Suzdal Diocese Gazette Excommunication Official Announcement

[Protopriest Dionysi]

To be quite honest I don't follow ROAC news and have heard very little about the recent developments of ROAC oppression in Russia.

My joke was not to be taken in the context of bishops being killed. If I had known about this, the joke would obviously not have been made.

I do find it odd though that certain members of this list can basically call "world Orthodoxy" the demon whore of babylon, claim that 99% of the Orthodox world is graceless(and therefore has little chance of salvation), that all of my hierarchs are corrupt and un-Orthodox, etc. yet this is tolerated when a joke about the tiny size of the ROAC schism is trumped up to seem like I'm joking about murder. Easy kids.

On the flip side of this coin;
Is it not weird to you to have Bishops that disregard and even openly challenge the very Church with her teachings (canons and traditions) that claim to be heir to? I find this not only weird, but repulsive. You say you do not like to hear these things, but can you really show that your bishops are Orthodox. Is Orthodoxy just a "look" or is it a faith and way of life to you? If it is a way of life and a faith, how could you, or any, say that those in World orthodoxy are Orthodox. No, we do not say that we are better or holier and therfore we are right. In fact, it is the love of God, His Church, and our knowledge that we are not better or holier that has us remain faithful to Orthodoxy. I dare to say, World orthodoxy are the SELF RIGHTEOUS that feel that they can add or delete from our Holy Faith as they see fit, to not only make it more modern, but "easier" for them to live. This is what makes it outrageous and such a sin. Not silver do they betray our Lord, but for ease and moderism.

[bogoliubtsy]

Here's my somewhat disjointed "free form" reply. Also, Priest Dionysi, I'm curious to know your story if you don't mind sharing it. Were you in ROCOR at one time?

First of all, I attend a ROCOR parish. Secondly, is it a heresy for certain Christians within a jurisdiction to be somewhat "watered down" or to have "lukewarm piety" or something to that effect? This is not heresy, this is just unfortunate. However, it's quite presumptuous to assume you know the inner workings of a person's(bishop's, priest's, layman's, entire synod's) heart. As we both know, one may appear completely traditional but at the same time be some kind of sexual deviant, law breaker, schismatic, etc. The external trappings are not the core of the Orthodox faith. Orthodoxy to me is a living faith, of course. At least at this point my head knows this, hopefully my heart and actions will start to gradually follow my mind and in time transformation will take place, God willing. I see nothing entirely un-Orthodox in the actions of many of the Synods your group lacks communion with. ROCOR, Serbia, the JP, and many pockets of other Synods which remain true to Orthodoxy. There have, for hundreds of years, been small groups broken from the rest of Orthodoxy who have claimed to represent the only "true" Orthodox left in the world. This is seen in some of the groups who sprung up as a rejection of Patriarch Nikon, and not just the Old Believers. There have been others in Orthodox history(particularly in Russia) who have followed this same line. Schism and splinter groups are nothing new. This leads me to believe(and know!) that there have been temptations from the "really really Orthodox" for hundreds of years. The modern day manifestations of "truer than you" Orthodoxy are nothing new and therefore don't really boggle my mind or make me question things all too much. In fact, there could be pointed out many very scandalous actions taken by Bishops hundreds of years ago that scandalize me to this day, more than anything I see happening in the Orthodox world today. Were there schisms, accusations, flying each and every way then? Yes, there were. And today's accusations, schism, etc. whether completely without grounding or basis in truth, or even if they are true, are nothing new to Orthodoxy.
Is it not somewhat of an embarrasment to your synod to have your first hierarch write a Nativity epistle consisting of ten paragraphs of "exhorations" to the "lost flock". Even Met. Philaret, who this first hierarch never knew but proof-texts to no

end, didn't write scathing attacks like this. Is this the tradition of St. John Maximovitch that ROAC has supposedly inherited. Is this the ROCOR legacy ROAC belives they've taken up cause for? Our beloved saint would never have written something so callous.

This debate could go on forever. Let me make one simple request though:
If you're going to claim the "heresy" of "world orthodoxy" (a home you believe ROCOR has now found itself in), at least do us the favor of citing the specific heresy. Some here use "heresy" like it's going out of style. Show us exactly where some of us have accepted heresy. Likewise, if I want to say that ROAC is schismatic, I will cite examples. The thing is though, with ROAC it's quite simple. Met. Valentine was defrocked. Simple as that.

