Analysis of the public letter from 16th February 2007

                                                                                                                                                          An open letter

Dear Vladimír,

to Your public letter from 16th February 2007 we partly responded in our letter to the bishops of CR and SR (Czech and Slovak Republic) dated 1st March 2007. Now we would like to make a deeper analysis of the letter because it does not concern only You and us. The letter is connected with a spiritual fight which touches the whole Church.

 

It is generally known that it is by now nearly two years that we have been writing letters to the Holy Father, cardinals and bishops in which we point at two big wounds of the mystical body of Christ – the Church. Since for the internal enemies of the Church it is impossible to silence us by argumentation directed against the contents of our letters, there is then only one possibility left – through lies and distortion to attack straight against us. Then through these lies to achieve our moral liquidation so as to cast a shadow on all that we have written and so that one will no more go to the substance but stick in the purposeful defamation.

 

We do not know to what extent You are conscious of what kind of spirit You are an instrument, and why that which You have written – to Your and others’ harm – is so suggestive. You have abandoned the substance – if You ever perceived it – and You are writing about concrete events which through Your interpretation You use to infect other souls with this spirit of lie and spiritual death.

 

We understand that God allowed even this to reveal one more side of the spiritual fight which is more cunning and more treacherous than those which we have encountered by this time.

 

One of the essential parts of spiritual fight has from time immemorial been psychological manipulation and intrigues which the proud, godless and wicked do against the just. This reality is expressed at many places of the Holy Scripture, especially in the Psalms: “Preserve me, O Lord, from violent men, who plan evil things in their heart… They make their tongue sharp as a serpent’s and under their lips is the poison of vipers… Arrogant men have hidden a trap for me… they have set snares for me.” (Ps 140; next Ps 37; 124; 94…) Everyone who stands up only a little in truth for God’s interests will experience it.

 

Why is the just hated and persecuted by the wicked and arrogant? The reason is:

a)    envy and jealousy;

b)   the life of the just is a remorse for them.

 

For these reasons the wicked, unjust and proud want to remove the just one. This psychological fight is predominantly aimed at his moral liquidation. This is done through lies, distortion of his words and intentions, through concealment of the substance and the like. The just is powerless in this fight, because:

1)   the corrupted human nature (the old self) tends towards sin – darkness and lie – and that is why suggestively presented defamations against the just are automatically considered by it to be true;

2)   truth (light) is hardly promoted and easily cast doubt on (quenched);

3)   the fight is uneven, the wicked are arrogant, with no moral principles or rules;

4)   the just lives by faith and he cannot be frank with the wicked and reveal his interior relation to God and his motivations because they will distort and misuse it. Here one can fully apply Jesus’ words: “Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.” (Mt 7:6) These words of our Saviour express the reality why every genuine and just Christian is exposed to pressure and ridicule from people with the spirit of the world within the Church.

 

Dear Vladimír, in the analysis of Your letter we will point at the forms of manipulation which You use:

a)    evoking of trustworthiness;

b)   lying or concealing of the essential truth;

c)    a hidden aim and a mean intention.

 

Quotation: “Dear brothers of the already non-existent Delegature of St. Procopius”. Only this very form of address clearly testifies to the fact that You are not writing to the brothers, nor even to us. We know You quite well and we also know about all events which are intentionally distorted in Your letter. You are writing for the public with a definitely set purpose and by order of (the spirit of) Christ’s enemies who are looking for a false witness, a traitor in our midst.

 

What is Your object?

1)     Your career;

2)     moral liquidation of the former brothers who are a remorse for You;

3)     moral discredit on us fathers.

 

You try to turn us into some visionary sect which is closed to the Church and to the truth so that You can thus destroy the trustworthiness of our letters which we have been writing to bishops, cardinals and to the Holy Father since 2005 (see www.community.org.ua). In these letters we point at the roots of the crisis of faith in the Church. It concerns above all the historic-critical method (HCT), syncretism with pagan religions connected with the gesture in Assisi, occultism, openness to the spirit of the world and to the spirit of the New Age in the Church.

 

We are asking You: Why is Your letter and Your call to a so-called repentance not addressed to us the fathers, but to the former brothers? They as well as You bear no responsibility for the events in Prague and as novices and students You were not initiated in them. Similarly, neither You nor the former brothers have anything to do with the letters we now write.

 

Quotation: “I am afraid lest God should once mark us as hypocrites and pharisees when we call others to repentance (Hu?ko, Husar, Vlk, Koubetch, Chautur, Tondra and others) but we do not repent ourselves.”

