin) (Joseph Vissarionovich was Stalin's name and patronymic and he was a native Georgian-hence the very non-Russian last name. Koba was a previous pseudonym he used. Stalin is derived from the Russian word stal' which means steel - trans) and with the advice of bishops loyal to the godless authorities a "Council" was called in which metropolitan Sergius was elected as the first soviet patriarch. This is how the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church was created as an organization that had never before existed since the legal Russian church was referred to as Rossijskaia (or all-Russian). The name itself "Moscow Patriarchy" is grammatically uncanonical; a more proper name would be "Moscow Patriarchate" as sergianists refer to themselves more often today having finally realized the incorrectness of their initial title. (In English, Patriarchate has always been used and the difference is primarily for Russians to differentiate - trans) (both the terms Russkaia and Rossijskaia are translated into English as Russian. However, in Russian there is a slight difference in the interpretation. The former term refers to strictly ethnic Russians and defines a narrower group; the latter term comes from Rossija which is the name of the country and thus includes all ethnicities since many non-Russians were also Orthodox and were part of the Church. It's a fine point - trans)
And so, the last canonical patriarch of the Rossijskaia Church was His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon and that which was created by the Soviet authorities with the participation of Metropolitan Sergius can in neither in a legal sense nor in spirit be called an Orthodox Church. And, consequently, the MP can not be called the historical Russian Mother-Church. In essence, the MP began as an illegal gathering which very quickly became a schism having sergianism as its foundation.
Sergianism
Sergianism is a very vague concept. The "Declaration" of Metropolitan Sergius is a very insignificant document; it is simply an episode in the church life.
The "Declaration" is a document that expresses a faith and not simply a secular and administrative document. The document being presented as coming from the Russian Church that affirmed a new non-Orthodox relationship to the authorities.
This document was used by the authorities to locate and eliminate Christians who understood the Antichrist nature of ongoing events and were not willing to denounce the Truth.
At the time all possible compromises to avoid persecution and for the sake of peace were already made by His Holiness Patriarch TikhonII. He came to the line that separated personal concessions from the distortion of the faith.
The MP owes its existence specifically to this “Declaration." Properly, it's the document based on which the MP was founded.
From the date of the issuance of the “Declaration," the followers of metropolitan Sergius have been called sergianists and the heresy itself, the improper relationship to the godless authorities, as sergianismIII.
The saving of the church
If it were not for metropolitan Sergius' declaration the church would have been eliminated completely in Russia. With the aid of the Declaration it became possible to preserve a peaceful church life. Metropolitan Sergius saved the church from total annihilation.
This very often used argument contains several untruths.
By the witnessing of the sergianists themselves, the persecution, after the issuance of the "declaration" did not cease, even of those who accepted the new course. A clear proof of this are the lists of New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia that was composed by the MP in which there are many more names than in the lists of those glorified by the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad in 1981. It is clear that the great majority of names added to the MP lists were sergianists who suffered.
In addition, this Declaration contains untruths and falsifications of the Orthodox faith. Can those who fight God be called a God-blessed authority? What in this instance will stop the sergianists from blessing the Antichrist when his time arrives? And, the new authorities openly described themselves as godless.
That is why, what was "saved" can no longer be called a Church. The "new church policy" that was accepted is an obvious case of apostasy. Regardless of how well-meaning were the intentions of the source, it simply erases the struggle of all Christian martyrs.
Why did Christ suffer? Could He have compromised and accepted the correctness of Caiaphas and Annas? Then, there would have been no persecution of Christians that lasted several centuries! And why did hundreds of thousands of martyrs suffer? The saints confessed Christ before everyone giving an example to others and at the same time directly calling to follow them. Why not compromise with pagans and other persecutors to defend the Church in order to stop the persecutions? The answer is simple - the Church is not in temples, nor in open church services, nor in a large number of faithful and not even in a peaceful life of the Church but in the Truth. If for the sake of defending the Church it becomes necessary to forsake the Truth, then that is not a defense of the Church but treachery.
