What's Up With This About ROAC?

[canonical]

Anton Ter-Grigorian, writing in "Romanitas" (www.romanitas.ru), explains the real story behind the "retirement" of Fr. Gregory Lourie.

Not long ago, the Brotherhood of St. James the Brother of God decided to remove Alexander Soldatov from his position as editor of "Vertograd". The decision was signed by 14 laymen and two priests of the ROAC - Fr. Michael Makeev and Fr. Roman Pavlov (the founder of "Vertograd"). Their reasons were the persistent lies, distortions and heresies propounded by "Vertograd" under Soldatov. Needless to say, Soldatov has refused to hand over the keys, and "Vertograd" continues to be produced by him...

The noise generated by this affair has forced Metropolitan Valentine, of whom Soldatov is a close ally, to act. He convened a meeting of the Synod on November 13. Present with the metropolitan were Archbishop Theodore, Bishop Irinarch, Fr. Gregory Lourie, A. Soldatov and Fr. Roman Pavlov (Olga Mitrenina was behind the door). Fr. Michael Makeev.

Before the session, the metropolitan posed the question to Fr. Roman: "If Fr. Gregory is guilty, does that mean that I am guilty, too, since I have been protecting him?" And during the session the following irritated outbursts were heard: "Have you read what Romanitas is writing?" "Have you read what Vladimir Moss writes?" "Tell us, Fr. Roman, how does Romanitas receive inner church information before everybody else?"

The session came down to Fr. Roman talking about the right confession of faith, and what a Christian can and cannot do, and his five opponents asking him why he didn't come out with his criticisms earlier.

The most significant statement to come out of the session - and the real reason for its being convened - was: "Yes, we know that four hierarchs are ready to leave ROAC if Fr. Gregory is not defrocked"...

After the session the decision was made that BOTH Fr. Roman Pavlov AND Fr. Gregory Lourie are "pochisleny za shtat" (an inadequate translation would be: "retired") "for violating ecclesiastical discipline".

This is not the first time that M. Valentine has tried to silence both sides of the continuing struggle for the faith inside the ROAC by supposedly punishing representatives of both sides "for violating ecclesiastical discipline" - which is reminiscent of the attempts of Emperor Heraclius to silence both sides during the Monothelite controversy in the 7th century.

However, only one side is really punished. Fr. Roman will now not be allowed to serve in Moscow until and unless the metropolitan changes his decision. Fr. Gregory, on the other hand, according to Alexei Romanovsky, the moderator of the "unofficial forum of the ROAC" has declared, continues to serve in his church of St. Elizabeth in St. Petersburg.

There is now an interesting situation in the Moscow parish of the ROAC. The rector, Protopriest Michael Ardov, is a supporter of Lourie. However, many have left him because of this, and he himself is now undergoing treatment for cancer of the bowel. The second priest, Protopriest Michael Makeev, is an opponent of Lourie and continues to be the spiritual father of many parishioners
(including Anton Ter-Grigorian). The third priest, Fr. Roman Pavlov, was a supporter of Lourie, has now changed his mind and is on the side of the confessors of the truth, but has been "retired".

Meanwhile, not a single one of the numerous very serious charges levelled against Fr. Gregory Lourie over the last three years has been investigated....

But the most important question is: what will the four hierarchs who are preparing to leave the ROAC do now?

---

This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm

[priestmark]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/orthodox- ... sage/42234

I have taken the liberty of replacing your quoted text (that had no quotation marks) with the/a primary reference to its source - which is the only academically honest thing to do. The answer to your question - which seems more like a troll - is to be found in the context of the unattributed translation you have posted. (context = orthodox-tradition list, both now and also earlier when Vladimir Moss announced his reasons for leaving ROAC which included the heresies espoused by hieromonk Gregory who is the "Basil Lourie" I referred to in http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/vi ... ight=#9235 - heresies which apparently continue to be supported by these latest contradictory words/actions from the head of ROAC)

The bottom line is that in spite of the sound of reports coming from official sources in ROAC, nothing has changed for Hieromonk Gregory, other than he has lost the title of 'rector' while continuing to serve as the priest for his parish. His detractors however appear to have been effectively suspended, or in the case of four bishops (as suggested by some reports) are on the verge of leaving ROAC because ogf the failure to address the issues revolving around Hieromonk Gregory. And some say there is no parallel between the mitosis of the Russians and Greek Old Calendarists.

[Monk George]

Anton Ter-Grigorian, writing in "Romanitas" (www.romanitas.ru), explains the real story behind the "retirement" of Fr. Gregory Lourie.

************* Let us all hold onto our hats because now we are going to get “THE REAL STORY”. Has Anton ever proved himself to be a person who can be believed? Are we here in America going to listen and believe this person who has a bad reputation in Russia?

Not long ago, the Brotherhood of St. James the Brother of God decided to remove Alexander Soldatov from his position as editor of "Vertograd". The decision was signed by 14 laymen and two priests of the ROAC - Fr. Michael Makeev and Fr. Roman Pavlov (the founder of "Vertograd"). Their reasons were the persistent lies, distortions and heresies propounded by "Vertograd" under Soldatov. Needless to say, Soldatov has refused to hand over the keys, and "Vertograd" continues to be produced by him...