Response: You intentionally make Yourself a co-author of our letters so that You can thus take the responsibility for them before the public on Yourself. Then as an alleged co-author You want as if to repent of them and thereby to publicly condemn and retract them.

 

Quotation: “Standing before God’s face, I admit with humility… I realize that once I shall stand before the judgement seat of God … I do not know when I shall die… therefore I ask You not out of some pride but with the fear of God, that we should search our conscience in relation to the following … I do not want to exalt myself over anyone.”

Response: Dear Vladimír, why are You presenting Yourself in such a heartbreaking manner and so artificially as a man standing before God’s face, who is incapable of lie and who is striving only after God’s truth? Again You thereby prove that You are not writing to us, because we know You. We can only say to this that in Your mouth these strong words are a mere phrase and lie. The seminarists in Bratislava confirm it, too. They know that You spend more time on internet than in prayers and not at all before God’s face. We as well as our former fellow brothers from the Delegature OSBM can – if we already have to react to Your words – bear testimony to Your alleged “holiness”, “sincerity” and “humility”, for You always exalted Yourself over Your brothers, was jealous of them and You always exalted Yourself even over Your superiors, which is also testified by the further contents of Your letter. Your obedience was almost null. Your reason refused to accept the opinions of the more experienced and of the authority. The aim hidden behind Your strong words about seeming sincerity is to evoke with those who do not know You an impression of credibility, so that all that You will further falsely claim is received as the truth from a credible witness.

 

After this mean introduction You attacked Fr. Eliáš, publicly condemned him and declared that he is a dishonest man, a false prophet through whom works an evil spirit. Why did You do so and what are You aiming at? Because our enemies and the enemies of the Church, among whom You, too, have included Yourself, need to morally liquidate all that has been written and all that we have done. Above all You want to say thereby that our letters to the bishops and cardinals, in which we point at HCT, occultism, syncretism and the spirit of the New Age, are a false prophecy and a false light.

 

We quote the first point: “A false prophecy of Father Eliáš, which I personally heard from his mouth, I think that it was sometime in January 2003. There might have been ten of us whom he told it that morning after ‘erko’ (1 hour of prayer). False prophecy is a deadly sin… beside the fact that there is an influence of the evil spirit.”

Response: Dear Vladimír, You purposefully conceal the substance. You describe the situation as if it had been some extraordinary ecstatic event similar to the revelation of the Apostle John on the island of Patmos and again You explain it falsely. Do You think that noone remembers what exactly it was? We want to remind You of the reality: it was a mere testimony from the interior prayer, that God heard our prayers for Canaan. It was an inner inspiration of which all knew that it did not bind anyone in his conscience. It was an encouragement in faith, that on the day when the Church celebrates the feast of the Incarnation of the Word of God (25th March 2003) the Lord Jesus through the intercession of His Mother will give some form of spiritual or visible Canaan. The prophecy has been fulfilled, and that even more deeply and widely than we could imagine. We already explained this in our letter to the bishops of CR and SR dated 1st March 2007. However, You meanly distorted the situation to demagogically defame Father Eliáš and to claim that he committed a deadly sin and that through him works an evil spirit. For this defamation it is evidently You who committed a deadly sin and maybe You are even blaspheming against the Holy Spirit.

 

In the introduction You present Yourself as a credible witness who stands before God’s face and does not want to exalt himself over anyone, nor to condemn anyone. However, right in the first point of Your letter You condemn with an aim to spiritually kill not only a person but a whole work of God. This first point of Your letter witnesses to the fact that Your introduction about repentance, humility and God’s face is a mere comedy. This can be testified to You by us fathers and this can subsequently be testified to You by each of the ten brothers to whom You refer.

 

Quotation from the second point: “… however, the sin is … to try to stop consecration. From moral aspect there is no rightful cause, nothing that would allow to stop consecration which was officially acknowledged by Vatican through the Apostolic Nuncio…”