Thus, the Declaration saved nothing and no one. On the contrary, it aided the godless to fight against the Church and against the Truth. And what was possible to save, rather to create, neither canonically, nor by logic nor in spirit can be called a Church. Some were killed and others went underground and others were made traitors.
World Orthodoxy
Other churches, such as the Patriarchate of Constantinople et. al. recognize the Moscow Patriarchate as the legitimate Russian Church.
In the last hundred years all patriarchates in one form or another fell into different heresies. As a first order they all have ecumenism as part of their faith. Some of them switched to the heretical Gregorian calendar and even openly pray with those whom they had previously called heretics and with representatives of totally non-Christian faiths. Such prayers are directly forbidden by the holy apostles. That is why they all recognize each other because the strayed from the Truth. No heresies offend them whatsoever.
Unity
The Church must be one and it's unnecessary to split up and try to determine what may be our differences or who was guilty in the past. It's necessary, in a brotherly manner, to embrace each other and to continue the path of fighting worldly evil and the Antichrist.
The basic accusation towards the MP and "world Orthodoxy" is exactly their crossing over to the side of the Antichrist. At the present time, unity with the MP and other churches would be a unity in serving world evil and not unity in Christ.
Official church
The authorities of the Russian Federation recognize the MP as the official Russian church.
This is simply a secular categorization. Let us remember that Christ was recognized neither by the official authorities nor by the religious leaders. Furthermore, Christ and his disciples, with few exceptions, were killed. In addition, in the course of the next subsequent centuries the true Church was not recognized and was actually persecuted finding itself in a catacomb position. In fact, the Church of the first centuries was catacomb.
The acknowledgement of the contemporary godless authorities is rather not a good sign. The Savior Himself explains this to us: If the world hates you, know that it hated Me before you (Jn. 15-20).
Holy Rus'
We go not to the MP as such but to our ancient churches that have heard many prayers. Do we really have to give up our holy things, our churches, monasteries and the entire heritage of Holy Rus'? (The term Rus' was applied in centuries past and referred to the territory that roughly comprises today's Ukraine, Belarus and European Russia - trans)
The heritage of Holy Rus' primarily consists of a wholehearted love for Christ-the Truth and to holiness. The rest is secondary and without the first it has no meaning. The Savior himself teaches us the proper relationship to temples and holy items when he gathers his disciples for the Last Supper-the first liturgy on earth-not in the Temple in Jerusalem (although as All-mighty God could have done so), not on Sinai and not in any other holy place but in the private home of a believer-Simon the leperIV.
So, the temple is where Christ is. If heretics and apostates pray at the altar, Christ can not be there by definition. The Savior says: where two or three are gathered in my name I am among them (Matt. 18:20). To gather in the name of the Lord signifies to gather in the name of TruthV.
The creators of the MP discarded the Truth from the beginning. Where the Truth is absent Christ is not there.
It is also very important to remember that after the revolution of 1917 all the churches were "nationalized", i.e. they became the property of the godless Soviet authorities. This government only allowed the Church to use them. After the government created its own "church" it allowed the use of these churches and other holy items only to those who served it. The new authorities demanded not just a simple secular obedience but serving it in a spiritual manner. This is especially emphasized by the referenced Declaration. So, will the godless ideologues give the churches to those who serve God? To serve a godless government and God at the same time is impossibleVI.
Old Russian churches
When we come to an old Russian church, we feel the warmth, we feel good and our soul feels light.
One can not intermix the well-being of the soul and the aesthetic of feeling good as part of a spiritual life. The outward beauty of Orthodoxy: architecture, iconography, singing and the entire ambiance are the fruits that are filled with the grace of God. Naturally, a soul that is deprived of a spiritual life will not be as comfortable as in an old church. Besides other feelings, what takes effect here is simply people's memoriesVII.
