Gigantic ornate church built by Monks to open in Moscow

Discussion in 'General discussion' started by andree, May 3, 2017.

  1. andree

    andree Well-Known Member

  2. andree

    andree Well-Known Member

    Here is the entire article with photos.

    Gigantic, Super-Ornate New Church Built By Monks To Open Soon Next To KGB in Moscow
    An extraordinary, enormous, church is being built at a furious pace right in the heart of Moscow

    Paul Kaiser [​IMG]
    Sun, Dec 4, 2016 | 7956 146


    (Click to enlarge)
    An enormous new church has been built in record-breaking time in central Moscow a few blocks from the historic KGB headquarters on Lyubanka Square. The church commemorates Christian victims of the revolution and subsequent persecution.

    The church is being built on the territory of the Sretensky Monastery on the initiative of Bishop Tikhon, the abbot of the monastery. Tikhon is a massive celebrity in Russia due to the runaway success of his book Everyday Saints, which is available in English in an excellent translation by the American writer Julian Lowenfeld, famous for his translations of Russian poetry. (Amazon) Everyday Saints is by far the best-selling book in Russia in decades, selling in the 10s of millions of copies.

    Bishop Tikhon, one of Russia's most prominent clerics
    The church is being financed from sales of the book, the monastery, and donations from the public. Construction commenced in early 2014, and the church will open its doors in March of 2017.

    The picture below which shows the church relative to a human being, gives an idea of its size. Further pictures showing the ornate interiors follow.
    The Sretensky monastery was founded in 1397 and is one of the five oldest monasteries in Moscow, playing a crucial role in the history of the city.

    It's enormous

  3. David

    David Well-Known Member

  4. andree

    andree Well-Known Member

    This is sad news indeed David. And these are pretty harsh sentiments against the Catholic Church in the article:

    The theology of ecumenism, Tikhon added, was "invented and lacks natural reasons", whilst the anti-ecumenical theology "is based on the patristic tradition".

    “Patristics is the term used to describe the position of fundamentalist groups within the Orthodox Church who oppose the ‘Nikodimist’ line, to which Patriarch Kirill is associated. The latter refers to a relatively new position, and is "named after Metropolitan Nikodim (Rotov), who died suddenly during an audience with Pope John Paul I in 1978.”

    “Its distinguishing feature is a lack of fear of the West and, in particular, of the Vatican, and its refusal to see unorthodox Christians as an enemy," Chapnin explained in an article for AsiaNews.
    I had never heard of the story of the death of NIkodem of Petersburg in the presence of Pope John Paul I. So I googled and found this interview about it here:

    The article implies that in those days, ecumenism was much more advanced, as in this excerpt "«Without proclamations, the role of the successor of Peter was then recognized in fact by the bishops of the East. Their trips to Rome were real visits ad limina Petri. The regimes were urging them and they came to the Pope with the faith of sons, sons of a sister Church. Perhaps the bond of the successor of Peter with the Christians of those lands would have found a way of asserting itself. It may all have been a delusion, but the return to unity seemed so easy at certain moments…»

    The article goes on: "In his personal gallery of lost chances, of omens, of what might have been and was not, Arranz also puts the words that Nikodim spoke to John Paul I, and that he himself translated for the Pope, on that dramatic morning of 5 September 1978. Luciani himself mentioned that conversation in public. «Two days ago,» the Pope said, «Metropolitan Nikodim of Petersburg died in my arms. I was answering his address. I assure you that in my life I have never heard such fine words for the Church as those spoken by him. I cannot repeat them, it remains a secret». A secret that Arranz as interpreter knows. With him, for the first time, we plunge back into the chronicle of those days and of that tragic morning."

    I wonder why his last words had to remain a secret? Does anyone know more about this subject?

Share This Page