Response: Dear Vladimír, You were a student and You practically knew nothing about what the superiors of the Delegature OSBM were or were not doing before the consecration of L. Hu?ko. You did not know about the efforts of Ukrainians to establish the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church (UGCC) in the Czech Republic. You know nothing about our letters to Cardinal A. Sodano and about his replies. You know nothing about the talks between the Delegature Superior and the Apostolic Nuncio, Cardinal M. Vlk, Bishop I. Ljavinec. The events connected with the episcopal consecration of L. Hu?ko are known to You only at second hand. We never persuaded the Ukrainians that they should hinder the consecration of Bishop L. Hu?ko, as You falsely claim. Even the Ukrainians themselves, as we learned from them later, had no intention to stop the consecration. The Ukrainians demanded for longer time their right to the establishment of UGCC in CR in the way it was established in other states of Europe. That was why they made out a petition and that was why they even organized silent prayer meetings before the Apostolic Nunciature in Prague. None of the Basilians ever participated in them. On the day of the consecration according to the testimony of the Ukrainians themselves an unexpected thing happened which they understood as a God’s sign. Before the inauguration of the consecration, when a procession was coming out from the sacristy of the Church of the Most Holy Saviour, the Ukrainians (about 30 people) were standing in the Church of St. Clement with banners – “We want Ukrainian Church and Ukrainian bishop”. Without any preparations beforehand, they knelt down, took each other by hands and began to pray. As they testify themselves, they were astonished to see that antiterroristic police, which Bishop L. Hu?ko had called up before, did them nothing and that the procession returned back to the sacristy. Just a few Focolarines present kicked them and destroyed several banners. Subsequently the consecration took place in the Church of the Most Holy Saviour where the rector is the apostate Prof. T. Halík and where every Tuesday there are buddhist meditations organized. The enthronement likewise took place in this church. Is it all a mere chance? “… love, unity of spirit…”

 

Your argument that we had an intention to thwart the consecration is a lie and Your subsequent imputation of it to us as a deadly sin is absurd. We wonder where You got this information if You were not present there. From Bishop L. Hu?ko? Concerning Bp. L. Hu?ko, it was him, as well as You, who committed a lie and defamation when in the Bishops’ Conference he publicly declared that the superior of the Delegature Fr. Metod?j OSBM had been present among the Ukrainians and that he had shouted at him. Soon afterwards a certain bishop refused to concelebrate with Fr. Metod?j in Sázava. Father Metod?j was defended by a Roman-Catholic deacon who had been present at the consecration of L. Hu?ko and who witnessed that it was a lie. He confirmed that the Superior of the Delegature Fr. Metod?j had concelebrated with Bishop L. Hu?ko, that they had given each other the kiss of peace, and therefore it was not true that he would have shouted at Bishop L. Hu?ko.

 

Dear Vladimír, You lay on us the blame for the events in Prague, and You condemn us with words: “God will be judging us that we claimed that we wanted to do good and we did evil (lie, rebellion, slanders). Evil will always be evil, sin will always remain sin even if it served to achieve good. Unrepented sin will not be justified by God, let us not be wiser than God.”

To this we respond to You: Concerning the events connected with the consecration of L. Hu?ko as well as the claim of the Ukrainians to their UGCC, we do not fear God’s Judgement. Yet we fear lest these words of Yours should be turned against You and against people with a similar spirit.

 

Next You claim that we have a hate on Bishop L. Hu?ko. We never had and do not have any hate. The letters which we now write and in which we point at the fruit of the activity of Card. M. Vlk, Bishop L. Hu?ko and of the Focolare movement are not a product of hate. On the contrary, they are a demonstration of pure love to the bleeding Church and to them as well. We are persuaded that both Cardinal M. Vlk and Bishop L. Hu?ko, as well as the other bishops and members of Focolare will be grateful to us in eternity for this ministry of truth and love. Although it is quite painful for them, for the time being it is the most effective means to their conversion and to their eternal salvation.

 

We are not angry with our enemies, we love them in truth, and that as ourselves. For if they should be eternally condemned, then we better wish them that God punish them here on earth and thus save them from eternal punishments in hell. We wish the same for ourselves, that God better punish us here on earth – similarly to our enemies. For we want to be saved at any price and from our heart we wish the same to all, even to our greatest enemies! But You, all this to the contrary, falsely and on top of it publicly claim that we have a hate on our enemies and that to us is applied the judgement according to the Scripture: “But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgement.”

 

Regarding the events in Prague in 2003, General Superior D. Ljakhovych OSBM, Bishop L. Hu?ko and Superior of the Delegature OSBM twice met together in common proceedings with the Apostolic Nuncio J. E. Ender. It was definitely proved that the accusations on the part of Bp. L. Hu?ko were false. And on the contrary, the Apostolic Nuncio ordered Bp. L. Hu?ko to return the religious order a stolen property. Bishop L. Hu?ko in the presence of the General Superior and Apostolic Nuncio promised to do so on the condition that some of the OSBM fathers would leave for Ukraine for certain time. In spite of the fact that the General Superior OSBM fulfilled the demand, Bishop L. Hu?ko did not return the property. And not only that; he even did not renew the legal status of the Delegature OSBM as he had been ordered by the Apostolic Nuncio. In fact, immediately after his entrance into office he let the state authorities abolish the legal status of our Delegature OSBM in CR, though ecclesiastically the Delegature was not abolished.

