President Medvedev was “An Absolute Success” at Hokkaido Summit

President Dmitri Medvedev (1965- )

Konstantin Kosachyov, chairman of the international affairs committee in the RF Gosduma, said, “President Medvedev’s performance at the Hokkaido summit of the world’s leading industrial nations was an absolute success. Let me point out, for objectivity’s sake, that differing points of view were voiced in Japan, and, come to think of it, a few countries of the West. Some media outlets said President Medvedev was a complete failure. What they said to prove their point of view sounded ridiculous, far from serious, and hardly professional. They accused Medvedev of failing to keep the United States of America from deploying elements of anti-missile defence in Europe, move a step closer to the settlement of the dispute over control of the Northern Kurile Islands, and improve relations with London. You will, of course, agree that one has to be a complete ignoramus in politics or an outspoken enemy of Russia to speak that way about someone’s performance at a G-8 summit. Are G-8 summits called to discuss that sort of things?

As for me, I never doubted that President Medvedev would do well in Japan. His impressive record of involvement in domestic and international policy-making dates back to the Putin period, and as soon as he entered the Kremlin, about two months ago, he started demonstrating excellent command of the whole gamut of this country’s problems. Since then, he held a number of big media conferences, and he never beat about the bush answering the journalists’ questions.

The Hokkaido summit proved he looked good on the silver screen, had a good sense of humour, and knew how to control his emotions. It did more than that. It made it clear that the new leader of Russia was perfectly prepared to play a role in the settlement of the most pressing global problems. The Hokkaido forum yielded thirty agreements, and, it is, in great measure, due to Russia that it owes that impressive result. The leaders of the world’s most developed nations upheld President Medvedev’s calls for the convocation of a grain summit and follow-up conferences of their ministers of agriculture, and, in the same context, hailed his pledge to boost food production and food exports.

The Russian decision to host an international conference on the Middle East was also appreciated. All participants in the Hokkaido forum liked what Dmitri Medvedev said about expanded cooperation in civilian nuclear production. And, Medvedev said before leaving Hokkaido that Russia meant to remain a reliable seller of sources of energy and hold a high profile in the settlement of the climate change problem. The Hokkaido meeting between Dmitri Medvedev and the leaders of Brazil, India, and China shed even more light on the growing role of Russia in efforts to settle global problems. Tell me, please, did any other national leader manage to score more impressive results at Hokkaido?”

10 July 2008

Viktor Yenikeyev

Voice of Russia World Service

http://www.ruvr.ru/main.php?lng=eng&q=29513&cid=56&p=10.07.2008

Government Policy Emboldens Russians to Look to the Future with Cautious Optimism

Many knowledgeable analysts believe that the economic policy of the Russian government gives cause for Russians to look to the future with cautious optimism. Transiting from one economic system to another, the country is in the midst of frenzied activity and the economic policy is being modernised and taking place in a different social milieu. Current developments in the nation are dictating the need for urgent reforms.

In the last decade, the Russian economy has developed intensively, increasing in quantity, but, not changing qualitatively. High oil prices have led to rapid development of natural resource exploitation. The transition to an innovative model requires a modern system of management, meaning an upgrading of state policy, since the traditional mode of operation can no longer solve today’s tasks. This issue has been repeatedly spoken about at the highest levels.

Russia is on the threshold of large-scale changes and many Russians are trying to understand what lies in store for them tomorrow, and sociologists focus attention on this in their studies. Aleksei Levinson said, “In people’s consciousness, today’s situation is characterised by different tendencies, amongst which is an inertia generated by the residue of the feeling of well-being and self-consolation that was widespread in the second half, if not all, of the time of Mr Putin’s administration The assumption of power by a new head of state has not brought about significant change in the tendency, but, there are signs of movement in the opposite direction. This is a result of high inflation and prices”.

Russians believe that this is not the time to expect serious complications and most of them are rather cautions in their evaluations. Answering the question as to whether the government of Vladimir Putin can alter the Russian economic model without triggering social upheaval, Russians say that such is likely. We could label such a social opinion “cautious optimism”. The cautiousness can be explained by the many of tasks facing the cabinet and President Medvedev, who is taking the first tentative steps on the road to realising his ambitious programme. Russians expect Mr Putin to back Mr Medvedev in his onerous undertakings. Mr Putin’s support should be effective instrument in the new power structure taking shape. The transfer of power from one president to another was quite painless, as was planned. Consequently, there are reasons to believe that other plans will equally see realisation.

10 July 2008

Voice of Russia World Service

http://www.ruvr.ru/main.php?lng=eng&q=29524&cid=57&p=10.07.2008

Holy Synod of the Romanian Patriarchate Condemns Metropolitan who took Uniate Communion, No Decision as to Punishment

Patriarch Daniel Ciobotea of Bucharest and all Romania (1951- )

The Holy Synod of the Romanian Patriarchate did not carry out any punishment against Metropolitan Nicolae of the Banat, who received Holy Communion at a Uniate liturgy, or Bishop Sophrony, who blessed water together with a Uniate “bishop”. “The Holy Synod condemns the behaviour of both of these hierarchs, for this has caused much disquiet in the church. After taking this decision, the Holy Synod took under consideration their sincere regret and repentance, and accepted this as the first sign of their amendment”, said a communiqué of the press service of the Patriarchate of Romania published on its official website, Interfax-Religion reported.

