Question about writings on the ROAC USA website

[Cyprian]

I had occasion to peruse the ROAC USA website recently, which states:

This is the official website and authoritative voice of the RUSSIAN ORTHODOX AUTONOMOUS CHURCH OF AMERICA (ROAC). No other English language based website (other than the sites linked herein) claiming to speak for His Eminence, Metropolitan Valentine of Suzdal and Vladimir, or any of the individual Hierarchs of the Holy Synod of the RUSSIAN ORTHODOX AUTONOMOUS CHURCH (ROAC), should be considered as genuine or valid.

and in looking at the "Catechism" section found here:
http://www.roacusa.org/catechism.html

I came across some very disturbing articles. There are literally dozens of articles hosted, so I can't cover them all, but take these two for example:

DISCOURSES ON GOD AND MAN
http://www.roacusa.org/Orthodox%20Schoo ... %20Man.doc
The material in the following chapters was barrowed [sic] from dif-ferent [sic] sources. It was reviewed, corrected and supplemented by Bishop Alexander (Mileant).

and

ORTHODOX APOLOGETIC THEOLOGY
http://www.roacusa.org/Orthodox%20Schoo ... exande.doc
By professor Ivan M. Andreyev of the Holy Trinity Seminary, edited and updated by Bishop Alexander (Mileant).

These missionary leaflets which were published by Bp. Alexander Mileant promote heretical teachings according to the theory of Evolution.

I do not know who specifically is responsible for the material contained on the ROAC USA website, and whether or not they were perhaps just careless in posting these writings, or if (God forbid!) they actually believe these doctrines.

The scandalous work, The River of Fire by Alexandre Kalomiros is also posted on this page, and contains a number of unorthodox statements as well.

Is Bishop Andrei aware that these writings appear on the official site of the ROAC in the U.S.? If so, does his grace sanction these teachings?

One would hope that Bp. Andrei is simply unaware of these teachings on the official site, and when apprised of the situation, will take appropriate action to safeguard ROAC's presentation of subject matter pertaining to the Faith, so as to not scandalize the faithful.

Cyprian

[ioannis_theologos]

Yes, I was curious about some of these writings. But I wouldn't get too hung up about it, since you're talking about various things (Darwinism, "River of Fire" soteriology) which I believe are wrong, but which have not been formally condemned by the Church, so I believe it's legitimate to allow different viewpoints to be expressed until such a time as the Church makes Her position clear. It's not the same as, for example, the Papal Calendar, which has already been condemned numerous times by various councils and individual pronouncements of Patriarchs.

[Cyprian]

Ahem! Why would any church wish to promulgate false teachings whether they have been "formally" condemned or not? It is on their page for catechism! Do they wish to teach enquirers of the Faith that they came from apes? Hopefully not! Whose idea was it to post those materials on their catechism page? There is an article on there about infant baptism which also contains errors.

Furthermore, those who cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine delivered to the faithful by the Holy Fathers do not require formal condemnation prior to our separation from them, according to the Divine Scripture, the Sacred Canons, and Holy Tradition.

In the Sacred Canons see the 15th of the twice-held Council presided over by Photius the Great.

"Submit not yourselves to monastics, nor to presbyters, who teach lawless things and evilly propound them. And why do I say only monastics or presbyters? Follow not even after bishops who guilefully exhort you to do and say and believe things that are not profitable. What pious man will keep silence, or who will remain altogether at peace? For silence means consent. Oftentimes war is known to be praiseworthy, and a battle proves to be better than a peace that harms the soul. For it is better to separate ourselves from them who do not believe aright than to follow them in evil concord, and by our union with them separate ourselves from God." --Saint Meletius the Confessor

Reference to St. Meletius: http://www.orthodox.net/gleanings/ecumenism.html - scroll down midway

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. (Romans 16:17-18)

The doctrine I have learned from the Holy and God-bearing Fathers is that Adam, and the Most Holy Mother of God, and therefore Jesus Christ our God and Saviour did NOT come from an ape!

According to the Holy Canons, Scriptures, and Fathers of the Church we are told to "separate" from and "avoid" them who do not teach aright, even prior to a synodal condemnation.

May God always give all faithful Orthodox Christians the strength and courage to do just that!

[joasia]

We have so many centuries of writings by the holy fathers of the Orthodox Church that there is no reason to allow articles of dubious nature to be allowed. The Orthodox teachings are clear and without question true. Therefore, one must question the motives of such articles that clearly opposed the writings of the holy fathers. If there is no retraction, on the website, then there is definitely something wrong.