 

Why such illegal and inhumane acting of this bishop? The main reason of his disregard of whatever laws was that from his own experience as the highest representative of the Focolare movement in the former Czechoslovak Socialistic Republic he was conscious of what power the Focolare movement had in the Church. He was well aware that even the Apostolic Nuncio was weak to force him into observing the Church laws. Only after a year, when the new General Superior was elected, due to the pressure of Bp. L. Hu?ko, Card. M. Vlk and Focolare movement the Delegature OSBM in CR was abolished even ecclesiastically. For a wonder You truly write: “Every one of us knows best what pressure, what lies and what deceits were committed by those who abolished the Delegature.”

 

The third point of Your letter – quotation: “The newspaper article in May 2003, which was published in the daily ‘Metro’, on alleged collaboration of Bishop L. Hu?ko and State Security Committee (StB)… This was connected with several sins – defamation of Bishop L. Hu?ko (his alleged collaboration with StB has never been proved), lie and deceit. The deceit was committed when subsequently the police investigated who was the author of the article… The authorship was professed by Mr. Špi?ík (note: he is the father of the two harmed Basilian priests). The police was deceived, the bishops were deceived, the believers were deceived… Brothers, I do not want to offend or disgrace anyone, but God sees it, that it is a sin of lie and slander. You might say that we had to do so; however, man has free will, he does not have to lie, slander and cheat. If one does so of one’s own free will, the graver is the sin which he has committed.”

Response: You, Vladimír, claim that there was a big deceit committed because the author signed only put his signature to the mentioned item in the daily Metro but had not elaborated it himself.

 

For example bishops and the Holy Father, too, are usually given drafts and even whole articles elaborated by people who are initiated into a particular issue and the Holy Father as well as bishops take upon themselves full responsibility by their signature. Noone investigates who drafted the letters and articles. Noone shouts at the bishop: “Lie, deceit… If (the bishop, the Pope) does so of his own free will, the graver is the sin which he has committed.”

The police which inquired into the alleged charge of a slander against L. Hu?ko officially confirmed that the article did not contain anything that would not be publicly known – namely that in CR there was such practice that the title of CSc. (Candidate for the D.Sc.) could not be granted to anyone who at the same time was not a member of KS? (the Communist party) or a collaborator of KS? or StB, and thus the police confirmed that the author of the article did not commit any criminal offence which Bishop L. Hu?ko demanded of them to uphold.

 

Quotation to the point 4: “Deceit was committed in the subsequent attempt at registration of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church (UGCC) with the Ministry of Culture in the Czech Republic.”

Response: The Ministry did not deal with us (Basilians) so we could not deceive them. You thereby mendaciously defame the Ukrainian preparational committee under the leadership of Dr. M.L.

 

Next quotation: “I was personally engaged in the process of registration after Fr. Cyril had to leave for Bradford, England in January 2004. Therefore I can say that … the main organizers were the Basilian fathers in Pidhirtsi in Ukraine. From them I was receiving instructions what steps to take further.”

Response: It is not true that You were engaged in the process of registration because the matter there was an official legal procedure which was carried out by legally required representatives of the Ukrainians in CR, headed by Dr. M.L. The decision on the rejection of registration was taken as early as the end of 2003 (published in March 2004).

 

Therefore Your statement concerning instructions from the Basilian fathers from Pidhirtsi in Ukraine is a lie.

You further write: “Fr. Eliáš has never admitted that he wanted to achieve the aim by help of deceits and lies.”

Response: This statement does not refer to Fr. Eliáš but to You and Your letter.

 

You continue: “However, an even more serious lie was committed in the autumn 2003 when the signatures needful for registration were lacking…”

Response: You were not a witness here, so You cannot act as a witness.

 

Quotation: “Putting their signatures everyone declared that he/she was willing to become a member of UGCC, which was a lie.”

Response: It is similar as if You claimed that the signature in whatever official contract is a lie. From where do You have evidence that the persons concerned signed something they did not know and did not want? Even if they had whatever kind of motivation to put their signature, the signature is valid and binding.

 

You further write: “In such way there were more than 100 signatures collected from people out of whom many even did not know what UGCC was, nor did they know why they were signing it.”