The noise generated by this affair has forced Metropolitan Valentine, of whom Soldatov is a close ally, to act. He convened a meeting of the Synod on November 13. Present with the metropolitan were Archbishop Theodore, Bishop Irinarch, Fr. Gregory Lourie, A. Soldatov and Fr. Roman Pavlov (Olga Mitrenina was behind the door). Fr. Michael Makeev.

******* If we were to believe this, we are told that the Metropolitan convened a synod meeting solely for this purpose, but this is not true. This Lourie issue was but one topic of the many topics of Church business that was dealt with. I know this for a fact.

Before the session, the metropolitan posed the question to Fr. Roman: "If Fr. Gregory is guilty, does that mean that I am guilty, too, since I have been protecting him?" And during the session the following irritated outbursts were heard: "Have you read what Romanitas is writing?" "Have you read what Vladimir Moss writes?" "Tell us, Fr. Roman, how does Romanitas receive inner church information before everybody else?"

****** All of this is just “I heard such and such, it sounded like a outburst so I’m going to tell the world such and such”. Who has time to listen to all this gossip?

The session came down to Fr. Roman talking about the right confession of faith, and what a Christian can and cannot do, and his five opponents asking him why he didn't come out with his criticisms earlier.

****** What are we talking about? Nobody knows. So why are we talking about it? Just to gossip?

The most significant statement to come out of the session - and the real reason for its being convened - was: "Yes, we know that four hierarchs are ready to leave ROAC if Fr. Gregory is not defrocked"...

*** ** This is nonsense. Do you think four bishops will cause a schism because a priest is not defrocked and to top it off, this priest belongs to another bishop? Just think about it. Who will be guilty of causing such a schism if they do such a thing? This is just Vladimir Moss stirring up opinion to justify his own prideful and sinful actions of passing judgment on his own bishops. He placed himself above the synod of bishops and condemned them, although not one bishop can canonically be criticized.

After the session the decision was made that BOTH Fr. Roman Pavlov AND Fr. Gregory Lourie are "pochisleny za shtat" (an inadequate translation would be: "retired") "for violating ecclesiastical discipline".

This is not the first time that M. Valentine has tried to silence both sides of the continuing struggle for the faith inside the ROAC by supposedly punishing representatives of both sides "for violating ecclesiastical discipline" - which is reminiscent of the attempts of Emperor Heraclius to silence both sides during the Monothelite controversy in the 7th century.

***** Oh contraire. This is not the first time that Vladimir Moss has found the spec in someone else’s eye and overlooked the bean in his own eye and made the spec in someone else’s eye a crisis in Orthodoxy. And all of this right after Metropolitan Valentine again confessed the faith in his “appeal to ROCA”, which we all read a short while ago.

However, only one side is really punished. Fr. Roman will now not be allowed to serve in Moscow until and unless the metropolitan changes his decision. Fr. Gregory, on the other hand, according to Alexei Romanovsky, the moderator of the "unofficial forum of the ROAC" has declared, continues to serve in his church of St. Elizabeth in St. Petersburg.

***** Who cares? This is the internal affair of another country dealing with one or two priests. Has the faith of any of the bishops changed? No. Are all the bishops still confessing Orthodoxy in its purity? Yes. So who cares how two priests are disciplined by their own master?

Meanwhile, not a single one of the numerous very serious charges levelled against Fr. Gregory Lourie over the last three years has been investigated....

****** How can anyone make such a foolish statement? Do they have the synod building bugged and every move of the bishops investigated?

But the most important question is: what will the four hierarchs who are preparing to leave the ROAC do now?

****** See how now four Hierarchs are preparing to leave!!? So now we are told that they are gathering their things together and making preparations for their departure. What should we hear next to make this thread continue? Something like this. They are not only preparing to leave, but they are discussing among each other who is going to be elected the Metropolitan among the four of them. Oh yes, they are also going to decide on the city of their headquarters and of course the name of their new Church. Isn’t this laughable? It is to me.

In Christ,

Father George

[CGW]

They are not only preparing to leave, but they are discussing among each other who is going to be elected the Metropolitan among the four of them. Oh yes, they are also going to decide on the city of their headquarters and of course the name of their new Church. Isn’t this laughable?

Does this mean I get to laugh if, in six months, the four can be assigned definite names, and their headquarters can be given a definite location, and the name of their new "jurisdiction" is being invoked by the converts they have managed to collect from this forum?

[canonical]

They are not only preparing to leave, but they are discussing among each other who is going to be elected the Metropolitan among the four of them. Oh yes, they are also going to decide on the city of their headquarters and of course the name of their new Church. Isn’t this laughable?

Does this mean I get to laugh if, in six months, the four can be assigned definite names, and their headquarters can be given a definite location, and the name of their new "jurisdiction" is being invoked by the converts they have managed to collect from this forum?

Maybe the ROCinE in Mansonville has a couple of extra rooms available that ROAC could use for its headquarters. Kinda like birds of a feather...

[Protopriest Dionysi]

Maybe the ROCinE in Mansonville has a couple of extra rooms available that ROAC could use for its headquarters. Kinda like birds of a feather...

But the ROAC already has a "headquarters". Are you unaware of this?

[mwoerl]

and on and on and on . . . but no answers or sense out of all this nonsense . . . in other words, business as usual . . . nestorians and qabbalists, indeed! oh, yeah, and "so i am guilty since i was protecting him?" puhleeeeeeeese!

mwoerl