Updates to Autonomous Russian Church Websites

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Gregory,

Be very careful with this subject please, there are people on this forum who has been baptized in his care.

It is customary and tradition that if one suspects a bishop is a heretic it is only proven by asking / requiring him to make a confession of faith. Until then there is nothing, unless the heresy is brazen and clear. I don't think anyone here is in a position to start speculating about what was known and not known, if there was anything at all at the time! It seems the ROAC has had a healthy enough response to a problem.

And I don't think there is a problem with baptizing a Cyprianite. I don't think any "traditional" synod would do this however, they would most likely be received by Holy Chrismation.

I don't beleive this was the synod at issue with Met. Valentinos, I believe it was a Matthewite that was re-baptized. Here the issue seems to be, unlike the Cyprianites, there is no difference in faith between them, so a lack of communion does not nessesarily mean a lack of the Mysteries. This is of course problematic, but so are most things through history in Orthodoxy.

And I thought I would also mention, the Sixth Ecumenical Council was also a big fan of St. Cyprians (ie. Orthodox) understanding of baptism. We are taught as all the Holy Father say, THERE ARE NO MYSTERIES OUTSIDE THE CHURCH.

[Gregory]

Be very careful with this subject please, there are people on this forum who has been baptized in his care.

OOD, it was an honest question. If those who have been baptised by Bp Gregory feel that this conversation and these questions trouble their souls, then I will refrain from speaking about this. Until then, I believe that these are fair and honest questions.

However, there are more people on this forum who are part of "World Orthodoxy" than those you are in communion with. Yet, you and others have no problem posting articles and opinions that they are Graceless. How come you are not "very careful" when it comes to them? Do they not deserve mercy?

Of course, I welcome the critique because I like to hear both sides. But, I guess, that's just me. If Fr. Dn. Nikolai is troubled by this/these question, then I will stop if he asks. If he does, then you also should stop claiming that Orthodox outside of your communion are Graceless because it might trouble many members of this forum. So, let's be fair.

It is customary and tradition that if one suspects a bishop is a heretic it is only proven by asking / requiring him to make a confession of faith. Until then there is nothing, unless the heresy is brazen and clear. I don't think anyone here is in a position to start speculating about what was known and not known, if there was anything at all at the time!

But the letter from Met Valentinos was posted on this forum! It detailed allegations that the Met brought up himself! The Met is not a third party here...Bp Gregory confronted the Met with his heretical views. It is the Met himself who is charging Bp Gregory!

Earlier I posted:

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?

OOD, you still have not answered the question.

BTW, this is not an anti-ROAC polemic. Granted, at this time, I don't believe that ROAC is legit. But, at least I am open to the truth and that is why I ask these questions.

Greg

[Austin Doc]

I think the bottom line is that Bp. Gregory has a very narrow view of where the Church is, and he is very specific about saying where Grace is and is not. Based on my last discussions with him, it appeared the only jurisdictions with Grace in his opinion were ROAC and the Lamian GOC under Kallinikos -- the last jurisdiction he left. Therefore the rebaptisms.

I think the problem is that Met. Valentine and ROAC have never made such proclamations. So, in this sense, Bp. Gregory is not in line with the AROC/ROAC public position. (What is said behind closed doors, I have no idea.)

Nectarios

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

However, there are more people on this forum who are part of "World Orthodoxy" than those you are in communion with. Yet, you and others have no problem posting articles and opinions that they are Graceless. How come you are not "very careful" when it comes to them? Do they not deserve mercy?

Very true. I am not at all opposed to both sides myself, I just do not feel there is enough information to start speculating. And by this I don't mean speculating about what is in the letter, but what was known at the time of any baptisms and who knew it. Clearly if one knows a bishop is a heretic, and I don't think anything Gregory has been purported to believe is a heresy, then one is required to leave, for their own sakes!

So yes, everyone deserves our mercy just as Christ is most merciful. There are times however when remaining silent about difficult subjects is very unmerciful - this is when the facts are clear and people are in danger; So if you want to question Gregory's baptisms, then lets first establish what, if anything, brings that into question. I believe you would have to show that Gregory was publicly preaching heresy.

Until then, because they are not Donatists, Gregory would have been a true bishop of the ROAC.

(Nectarios' statement seems to about sum it up, in part)

[Chrysostomos]

Gregory,

I hear what you are saying in your post, but I have to say, that
considering the situation, it is best to discuss it at another time.
Yes, many things have been said in haste, and judgementally
against those of us who are "new calendar", or part of a church
not considered "traditional"/acceptable. None-the-less, wouldn't
it be better for us to be the example, rather than to do to
"them", what has been done to us in the past? Prayer is the
order of the day, and reflection upon ourselves in this situation.
What can we learn from this whole situation? Also, I might add,
the "jury" is still out.....Archbishop Gregory can still be restored
to his position and it won't be overnight. Thus, we must be
patient......If after the ROAC Sober is conducted, and let's
say that Archbishop Gregory goes onto another "jurisdiction",
perhaps a discussion like this can/should take place, but I
honestly believe that those on this board who are ROAC, have
enough "things on their mind", then to add another at "this time".
Juvenaly, has come out and asked forgiveness for his behavior
on this board in the past.....could this be the sentiment of
others on this board who have done likewise? What I will say
is that I believe that as unfortunate as this situation is, that
good will come out of it.

With humble bow,

Rd. Chrysostomos