Response: According to Your methodology it is possible by Your statement – by a mere word – to cast doubt upon all signatures and juridical acts in the history of mankind. How can You claim about somebody that he/she signed something about which he/she did not have even the most essential information? You thereby make fools of the people signed. Your statement is an affront to these people and Your fabrication. Your testimony can therefore be accepted only by two categories of people:

1)      by those who wish these fabrications and who have already lost their conscience like You;

2)      by those who want to become like that.

You crown Your lies with a mendacious “oath”: “I repeat once more – from January to March 2004 I was directly engaged in the attempt at registration, so I know what I am speaking about.” Concerning the intervention of bishops in the process of the registration You write: “Bishops had a right to stand up against the registration of UGCC whether one liked or disliked it.”

Response: The endeavour after the registration of the Ukrainian community was a purely civil matter which regarded general human rights and civil laws of the Czech Republic. No Church had the right to encroach on it.

 

Quotation: “… (the rejection) was substantiated from the side of the Ministry partly by scantiness of valid signatures and partly by shortcomings in the statute...”

Response: You consciously conceal the fact that Ukrainians collected a sufficient number of signatures and there was no reason for not accomplishing the registration; however, Mrs. ?epová at the Ministry of Culture, an atheist, put psychological pressure through personal letters in order to intimidate the persons signed so the number of applicants was reduced. Moreover, she made up other artificial problems. The Focolare leadership in CR and Mrs. ?epová at the Ministry of Culture knew well that if the registration took place and if the Ukrainians afterwards turned to the Holy Father, certainly he would acknowledge UGCC even ecclesiastically, the same as Ukrainians have in other countries.

 

You further write: “Subsequently several letters directed against the bishops in the Czech Republic were written. Regrettably to say, at that time I supported it.”

Response: Neither in 2003 nor in 2004 we wrote any letters against the bishops in CR. When we later began to write, it was not against the bishops as You short-circuitly express it, but the matter there was objective issues concerning the Church and thus also the bishops. However, as to this problem of the pains of the Church we started to write only two years later. And we wrote then and now we also write not for envy but for love. You make Yourself a co-author of our letters in spite of the fact that You do not understand their substance at all nor did You have and do not have anything in common with them.

 

We ask You:

1)      Does HCT destroy faith in God’s Word and the foundations of Christianity or not?

2)      Is syncretism with pagan religions a wound to and a decay of the Church or not? (You, who were converted among Protestants, should know that behind buddhism and hinduism there are demonic powers.) Is occultism (homoeopathy, acupuncture, hypnosis, divination with a dowsing rod, healing by energies etc.) a sin against the first commandment and opening oneself to demons or not? You know it; or have You already changed Your Catholic faith?

 

Tell us honestly who in the whole Catholic Church has the courage to stand up for the defence of these rudimental pillars of the Christian faith. Who except us had the courage to stand up against this spirit of antichrist in the Church? That was why we lost our good reputation and completely everything, in spite of the fact that there was a career opening before us. We renounced it for Christ’s sake and for the sake of His Gospel. You are consciously and purposefully concealing the substance. You are turning us into cheats and mean people in order to destroy Christ’s testimony borne by us. That is why Your attack on us, on top of it a mendacious, mean and demagogical one, is not only an attack on us but also on Christ and His bleeding Church. We are seriously afraid that this is a sin against the Holy Spirit.

 

In the conclusion of Your whole letter You write: “I could continue; there was a big number of those mistakes and errors as before the year 2003 so after it…”

Response: What do You want to say by this, what mistakes do You mean? It is natural that all make mistakes and errors for their whole life. However, You intentionally put this catchphrase to such light that You may cast doubt upon our whole community, our life and all that we wrote as if it was built upon lie, deceit and error. It is a mean manner You use in order to divert the attention from the substance and avoid the responsibility; however, You are deceiving Yourself and others, too. But You say that it is us who are deceivers and liars.

 

Quotation: “Everyone knows best what pressure, what lies and what deceits were committed by those who abolished the Delegature.”

Response: Surprisingly, this statement in Your letter is true. However, why do You not thoroughly threaten with “God’s Judgement” those “who committed lies and deceits” and why do You not point at their “evil and sin”: “God will be judging (you) that (you) claimed that (you) wanted to do good and (you) did evil (lie, rebellion against God, slanders). Evil will always be evil, sin will always remain sin, even if it served to achieve good… unrepented sin will not be justified by God… (do not be) wiser than God.” You, however, on the contrary, stood up against the defenceless who for their love to Christ are put in the Catholic Church on the very last place, spitted and defamed, and Your mean letter spitted us more than all attacks of our overt enemies. If only You understood that You are thereby not making harm to us but to Yourself and to other souls.

