Редакция Православного альманаха






Курьезы: Иеромригорий (Лурье) обвиняет Владимира Мосса
в приверженности древнееврейской Каббале





Недавний текст с вероучительными архипастырскими претензиями со стороны М.Суздальского Валентина к чтецу Владимиру Моссу не мог быть составлен самим М.Валентином, считает историк Церкви чтец Владимир Мосс. Действительно, М.Валентин, который в силу, хочется верить, особого христианского молитвенного подвижничества и не многословия, испытывает серьезные затруднения в употреблении времен и спряжений родного русского языка, не говоря уж о языке церковно-славянском, вряд ли читал по-гречески Христоса Яннараса или имеет понятие об «андрогинах» и пр. Наша редакция приводит для своих читателей ответ Владимира Мосса на курьезные обвинения в свой адрес относительно приверженности Каббале и Яннарасу со стороны одной из нынешних ипостасей иеромонаха Григория (Лурье) и иером.Феофана (Арескина), Митрополита Суздальского и Владимирского Валентина. Именно ипостаси, потому что если о.Григорий еще и не «вошел в Ипостась Бога-Сына», что он пообещал недавно сделать со страниц «Суздальских Епархиальных Ведомостей», выходящих под грифом «По Благословению Митрополита Валентина», то уж что касается болящей и отработанной Властью ипостаси самого Митр. Валентина – тут он имеет лучшую сноровку, встречное понимание и успех.





Отправлено в редакцию «Романитаса» и на orthodox-tradition@yahoogroups.com




For the last month I have been abroad in Russia and Greece, and have returned to discover that Metropolitan Valentine of Suzdal has (a) excommunicated me (some nine months after our parish broke communion with him for reasons of the faith!), and (b) has accused me of preaching the heresy of “fornication-venerating”, and of following the teachings on marriage of the Greek new calendarist Yannaras and the Jewish Cabbala. I believe there has already been some discussion of this issue on “Paradosis”. However, list-members may wish to know where exactly I, the accused, stand on this issue.


    First, list-members might be interested to know that up to now M. Valentine has neither publicly nor privately criticised my teaching on marriage. Early in 2001 he blessed the publication of a booklet containing articles by four authors, including myself, criticising Fr. Gregory Lurye’s teaching on marriage (he told me that he had received a flood of criticism of this book). Lurye and his followers were, of course, furious with this booklet, and late in 2002 Tatiana Senina published an article entitled “The fornication-venerating heresy of Vladimir Moss”. Since this article was based on a stolen early draft of my article, badly and tendentiously translated, and NOT on the final published article, which alone represented my considered views, I refused to reply to it. If and when the Luryeites choose to write against any of my PUBLISHED, FINISHED work on this subject, I will reply to their criticisms. (They have not done so.) Until now there was no sign that M. Valentine himself actually agreed with Senina’s views. However, now that he has publicly declared himself on her side, branding me a heretic, I am forced to reply.


    M. Valentine writes that I have preached that “for people who have chose virginity for victory over the passion of lust it is necessary to adopt the cure of marriage”. I never said that, and I challenge anyone to find such a statement in my works. I have consistently taught, in accordance with all the holy Fathers of the Church, that virginity is higher than marriage, and have never even hinted that a person who has taken a vow of virginity should break that vow by entering into marriage.


   The metropolitan goes on: “V. Moss de facto preached the unorthodox teaching of the well-known modernist-heretic Christos Yannaras, drawn by him from the Jewish Cabbala, concerning some “paradisal grace of Eros”, androgynes and the like.” Perhaps the metropolitan could tell me what precisely is the heretical teaching of Yannaras, and then I will tell him whether I agree with it or not. As for the Cabbala, I have never read it. Actually, I doubt very much that the metropolitan has read eitherYannaras or the Cabbala, and is here simply repeating, parrot-like, the assertions of Fr. Gregory Lurye - who as a Jew who reads Hebrew, and a direct descendant of the 16th century Jewish Cabbalist Isaac Lurye, is probably very familiar with the sexual doctrines of his ancestor.


   As for “the paradisal grace of Eros”, I can think of only one passage from my original article which would seem to have any relation to such an accusation. There I write: “Let us continue our examination of the creation narrative: 'And the Lord God brought a deepsleep (Greek: ekstasis, literally “ecstasy”)on Adam; and while he was asleep, he took one of his ribs, and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man He made into a woman and brought her to the man' (Genesis 2.21-22). The great Serbian Bishop Nikolai Velimirovich (+1956) writes about this event:“This is the foundation of, and the reason for, the mysterious and attraction and union between man and woman” – a foundation laid, it should be noted once more, already in Paradise.”


    Now what are my opponents accusing me of here? That I follow the teaching of Bishop Nikolai on this question? Why then do they not accuse Bishop Nikolai of heresy, too? Why bring in Yannaras, whom I do not quote in my article (and whose views on marriage I cannot even remember, except that he once said that both virginity and marriage were methods of healing lust)? However, I stand by what I wrote in that article, and fully agree with Bishop Nikolai’s teaching, which I consider to be, not heresy, but Orthodoxy.


    M. Valentine continues: “V.Moss thereby accused the ancient saints of the Orthodox Church who called young people to the virginal life of being ‘fighters against marriage’”. Where do I accuse any saint of the Orthodox Church of being a fighter against marriage? I accuse Lurye of that, yes, but I am not aware that he is a saint of the Orthodox Church… On the contrary, I have no problem at all with the call to the virginal life. I DO have a problem with those who say that marriage is sinful….


    “(St. Alexis the Man of God, SS. Martyrs Chrysanthus and Daria, St. Matrona of Constantinople, who for the sake of the virginal life cast of their spouse).” I never accused any of these saints of  ‘fighting against marriage’. There are exceptions to every rule, and if God called these saints to abandon their marriages, then of course it was right in their cases. But the norm, as M. Valentine very well knows, is that spouses should not leave each other for the sake of the virginal life or for any other reason except adultery. This norm is affirmed by the Holy Gospel and the Holy Canons of the Church. I was simply reaffirming the norm in the face of Lurye’s insistence that the norm should be abandoned, and that the only sinless marriage is a virginal marriage.


    It should be pointed out that Fr. Gregory Lurye is here justifying his own actions. As is well-known, he abandoned his wife (from whom he has a daughter) against her will. As a result, his wife committed adultery with a member of the ROAC, Egor Kholmogorov, who remains close to M. Valentine. Kholmogorov has now abandoned Lurye’s ex-wife and is now married again….  When you look at the lives of heretics, you usually find that their false teaching is closely linked with their corrupt lives…


    My teaching, in short, is as follows. Both virginity and marriage have been given by God as means of salvation in general, and of curing the fallen passion of lust in particular. Both are good, both are without sin. But virginity is higher. As St. Seraphim said: “Marriage is good, but virginity is very, very good.” To teach that the sexual act in marriage is sinful contradicts the apostolic teaching that the marriage bed is undefiled, and to teach that it is alright for ordinary people, without a special calling from God, to abandon their spouses for the sake of virginity contradicts the clear teaching of the Lord on the indissolubility of marriage except in the case of adultery.


    For those who wish to examine my teaching on marriage more closely, I recommend that they read my dialogue between an Orthodox Christian and a Manichaean on Marriage (in Russian) at www.romanitas.ru/Actual/dialogue-on-marriage-rus2.htm.The same article can be found in English at the same site.


    If M. Valentine agrees with the teaching of Fr. Gregory Lurye and Tatiana Senina on marriage, then he himself is a heretic and should resign immediately.


Vladimir Moss