We think that we do not err if we say that an Englishman will feel just as well when he enters into an even older church. Or even a pagan when he enters his pagan temple where his ancestors had prayed for centuries.
However, these feelings relate more to an earthly sphere as opposed to a heavenly one. What affects the soul is not the same as what is spiritual. Since even a pacifier, for a time, can replace a child's mother; it can soothe and help fall asleep. But it can not feed the child.
So, there is nothing strange that entering Russian churches (old ones or even new ones, but properly constructed) we feel that our soul is at peace since, by way of external symbols, we get the sensation of that which gave birth to this initially. However, that does not mean that grace resides in churches all by itself, independent of how true is the faith and the services.
Kind priests
Simple priests are not to be faulted for the indiscretions of the higher leadership. They sincerely are serving Christ and their flock.
The Church of Christ is one and catholic. (this does not mean Roman Catholic - trans) Not one priest serves independently but in union with and of the same mind with the rest of the Church. He is first of all with his bishop who, in turn, is also part of the unity of the faith with the other bishops and the patriarch. This is directly reflected in the Divine liturgy "let us love one another that with one mind we may confess Father, Son and the Holy Spirit" and also "and grant unto us that with one mouth and one heart we may glorify and hymn Thy most honorable and majestic name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy SpiritVIII.
The Holy Canons teach us not to obey a heretical bishopIX. And those that prayed with heretics the Canons demand they be separated from church participation. By the Canons it is required to separate those who pray with those who are already separatedX.
In this fashion, all who are in a prayerful association with heretics are part of the heresy and are subject to being separated. This also pertains to those same kind priests.
Don't the Catholics have kind priests? One can probably find kind imams and rabbis. However, this is all in the sphere of worldly kindness, which in itself can be wonderful, but it can not be a substitute for the true faith.
If the "kind priest" does not apply himself to investigate matters of the faith he displays a severe indifference, being lukewarm, which is loathsome in God's sightXI. Such a priest, even if he is kind in a secular sense, is a wolf in sheep's clothing who corrupts souls sowing in them the seed of indifference to the Truth.
Church books
ROCA and others with no connection to the Moscow Patriarchate use the books and other church items that are made by the MP in this manner recognizing its authenticity.
In this sense, ROCA relates to the MP as an enterprise. We obtain what the MP has republished just as in any other publishing house. We do not buy their own publications.
Pre-sergianist editions are few and copies are not always of good quality. So, not having any other choice to find a service book or the Holy Fathers we sometimes obtain what is published by the MP. In addition, the people doing the work (typesetters, proofreaders, etc) quite often are simply personnel hired by the MP and often not even believers.
In addition, one must note that we put great effort into the fact that, having obtained a book printed by the MP, we proof it for errors and planned forgeries.
ROCA and Hitler
ROCA blessed the Nazis in Germany and even sent greetings to A. Hitler. After this, any accusations from ROCA carry no weight since the ROCA messages and the "Declaration" are equally as criminal.
First of all, one must note that whatever accusations (truthful or false) were issued towards ROCA in itself does not justify the sergianist heresy.
Also, before taking up this argument that is often presented by the sergianists, we suggest that one carefully read the referenced documents and soberly assess them from an Orthodox point of view.
It is important to understand that the documents issued by the ROCA bishops were not of a welcoming nature but one of thanks and also it was at a time that Hitler (legally elected, one might add) did not yet start the war and did not initiate terrible repressions. Thus, we emphasize that these messages, if properly read and taking into account the time and why they were written, can not be used to assign blame to the bishopsXII.
It is more important to note that whatever the content of these messages to Hitler and the German government, they were not faith-related in nature as the "Declaration" of Metropolitan Sergius.
In other words, ROCA would continue to exist without these appeals and in no way was it imperative for all the bishops to agree with them; at the same time that the MP, in its beginnings, has exactly the heretical "Declaration" and all who accepted it were eliminated or driven underground.