[bogoliubtsy]

Also, if you'd like, please define the following:

Modernism-

Ecumenism-

Easier Orthodoxy-

[Protopriest Dionysi]

When I was talking of World orthodoxy (and when many others do) we are not talking about “certain Christians within a jurisdiction”. We are talking about jurisdictions that have become “watered down” with the brackish water of ecumenism, modernism, and a denial of Christ’s Body, the Church, by their denial of the proceeding Councils and canons that they supposedly are the successors of.

Might I add that you seem to fall in your own accusation of being presumptuous? I never stated that I knew the inner workings of a person’s heart, but you, being presumptuous, ASSUME that I do. However, we can know a tree by its fruits, and the fruits of ecumenism have shown to be poisonous. I may not know what is in the heart of a certain bishop, but we can all know what is in his epistles and public teachings. If these contain heresy and he remains steadfast in his refusal to conform his mind to the Church, then he is a heretic. If they commune with heretics then, yes they too become heretics. In World orthodoxy we have joint prayers with heretics and even some saying the heretics are but another lung.

No, the Nativity epistle of our Metropolitan is not an embarrassment. In fact, it was reassuring to me that he would use the Incarnation of our Lord, to try to recall those who have chosen the wide and easy path of modernistic ecumenical orthodoxy. Maybe you should read over the epistles of the hierarchs of ROCOR again. See the sorrowful epistles of the incorrupt St. Philaret whose relics are captive in Jordanville. Maybe you should read over Archbishop Averky’s warning against the add mixtures in modern orthodoxy. Maybe you could also read the warnings of St. John against those who were modernizing the Faith while he was still alive and even persecuting him. You will see that all good hirarchs have called the wayward back. In fact, this is part of their duty as a bishop. Maybe, you have seen just the opposite with the bishops in World orthodoxy, and thought this to be the norm?

You want specific actions of heresy in World orthodoxy? Are you new to this discussion of the differences between Orthodoxy and World orthodoxy? I understand, that you may not accept violations of the canons of the Church as being heretical, but can you honestly say you have never seen the crimes listed? If, they are, does this mean you will accept it? If you were shown out right bareheaded heretical beliefs, would you accept it, or deny its violations?

[Protopriest Dionysi]

Could you define heresy?

[bogoliubtsy]

It seems you haven't addressed many of my questions and statements, so I will only address a couple of yours. Again though, what is your history if you don't mind sharing? Were you once ROCOR?

Might I add that you seem to fall in your own accusation of being presumptuous? I never stated that I knew the inner workings of a person’s heart, but you, being presumptuous, ASSUME that I do.

I don't assume you know the workings of a man's heart. Why would I ever assume that. In fact, I think I've pointed out quite the opposite.

However, we can know a tree by its fruits,

Oh, how true. Just look at the recent "Nativity" Epistle.

See the sorrowful epistles of the incorrupt St. Philaret whose relics are captive in Jordanville.

Captive? Please explain. I've been before his relics in Jordanville where they are kept next to other great ROCOR hierarchs. Hardly "captive".

Maybe you should read over Archbishop Averky’s warning against the add mixtures in modern orthodoxy.

I'm familiar with the writings of Archbishop Averky. I'm also familiar with the spiritual line which follows him in those like Fr. Seraphim Rose and Metropolitan Lavr. Fr. Seraphim, as you may know, spoke very pointedly about the "super correct" mentality which is typified in the current ROAC. Fr. Seraphim also gave communion to the new calendar "heretics" on occasion. Being a spiritual son of Archbishop Averky and Saint John I daresay he knows a bit more about what is "correct" then some of ROAC's pundits. Should I also mention St. John's commemoration of the Patriarch of Moscow for a short time while in Shanghai?(Not that this is the norm for him, of course! but it shows he considered them to be a real Church even after the declaration of Sergius). Should I mention the founder of Holy Trinity Seminary, Archbishop Vitaly who is reported as having also commemorated the Patriarch of Moscow at one time? Again, not the norm, but proves a point. The question is, has ROCOR ever denied the grace of "world Orthodoxy", even during the times of INTENSE ecumenism in the 60's? NO. Metropolitan Philaret's sorrowful epistle was a warning, an exhortation, to the Patriarchs and bishops whom he, incidentally, still considered to be Orthodox. Did he call them heretics in this epistle as the current ROAC calls "world orthodoxy"?

[bogoliubtsy]

Could you define heresy?

Well, I know for certain that Blessed Metropolitan Anthony Khrapovitsky's Dogma of Redemption is a heretical teaching and is accepted by your Bishop Gregory. Now that's a great example of a heretical teaching which doesn't "destroy" the rest of a man's work or serve as an indicator of some depraved, "heretical" internal disposition.