Updates to Autonomous Russian Church Websites

Грешник · Post by **Грешник** » Thu 1 July 2004 12:35 pm

And here come the stones!

Is this not the reuirement of those under a bishop? To defend him til the end until such a time where defense can no longer be taken and actions must insue? This is just that case. As you can see above, what are we to defend? Bribery? Somony? Lust for power? Until things such as these occur, and I guess even now until the Synod makes a final decision we are required to defend him as our bishop. This is my understanding of the way that Orthodoxy is supposed to be.

Yes, we will have to live wit hthe facts of what has occurred but in the end we all did what was right in the eyes of the Church by defending oor bishop up until the end. I have no regrets about that. What I do regret is that all of that is for nuaght it seems and that there are those out there whp see folloeing the Canons as artidicial and not necassary when it comes ot themselves but as soon as there is a situation outside of their jurisdiction they begin to run others through because of their decisions.

Maybe we were all wrong about Gregory rom the begining and there were smarter people out there who tried to warn us, but the bottom line is from the time he became a bishop we were dunject to his authority. Now, he is retired and we are under the Synod. Now he will incur the penalties for his actions and we will have to work through this. But it all comes down to one thingm while we were under him we were subject to him and we did what was right in the eyes of the Church and can not look back in error or shame for we did what was required of us as the people in his diocese.

Грешник · Post by **Грешник** » Thu 1 July 2004 12:39 pm

That they know who has "Grace".

Tom, see thisis where false information is key.

At no time, whatsoever, has ROAC definesd who does and who does not have grace. There have been "hierarchs" who have tried ot use their influence on others to say that we are in communion wit hthe only Greek synod wao according ot him has grace, and that we were not in communion with any other church and that no other church outside of ROAC has grace. The interesting thing is that thisis one man's personal opinion and it HAS NEVER been the SYNODAL DECISION of the ROAC.

If this were the case, reread the Ukase posted above and find something different, but as the case stands and has always stood there is no official pronouncement on who has or does not have grace. On the contrary this just does not exist outsdie of the mind of one retired bishop.

TomS · Post by **TomS** » Thu 1 July 2004 12:43 pm

Juvenaly Martinka wrote:
That they know who has "Grace".
There have been "hierarchs" who have tried ot use their influence on others to say that we are in communion wit hthe only Greek synod wao according ot him has grace, and that we were not in communion with any other church and that no other church outside of ROAC has grace. The interesting thing is that thisis one man's personal opinion and it HAS NEVER been the SYNODAL DECISION of the ROAC.

Yes, I understand that now.

I apologize and retract my accusation.

Грешник · Post by **Грешник** » Thu 1 July 2004 12:48 pm

I appologize for the lateness of my posts in explaining all of this but hopefully these peices of info cover most questions, if not ask away and I will answer in any way I can.

The Resident ROAC Whipping Boy",
Juvenaly

Chrysostomos · Post by **Chrysostomos** » Thu 1 July 2004 12:58 pm

Juvenaly,

Thank you for posting the letter, and it explains it in detail
and appears that the action taken was appropriate, and
unfortunate. All any of us can offer is our prayers, that's
it. We will try, God willing, not to raise stones against you
and your fellow ROAC'ites, though, admittedly, our flesh
remembers how we were treated due to our lack of being
"truly Orthodox".

I thought that it was interesting that the Metropolitan
chastized Archbishop Gregory for his: "rebaptizing and
rechrismating those who come to you". This means that
those who are now under Metropolitan Valentin, agree
that the rebaptizing and rechrismating of Orthodox
Christians who come to the ROAC from other jurisdictions
is not required. Personally, I am glad to see this.

None-the-less, you are in our prayers and may God grant
a speedy resolution to this unfortunate situation, and
that Archbishop Gregory will stay with the ROAC and
submit in obedience to Metropolitan Valentin.

Rd. Chrysostomos

Gregory · Post by **Gregory** » Thu 1 July 2004 1:14 pm

This means that
those who are now under Metropolitan Valentin, agree
that the rebaptizing and rechrismating of Orthodox
Christians who come to the ROAC from other jurisdictions
is not required. Personally, I am glad to see this.

Is this, however, what Met Valentin really meant? Or does he mean those who have come to Bishop Gregory from churches in communion with ROAC?

At no time, whatsoever, has ROAC definesd who does and who does not have grace.

Now I'm really confused! What about all the talk about the Graceless MP, EP, et al from OrthodoxyOrDeath and others?

Greg