The ROAC situation.

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

TomS,

In the history of the Church from the earliest days up until now, "sister chuch" has always been used in one and only one way: To mean two local churches of the same Body of Christ. You can read all of the saints and this is the meaning. "Sisiter Church" is never used to describe a heretic body which is completly foreign to the Body of Christ - who is the Truth.

Clearly nothing has changed, even for your heirarchs it still means the same thing as it always has does it not?

So now that we've established that the only difference between your faith and the Latins, between your church and the popes, is a simple matter of human sin, and that all that needs to be done is the simple establishment of formal communion, the last set mile connecting the Union Pacific railroad so-to-speak. What else is their to discuss?

[TomS]

Well, I have to agree with you that the one thing I do not like about the GOA is the whole Ecumenist thing.

But do you really think that YOU will ever find a Church that you will agree with its positions on all things?

[TomS]

Concerning the Skete --

does this mean that you will no longer have any affiliation with it? Was it completely under Gregory?

[Грешник]

Right now the Skete is under the authority of the Synod, wether Gregory likes it or not. We, the members of Saint Basil of Kineshma parish have nothing to do with the Skete at this time for two reasons:

1. We are a parish in the Springs and to make the 2 hr trip to a Monastery for services is pointless.

2. Bishop Gregory is confessing beliefs and espousing ideals that differ from the teachings of the ROAC. Because of this we are obligated to depart from him.

I can only pray that the skete and the convent and those who commune there might await the decisions of the Synod before they make anymore potentially dangerous decisions affecting their future..

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Well, I have to agree with you that the one thing I do not like about the GOA is the whole Ecumenist thing.

But do you really think that YOU will ever find a Church that you will agree with its positions on all things?

Yes Tom, I have. It is not important what I think, it is only important that they agree with the Holy Fathers. And the GOC of Greece and all of her bishops agreed in every point of faith. And I feel the presence of a deep spiritual life.

And this is what it is all about, the faith and the life of the Church. Without the faith there is nothing but perhaps the smell of insence.

[Austin Doc]

Justin Kissel made a statement about Fr. John writing about Met. Valentine's "heresies". (Sorry, I don't know how to copy and paste the quotes here.) From what I can remember of the rebutal letter, there is mention that V. Valnetine says "everyone is baptised"...I guess meaning that ROCOR baptized and perhaps NewCalendar Orthodox are "baptized". Is the claim here of "crypto ecumenism" like the Cyprianites? Is Fr. John saying that Met. Valentine is a heretic because he views people of other jurisdictions as being baptized, i.e., there is Grace there.

Also, there was mention about those having bee baptized, then apostacized, then returning to the Chruch, without needing to be rechrismated. I guess this means, some one baptized in ROAC/Lamians, who leave to go to ROCOR, or HOCNA or Matthewites, or Kiousites and then return to ROAC, according to V. Valentine would not need rechrismating; but according to Fr. John they would...because that is what Bp. Gregory believes. So, the heresy is that of not rechrismating?

This is a problem about fanatic zeal without "love'...to sound like Bp. Cyprian. Bishops can and do have discretion. The Chruch is fortunately not always black and white. Canons are not meant to be straight jackets.

Nectarios

[Грешник]

AND HERE IS THE REST OF THE STORY:

What is stated by Father John, forst off, was never said directly to Father John, but was said to Reader Jerji in the home of Father Dionysi. Jerjis then shared this information with Father John who added it to his response. If Father John is so bold as to claim that he has these words of the Metropolitan on tape I will give him my mailing address and he can send me a copy of the ENTIRE conversation.

The actual comment by the Metropolitan regarding baptism and the necessity thereof was this.

"One who is baptized using triple immersion in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, this person is baprized. Everyone who is baptized in this manner likewise is baptized throughout the world. We, as Orthodox Christians confess in the Creed that "we accept one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins."

As for the Chrismating, the error that the Metropoliran saw was that the ROAC Synod has never condemned any of the Old Calendar Synods and the Synod in question at the time was the Matthewite Synod through whom the ROAC received Father Andrei. When Father Andrei came to Dormition Skete Bishop Gregory wanted to re-chrismate Father Andrei and the Metropolitn when he heard this was scandalized by this because there was no reason for it in the eyes of the Sunod of the ROAC church. This is where the issue of the baprisms in Hati and the acceptance of Father Michael Graves comes in as well. Father Michael himself baptized over 150 Christians in Hati and Bp. Gregory told him that he had no proof of this amd that he was going ot rebaptize them into the Church. When Father Michael objected to this he was told that in that case he could not enter into the Church.

Juvenaly Martinka