The aim of Your letter is to turn us into a sect and to degrade our testimony to Jesus and His Gospel which we defend in our letters and for the sake of which we are willing to lay down even our lives.

 

Quotation: “Since there was no control from outside, we were closed to the opinions of the representatives of the Church and that was why all ended in the way it ended. It is true that the Delegature was liquidated by its enemies; however, we bear the blame for it, too.”

Response: But You do know well that we were the most watched religious community in whole CR. The Superior of the Delegature all the time kept contact with the General Superior who visited CR several times, gave recollections and made even a visitation of the whole community. Without the consent of the General Superior it was not even possible to receive someone in the novitiate, to give vows etc. About every movement the Superiors in Rome were informed. They also knew what our attitude was like towards HCT, occultism, and also towards charismatic renewal. Every month the Superior of the Delegature took part in the conference of higher religious superiors. Every week he reported to Bishop I. Ljavinec in detail on the activity of Basilians from the parish of St. Clement in Prague. The whole Church in CR had us as if under a microscope. Your enforcement of the opinion that we were closed and without control is a lie. Yes, we were closed, but closed to the spirit of the world, and therefore those in the Church who opened themselves to this spirit of the world could feel quite well that we were different and that we were not in unity with them. The testimony of our willingness to a contact was our organizing of the celebration of the feast of St. Procopius in March 2003 whereat beside the Apostolic Nuncio and several bishops there were also about 100 priests and a wide public. You claim that we were closed to the opinions of the representatives of the Church; however, why do You not say that our theological views were built on the Catechism of the Catholic Church, on the theology of Card. J. Ratzinger and Prof. V. Wolf. (Under supervision of the latter some of us did our theses. Two of us did them under supervision of Prof. P. Ambros SJ, though he has an antagonistic spirit.) Till 2003 we were considered among religious a blooming and exemplary order. Concerning the events in Prague, we consulted General Councillors OSBM in Rome, we wrote two letters to Card. A. Sodano and got two responses. We communicated with the Apostolic Nuncio J. E. Ender as well as with Bishop I. Ljavinec. So Your myth about some sectarian reserve of ours, which You purposefully enforce upon others, is an absurdity.

 

Quotation: “It hurts me that many times we spoke that our aim is the renewal of the Church, but when 99% of bishops, priests and believers say that we made a mistake when we behaved towards Bishop L. Hu?ko and others in such way, we are not able to admit that even through this speaks the Holy Spirit and reveals to us the truth.”

Response: First of all realize that the truth is not there where is the majority, even if it is 99%. When Christ was condemned by the Church hierarchy (99%), it did not mean that they were right. Nor was right the crowd of people when shouting: “Crucify Him!” Do You want to say that if – in Your opinion – 99% of bishops are nowadays silent on HCT, which is propagated at theological schools, or even support it, that it means that HCT is true? If You claim this, You thereby state, too, that Christ is neither true God nor the only Saviour and therefore You are neither a Catholic nor a Christian any longer. The Word of God says: “Wide is the gate and easy is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.” (Mt 7:13-14)

 

Dear Vladimír, at the close of this letter we want to tell You a few frank words. You have opened Yourself to a deadly spirit which through You has attacked even others. We believe that God will turn even this evil into a blessing. That was why we wrote You this letter, and not only to You. But You need not despair; do honest and concrete repentance. Visit Your Archbishop Mons. J. Sokol and ask him to postpone Your deacon’s ordination which You should receive in a short time. We recommend You at least three years in civil employment. We love You and we want You – if You someday become a priest – to bring a blessing for the Church and not to bring her harm. We are praying for You in earnest so that You could break with that spirit which very seriously endangers not only others but Your eternal salvation as well.

 

In Christ,

            Fr. Metod?j R. Špi?ík ThD. OSBM

(the former superior of the Delegature in CR)       

Fr. Eliáš A. Dohnal ThD. OSBM          

Fr. Markian V. Hitiuk ThLic. OSBM

Fr. Cyril J. Špi?ík ThD. Ing. OSBM

                                                                                                                                  Pidhirtsi 8th May 2007

 

Address: Monastery OSBM, 80660 Pidhirtsi, Brody district, Lviv region, Ukraine

www.community.org.ua