So, it is not possible to put side-by-side the appeals of ROCA bishops to the Nazi government and the "Declaration" of metropolitan Sergius.
Grandmothers in far-off villages
Simple believing grandmothers, who live in far away villages, do not have the ability to learn about the heresies that are part of the MP.
Starting from the first centuries all kinds of heresies have attacked the Church. There was no internet, no radio, no rapid mail system for everybody. How did the people in far off places handle this? With God's help, in time, each had the opportunity to find out about the new erroneous teaching and make his choice.
There are groups of faithful as in a large megalopolis as well as in the farthest outlying villages in the whole world.
The Lord will not judge for not knowing but the unwillingness to know or a simple laziness are not permissible. So, let us leave the grandmothers in the far-off villages to God's Judgement. For those who wish to save their soul in the Truth the Lord, in time, will bring to the faithful.
What is important is that you are reading this commentary and you have the opportunity to learn and understand. Who knows, maybe even you will eventually take on yourself the difficult task of illuminating these grandmothers.
New social contract
In the year 2000 the MP glorified the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia and also adopted a new Social Contract which makes the Declaration of Metropolitan Sergius null and void.
Usually this argument is presented by those who fought for the "unification" of ROCA with the MP as though all transgressions have been corrected. But in this same double argument contains a contradiction.
In its "glorification" the MP noted not only those who suffered directly for the faith but also all church people that suffered during the repressions. In other words, in the list of glorified were included primarily sergianists. And what is even worse is that certain names already glorified by the Russian Church Abroad in 1981 were not included. For example, hieromartyr Metropolitan Joseph of Petrograd who very firmly criticized Sergius' usurpation of church authority and the heresy of Sergianism.
In addition, no "contracts" can correct a heresy. Any falling away can only be smoothed over via repentance in church. On the other hand, the MP not only does not repent that it is founded on the heresy of sergianism but it justifies it in whenever possible including and what is being heard more often is the glorification of Metropolitan Sergius among the saints.
Historical unification
ROCA united with the MP signing the "Act of restoring canonical contact" in 2007.
Yes, the greater part of ROCA betrayed its leader, Metropolitan Vitalii (Ustinov) and flock, and merged with the MP. However, this was more of a corporate merging as opposed to some church procedure, because if one thinks in an Orthodox manner no "unification" of two churches can occur. If two churches do not have interaction as a minimum one of them is not in the truth. For a unification it is imperative that the one that was not in the truth, with repentance, be accepted by Christ's Church. Neither the Holy Canons nor logic allows any merging but only via repentance. No "mutual concessions" and other compromises are of any use in this case.
What did occur confirms that in this case it was only corporations that merged and this has no connection to the Church of Christ. In this way the true ROCA was cleansed of traitors and as a small flock continues to witness the Truth.
The Church always serves the authorities.
During all times the church attended to the authorities. The church always defended the Byzantine emperors, the Russian tsars and taught the people to serve them. Therefore, what metropolitan Sergius did is completely lawful.
That is not so. Christ was crucified by the order of civil authorities. The apostles condemned the godless rulers; the great fathers, bishops and simple believers in front of everyone called not to bow down to the high-rank pagans. For not submitting to the godless chiefs a countless number of Christians were martyred.
Then, thanks to the holy emperor Constantine the Great began the era of Christian governments. But even in these blessed times the Church always condemned the erroneous views of Christian rulers. This can be clearly seen in the examples of St. John Chrysostom, Ambrose of Milan, the holy hieromartyr Metropolitan Phillip and many others.
The so called "Constantine era" continued until 1917 when the godless usurpers deposed and then killed the last Orthodox emperor, the holy Tsar-martyr, Nicholas.
After 1917 the faction that openly described themselves as godless came to power and so placed themselves outside God's law as stated by the apostles: "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God" (Rom 13:1). If one were to explain these words in a sergianist manner then the result would be that the rule of the Antichrist will also be "established by God".