[Pravoslavnik]

Cyprian writes: "Ahem! Why would any church wish to promulgate false teachings whether they have been "formally" condemned or not?"
This is really the question, isn't it? Is the biological/paleontological theory of evolution truly a "false teaching," formally condemned as such by the Orthodox Church? Cyprian obviously believes that it is. Alexander Kalomiros, like most modern scientists, believed that it is not, and exchanged correspondence with Father Seraphim Rose on this subject. Some modern Orthodox, including Father Seraphim Rose, have viewed St. Basil's 4th century Hexameron as a specific condemnation of the modern scientific theory of evolution.

Code: Select all

       In my opinion as a scientist and lay member of the Orthodox Church, there is a scientific model of relative cosmic time which may allow for a reconciliation of St. Basil's [i]Hexameron[/i] with modern biological an astrophysical theories (and data) of cosmogenesis.  It is best described in a book by the MIT physicist Gerald Schroeder called [i]The Science of God[/i].  In any case, St. Augustine of Hippo specifically advised that Orthodox Christians NOT make dogmatic pronouncements about scientific matters which might prove to be incorrect.  Perhaps the Church needs to come to a bona fide consensus on this complex scientific issue so as not to scandalize the faithful, as the Papacy did by condemning Galileo for believing that the earth revolves around the sun.

[Priest Siluan]

I had occasion to peruse the ROAC USA website recently, which states:

This is the official website and authoritative voice of the RUSSIAN ORTHODOX AUTONOMOUS CHURCH OF AMERICA (ROAC). No other English language based website (other than the sites linked herein) claiming to speak for His Eminence, Metropolitan Valentine of Suzdal and Vladimir, or any of the individual Hierarchs of the Holy Synod of the RUSSIAN ORTHODOX AUTONOMOUS CHURCH (ROAC), should be considered as genuine or valid.

and in looking at the "Catechism" section found here:
http://www.roacusa.org/catechism.html

I came across some very disturbing articles. There are literally dozens of articles hosted, so I can't cover them all, but take these two for example:

DISCOURSES ON GOD AND MAN
http://www.roacusa.org/Orthodox%20Schoo ... %20Man.doc
The material in the following chapters was barrowed [sic] from dif-ferent [sic] sources. It was reviewed, corrected and supplemented by Bishop Alexander (Mileant).

and

ORTHODOX APOLOGETIC THEOLOGY
http://www.roacusa.org/Orthodox%20Schoo ... exande.doc
By professor Ivan M. Andreyev of the Holy Trinity Seminary, edited and updated by Bishop Alexander (Mileant).

These missionary leaflets which were published by Bp. Alexander Mileant promote heretical teachings according to the theory of Evolution.

I do not know who specifically is responsible for the material contained on the ROAC USA website, and whether or not they were perhaps just careless in posting these writings, or if (God forbid!) they actually believe these doctrines.

The scandalous work, The River of Fire by Alexandre Kalomiros is also posted on this page, and contains a number of unorthodox statements as well.

Is Bishop Andrei aware that these writings appear on the official site of the ROAC in the U.S.? If so, does his grace sanction these teachings?

One would hope that Bp. Andrei is simply unaware of these teachings on the official site, and when apprised of the situation, will take appropriate action to safeguard ROAC's presentation of subject matter pertaining to the Faith, so as to not scandalize the faithful.

Cyprian

Why do you write Vl. Andrei directly, and ask him about? for what I know our church rejects Evolutionism. Maybe here, there is a confusion, I think that those articles were put on there by the former priest Elías Greer (Grivakos)

[filofei]

As for "the River of Fire" soteriology, there is a growing acceptance, to my dismay, towards its acceptance as a representative and definitive "doctrine" of the traditionalist Orthodox Church. Take, for example, the following websites: http://catacomb.org.ua/modules.php?name ... ge&pid=832. http://www.synodinresistance.org/pdfs/2 ... ndHell.pdf. The former is from the website of the RTOC in Russia and the latter from the Synod in Resistance. They list this controversial concept of hell under the headings of "Orthodox theology" and "Orthodox eschatology" respectively. While many clergy within these jurisdictions may reject Kalomiran soteriology, it can't be denied that it is gradually eating its way into traditional Orthodoxy.