Moderator: Mark Templet
Gregory,
If they were already in communion with another "jurisdiction", I
don't see how they would expect them to rebaptize and
rechrismate those who are already accepted as in communion
with them. If you are in communion, it means, that any member
of that other "jurisdiction" would be able to come and partake
of communion at the other "jurisdiction", of course, with their
priest's blessing.
Of course, you could be right, and I wrong! 
The Metropolitan meant what he said. The case in point here is Father Andrei who came to Dormition Skete and to ROAC from the Matthewites. The Metropolitan chastized Gregory for Chrismating Father Andreai as "a sin against the Holy Spirit". This tells me that there is no verdict coming from the ROAC Synod as to who or what jurisdiction does and does not have grace.
As far as I know, and I will check with some of the fathers on this for you, because i know that this is where thisis headung, ROAC has not opened official channels with any of the other jurisdictions, at least in America. Part of the other chastisements as we can see from the Ukase is that Bishop Gregory wanted ot bring the Greeks into communion with the ROAC and the Metropolitan did not agree with this.
I do feel that there are channels that can and will be opened in the future between ROAC and the other Old Calendar Synods but for now that has yet ot be seen. Just as is the case with the others, there is still hope as the ROAC has condemned noone officially. The condemnations were from Bishop Gregory and by those at the time who were under him and thought (wrongly) that his opinions were with that of the Synod.
As you all are praying for us within the ROAC, I ask for your forgiveness for my haughtiness and for my self righteous attitudes towards all of you in the past.
"For Christ has purges the threshing floor and has seperated the chaff from the wheat..."
Juvenaly Martinka
Just as is the case with the others, there is still hope as the ROAC has condemned noone officially. The condemnations were from Bishop Gregory and by those at the time who were under him and thought (wrongly) that his opinions were with that of the Synod.
Juvenaly, so what you are saying is that New Calendarists have Grace, or at the very least ROAC will not say either if they do or don't. Or, do you mean that ROAC has officially condemned New Calendarist, but not Old Calendar Synods?
As you all are praying for us within the ROAC, I ask for your forgiveness for my haughtiness and for my self righteous attitudes towards all of you in the past.
Forgiven...forgive me. But do others in ROAC and GOC feel the same way you do?
Greg
Dear Greg,
To your first question:
...so what you are saying is that New Calendarists have Grace, or at the very least ROAC will not say either if they do or don't. Or, do you mean that ROAC has officially condemned New Calendarist, but not Old Calendar Synods?
I am saying that I have no knowledge of any information regarding the condemnation of either Old or New Calendar jurisdictions by the Synod of the ROAC. I will call Father Vladimir (or if someone else wishes to do so before i can get to it and get the answer from Father Vladimir and possibly M. Valentine if he i still in NY.
As for your second question:
But do others in ROAC and GOC feel the same way you do?
If you are talking about my forgieness, I am unsure as it was a personal plea for forgiveness and was not intended ot speak on behalf of any other individual let alone a jurisdiction.
If you are asking about my comments about communion, this also I am not sure as I have not spoken to, and do not have the capacity to, (thank God) speak on behalf of my Synod or another. I pray that there can be some sort of communion between the ROAC and some of the other Old Calendar groups as to show some sort of unity in a time where unity is breaking apart all around us. Unity is a sign of strength and longevity for the Church. Not that I am saying that if we for some reason (ROAC) do not commit to communion we will die nor am I saying this of any other jurisdiction. I am just asserting my prayers for the future of the Church.[/quote]
I am saying that I have no knowledge of any information regarding the condemnation of either Old or New Calendar jurisdictions by the Synod of the ROAC. I will call Father Vladimir (or if someone else wishes to do so before i can get to it and get the answer from Father Vladimir and possibly M. Valentine if he i still in NY.
Thanks Juvenaly. Can anyone else here elaborate? For, I don't know, the past year and a half all one heard was the condemnation of New Calendar churches. I'm not trying to start a flame war, I'm just trying to get both sides of the issue correct.
I pray that there can be some sort of communion between the ROAC and some of the other Old Calendar groups as to show some sort of unity in a time where unity is breaking apart all around us. Unity is a sign of strength and longevity for the Church.
I agree Juvenaly and that is one big reason I have not left the OCA. I agree with many of your/ROAC/GOC/Etc arguments, but I believe that things take time and unity is vital to the life of the Church.
Greg
Greg,
(I'm new to this forum.) I was one of the first ROAC America members as was our Mission in Austin, along with then Rd. Dionysi's mission in VA. (We were also the first to leave ROAC.) As far as I know, ROAC never required "rebaptism" for those coming from another Old Calendar jurisdiction. However, ABp. Gregory, has done this even back when he was just a priest in ROCOR. I know, because I was a novice at Dormition in 1992 and was made a "god father" to a young man who was previously baptized in Etna (Cyprianites). There have also been rebaptisms of a family who were previously baptized into the Chruch under ROCOR. They too were briefly in ROAC/AROC.
Of course, the reasoning is that "since the Cyprianites are crypto-heretics and are without Grace, their baptisms are just dippings into water". Therefore, why not provide them with a "true" baptism. Of course, this assumes that the one doing the "real" baptism is a conduit for Grace. This line of thinking comes from St. Cyprian of Carthage, of which Abp. Gregory is a big fan of.
Nectarios Manzanero
Exaltation of the Holy Cross Mission
Austin, TX
Therefore, why not provide them with a "true" baptism. Of course, this assumes that the one doing the "real" baptism is a conduit for Grace. This line of thinking comes from St. Cyprian of Carthage, of which Abp. Gregory is a big fan of.
Okay...so let's assume that Bp. Gregory is a heretic because he believed that those entering ROAC under his care required "re-baptism", or more precisely he believe that he was the only conduit of Grace. Therefore, because he is a heretic, are those who were "baptised" by his hands truely baptised? In other words, because he is a heretic was/is he no longer a conduit of Grace? Or, because he was a part of ROAC, even though he was/is a heretic, he was a conduit of Grace simply because he was in communion with right-believing bishops?
These are honest questions...just looking for the opinions of those in ROAC and other Old Calendar Synods.
Greg