Secular submission is the farthest that Christians can go in relation to godless authorities. There can be no blessing for godless authorities nor serving them even if it's "not out of fear but due to conscience" as the sergianists say, because this is a question of faith.
Fall of communism
Already a quarter century has passed since the communist regime fell and there is more church persecution. New churches are being opened and there is no need to be underground.
That is true. Even in the beginning of "perestroika" churches were being opened and many groups that until then were underground could pray openly.
However, the authorities quickly returned to the thought that the MP is the only lawful church and, therefore, only it has a right to exist freely. Contrary to the announced principle of separation of church and state, the MP became the real "official" one, i.e. the governmental religious organization of the Russian Federation alongside other so called faiths (old ritualists, latins, moslems, buddhists, jews, etc).
The others become persecuted. Even though at this time there are no bloody repressions but an Orthodox who does not confess the sergianist heresy can not pray openly. All churches that had been in a ruinous condition were transferred to non-sergianist groups who restored them and later, under various excuses, were confiscated and given to the MP. Even the home-based non-sergianist churches are subject to a steady attention by the police (FSB) and the priests are invited to come for "a discussion".
Regarding the authorities the majority to this day are “formers"XIII. (they were members of the old KGB - trans) The head of the government is a member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union since 1975 and a "former" chekist who witnesses about himself that "formers do not exist". (The first communist secret police in 1917 and forerunner of the KGB was the Che-Kah which is how the two Russian letters are pronounced that made up the acronym-ЧК. Those who worked there were called chekists and that name stuck through all the name changes the organization went through to this day - trans). The first minister has been a member since 1986 and the heads of the armed forces are also members. The snake only shed its skin. Those in power are committed and spiritual heirs of those who unlawfully and via a bloody uprising seized power in 1917 and then became established via bloody reign of terror in a manner unseen throughout human history,
Our church from birth
ROCA is an immigrants church and our own Moscow Patriarchate is closer to us.
ROCA is only a name. In fact, ROCA got its start from St. Patriarch Tikhon and the MP from metropolitan Sergius who unlawfully seized power and Dzhugashvili-Stalin who with Sergius' aid and others created the Moscow Patriarchate. So that "our" church can relate to the MP only in the sense of "our Soviet" and not a Russian Church in a historical sense.
To this day ROCA (part of the Russian Church) is in prayerful communion, that is in unity with the Catacomb Church (that part of the Russian Church in the Russian underground after the sergian schism).
One must also remember that the Church is not a patriotic organization. The Savior came to earth to make us citizens of Heaven and not of earthly kingdoms. There are other organizations to express patriotism.
The arrogance of ROCA members
Members of ROCA consider themselves the purest, the most correct and look down at everybody affirming that only they have grace.
This same accusation could be applied to the holy Apostles and teachers of Christ's Church. Was it not they who forbade praying with heretics and the excommunicated? Did not the fathers establish the service read on the Sunday of Orthodoxy in which church errors are anathematized? Who would dare to fault St. John Chrysostom that he, fighting against erroneous ideas and criticizing all types of heretics and schismatics, did not serve the Truth but did it because of pride?
The ROCA faithful do not compare themselves to the fathers as being equal and at the same time they realize the duty to follow their example to serve the Truth. In this case, taking the matter personally is an excuse to step away from the real question.
We do not extol ourselves but the True Orthodoxy. And what to do if our disagreements with other churches are so deep and so meaningful that we can not have any contact with them? To pretend for the sake of an unsteady external unity is not a Christian path. There is no love in this, since love is inseparable from the truth. There is no love in lies.
Disagreements, schisms, instability
There is no unity in ROCA and in the so-called "True Orthodox". Continual disagreements and schisms. The Church must be one.