The Holy Synod reiterated the inadmissibility of “receiving Holy Communion in the church of another Christian confession” for all hierarchs, priests, deacons, monks, and laity of the Patriarchate of Romania, just as it is inadmissible for any Orthodox cleric “to perform any sacrament in union with the clergy of any other confession. Those who refuse to obey this decision shall be excommunicated from the Orthodox Church, and they shall be subject to the canonical punishments that correspond to the position that they occupy in the Church”, the declaration of the Holy Synod noted. The text of the document clearly states that clergymen are to be deposed for such actions and laymen are to be barred from the Holy Eucharist.

As was previously reported by Interfax-Religion, at the end of May, Metropolitan Nicolae of Banat took Holy Communion at a Uniate liturgy in Timosoara in the presence of the papal Apostolic Nuncio to Romania, Archbishop Francisco Xavier Lozano. Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad, the head of the MP Department of External Church Relations directed a letter of protest to his counterpart in the Patriarchate of Romania, Bishop Cyprian, with the request that “he clarify what actually occurred, and verify if a hierarch of the Patriarchate of Romania truly took the sacraments from those not part of the Orthodox Church”. Vladyki Kirill also asked Bishop Cyprian to relate the views of Patriarch Daniel of Bucharest and all Romania and the Holy Synod on this matter.

10 July 2008

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=25403

Editor’s Note:

Many converts to Orthodoxy in America, especially in America, do not understand the Orthodox position on Uniatism. The Church views Uniatism as a spiritual imposture of the worst order. We view them as Roman Catholics who use Orthodox ritual and externals to fool the Orthodox faithful into union with the Pope of Rome.

In Eastern Europe, the Unia was brutally imposed by the Poles and Hapsburgs upon their Orthodox subjects. There was much persecution of Orthodox believers, and, if you doubt me, ask the Carpatho-Russian people (in particular, ask them about the Tallerhof death camp run by the Hapsburgs). One should note that Orthodox people of this nationality call themselves Carpatho-Russians, and Uniates call themselves Rusyns. Indeed, most Carpatho-Russian people consider being called “Rusyn” insulting. Sadly, this persecution continues today, and you should keep the faithful Orthodox people of Galicia and Carpatho-Russia in your prayers, as they are under attack by fanatical Galician Uniates daily. They are heroes and deserve your support.

BMD

Schismatical “Patriarchate of Kiev” shall officially declare that Russia was never a part of Ancient Rus

Vladimir Monomakh (Natalia Kurgozova-Miroshnik). All responsible historians consider “Kievan Rus” the precursor of the modern Russian state. Do not be misled by Galician tomfoolery.

The self-proclaimed and schismatical “Patriarchate of Kiev” intends to redefine the term “Rus” as a part of the celebrations of the 900th anniversary of St Mikhail of Zlatoverkh Monastery and the 1,020th anniversary of the Baptism of Russia. “In connection with these two jubilees we are holding a Local Council where we shall correct the term ‘Rus’, for today, Moscow says that Rus refers to Russia and not the Ukraine”, according to the self-proclaimed and anathematised “Patriarch of Kiev” Philaret Denisenko. He claims that the correction shall be introduced on the basis of old chronicles, particularly those of Nestor the Chronicler. “Ancient chronicles testify to the fact that in the 9th and 10th centuries Rus included the contemporary Ukraine, a part of Byelorussia, the States, and a part of Poland. There was no such city as Moscow then, but, and today, they (Russians: Interfax) consider themselves Rus, but, this is a perversion of history”, Mr Denisenko emphasised.

9 July 2008

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=25389

Editor’s Note:

Firstly, consider the source. Philaret Denisenko is a deposed cleric of the MP, who is also under an anathema. He was a notorious collaborator with the KGB, a simoniac, and had a common-law wife and children. Truly, a paragon of all the Orthodox virtues.

Secondly, the historical veracity of the statement is laughable and beneath contempt. After the Mongol invasions, there was a verified population shift northwards. That is to say, the ruling élite of Kiev ended in Moscow. In short, Russia is the sole heir of Rus and no amount of screaming by Galician Uniates and their “Orthodox” running-dog-lackeys such as Denisenko can change it.

This would be absurdly funny, as it is obviously something ginned up by the American Cardinal Husar in Lvov by the light of a full moon; save for the fact that such “pronouncements” may lead to the persecution, and even martyrdom, of pious Orthodox Christians in the Ukraine. It is high time that Russia ends the existence of this sickly and deluded successor state. The Ukrainian people would greet the Russian forces as liberators from the Orangie fanatics (do not forget that 45 percent of the population is Russian-speaking, 30 percent speak both languages (with Russian being preferred), and only 25 percent are pure Ukrainophones). May God send his mercy on the suffering people of the Ukraine. How much longer, dear Lord, must they suffer?

BMD