Yes, it must be one but large in numbers or magnificent is not a necessity. Also, the Lord did not prepare a quiet and peaceful Church life on earth. On the contrary, He clearly said: "Do not think that I came to bring peace; I did not come to bring peace but a sword" (Matt. 32:16). A spiritual sword that cuts off those that oppose the Truth and those that love It.
Unity is not the goal but the result of unity of mind in confessing Christ. In other words, two that do not have agreement in the faith in Christ can not be united in Christ.
Already at the Jerusalem council (52 AD - trans) the holy apostles adopted a set of rules that guarded the faithful from heretics and schismatics.
The holy apostle Peter in his Conciliar Epistle directly warns about interacting with false clergyXIV.
Further on, in the life of the Church we see that not even for one century was the Church not attacked by all types of falsehoods from which the Church protected itself. Of those who persisted in the erroneous thinking some just disappeared into history and others continued to exist slowly forming a sort of "branching" of Christianity as a schism or a heresy.
So, there is nothing new in the fact that such sorrowful disagreements and schisms occur. At the same time this indicates that people are weak and the fact that the struggle continues. Unity for the sake of unity or for the sake of outward peace or for the sake of corporate interests is not the Christian way.
So, the Church was always one but its just that groups continuously fall away from the Church. But people either come to or simply return to the Church. The Lord does not take away this freedom from anybody. It has been so and will be until the end of time.
What to do
We acknowledge that the MP has much lawlessness and we are ready to accept that it is an illegal grouping that has fallen into many heresies. On the other hand we do are not familiar with true Orthodoxy. We hear that too many different "true" churches have appeared such as the Russian, the Greek and others. How to tell the difference? How not to make a mistake?
This can be answered very briefly with the Lord's words: seek and ye shall find; knock and it will be opened for you; since anyone asking shall receive and the seeker finds and it is opened to the knocker (Luke 11:9-10).
In principle, the path of salvation must not be easy. Especially after being in heresy, it takes much effort to free oneself from a heavy spiritual injury.
It happens that people come to ROCA quite readily and it also happens that we accept priests in their existing rank. This must be understood as a gesture of economia, which is an exception, for the benefit of the church.
In other instances one must expect that just starting to have doubts about one's situation that a person will immediately find the Church and will be accepted into it. It may take years for an honest search of the True Church. Holy Tradition knows many instances when heretics or pagans joined the Church only at the end of their life.
As it should be, the cornerstone must be a desire of being saved in the Truth and nothing more. Unfortunately, there are instances when a person says "I am ready to join you but only if you..." which is followed by conditions depending on the circumstances. Others who have priestly rank demand that they be accepted in their existing rank, others instruct in what manner they should be accepted, etc.
It also happens that there are those wishing to come to ROCA not thirsting for being saved in the Truth but because of a misunderstanding or a personal hurt received in the other church. Is it possible to start the road to salvation in such a frame of mind?
As soon as an individual recognizes that he is in a heretical group from which he wants to separate himself and to join the rank of the faithful, know that this must be done exclusively with repentance and with a humble spirit. Otherwise, this individual will quit the Church and will begin to wander through various schisms.
Footnotes: (translated the titles but the sites are in Russian - trans)
I Complete text of "Epistle" of Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky): http://goo.gl/Q6Xhw4
II Archpriest Michael Polski. Canonical status of the highest church authority in the USSR and abroad. Jordanville, 1948): http://goo.gl/J5AxKM
III Archpriest Lev Lebedev. The Sergianist schism and creation of the Moscow Patriarchate. http://goo.gl/RQ16bM
IV Matt 26:6
V John 14:6
VI Matt. 6:24
VII Professor Ivan Andreyev, Does the Soviet church have grace. http://goo.gl/J2E8cn
VIII Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.
IX Two-session? Council, rule 15 (Council met in Constantinople in 861 – trans)
X Apostolic Rules 10,45, 46
XI Rev. 3:15-16
XII Explanation from the Bishop's Synod Office of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad. http://goo.gl/vjmmUx
XIV 2 Peter 2:1