Moderator: Mark Templet
CGW
In America? That's easy: continue to go to church as before.
Not so "easy" for the Orthodox. I guess it makes us sectarian, but we are ready to follow the canons and tradition (e.g., Scripture) and seperate ourselves and split, over pesky things like tradition/canons, charges of heresy, schism caused by immorality, and so forth.
Nectarios,
I really don't understand much that is going on here, but I think this excerpt from the response sums up Fr. John's position regarding how he is relating to Met. Valentine at the moment:
[because of Met. Valentine's] very grave heretical views concerning Baptism, Chrismation, and Grace among the ecumenist and Sergianist parasynagogues, I must not follow the Metropolitan at this time. I am awaiting the 'fair' decision by the Synod. Of course, if the decision of the Synod is made in haste, is unfair and does not follow the CANONS I will separate myself from the Synod.
Preaching heresy bare head from the Ambo is only one way to decide to leave a Synod. Another way is the heretical actions of a bishop/synod. If their policy is heretical [No. 4 of UKAZ 130] whether preached or not, then you must leave.
It seems to me that there is indeed a charge of heresy being made, and that Fr. John has seperated himself from Met. Valentine (though not ROAC) until the Synod comes to a decision, at which time he will decide whether that decision is a victory of truth and Orthodoxy or not.
Justin,
I think Juvenaly sums it up a few posts back. Met. Valentine probably doesn't feel someone needs to be "baptized" again if they received the Orthodox formula. Thus, a ROCOR person , baptized after the union with the Cyprianites would not need a second baptism according to V. Valentine, because, they "already are baptized". In fact, when I was one of the first to join ROAC 3 years ago, I had posed this question to Olga Mitrenina in Russia, who at the time was the main intermediary to our fledgling group. I was told that people did not need to be "rebaptized".
In fact, ROAC at that time never even had a position against any of the OC. Greek jurisdictions, but rather wanted to wait and see if the Greeks could work things out themselves. So, all the anti-Matthewite, anti-HOCNA, anti-Kiousite, anti-ROCIE (Vl. Vitale) stuff was only coming from Dormition Skete. However, because ROAC did not censure those comments and "epistles" that were twisting history and misusing canons, I assumed that it was defacto the position of ROAC. However, I'm hoping this was not the case.
So, it seems the "heresy" issue raised by Rd. Jerjis/Fr. John is more of the same fanaticism that comes from Dormition. If one assumes that mindset, then of course, everyone is a heretic and unless they conform to Bp. Gregory's slanted view of the Church. Therefore, the Metropolitan's charity towards others is just another weakness and heretical belief.
Nectarios
Justin Kissel wrote:CGW
In America? That's easy: continue to go to church as before.
Not so "easy" for the Orthodox. I guess it makes us sectarian, but we are ready to follow the canons and tradition (e.g., Scripture) and seperate ourselves and split, over pesky things like tradition/canons, charges of heresy, schism caused by immorality, and so forth.
Sure, it's easy. You just have to give up the attitude of passing judgement on every cleric and hierarch as to his adherence to the canons and tradition as you understand them. As long as you keep looking for hierarchs who agree with you, you're church-shopping.
At this point I can only give you an Anglican answer, which is that anyone who looks at Bp. Gregory's history can see that he is someone to be avoided. I continue to be amazed and appalled at the bad judgement of those who ordained him. This has nothing to do with heresy or tradition or anything like that, but merely seeing that he is/was unfit to be ordained. But beyond that, it seems to me, as an Anglican (and thus someone with a bishop) you have to work out your differences with your bishop(s) on some level above just jumping ship and looking for some other bishop who takes your side. That is the path to becoming either Martin Luther on the one side or a religious dilletante on the other. Even as a layman the bishop's office as a teacher obligates you to some level of obedience as his student. When primarily what you are listening to is a bunch of other laymen trying to have you bring your axe to their grindstone, you are surely doing Orthodoxy wrong. I say this with the authority of someone whose church obligates him to a similar relationship.
The Nicene Creed states:
" I confess ONE baptism for the remission of sins"
This sounds pretty clear to me. What's the confusion? These clergy are just causing more jurisdictional chaos for NOTHING.
Baptism, which means immersion is the key word. Christ told the Apostles to go and baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. That makes it three times.
If sprinkling was involved,then a person would have to be baptized the correct way, but if a person comes from the old calendar Greeks to the Russians and had been baptised correctly(by the Greeks) as per the tradition of so many centuries, then why the big fuss?
So many bishops and clergy are struggling for power. The clergy leave their bishops so that they can eventually become bishops. The bishops ex-communicate their clergy because they see someone who can influence the people and perhaps, eventually become bishops and kick him out.
It's all SICK and PATHETIC.
Then the whole confusion amongst the "men-of-cloth" about who's doing what wrong. Why are they confused? Aren't they suppose to be the experts? Aren't they suppose to have studied in theological schools for so many years to know all the Orthodox traditions? Don't they have a common denominator in which to measure what's right and wrong without a doubt? Are we becoming disected like protestants?
Shoot, the people on this board sound more educated in theology then these bishops.
Why look to them for spiritual guidance if they are the instigators of chaos? And the Synod is no help, because they are consisted of these bishops who want to control. It's like trying to remove a bullet from a wound by shooting it out with a gun.
And I'm not picking on any specific Synod. In my eyes, they all have the same mentality. It's a spiritual disease that is spreading like wild fire and satan is roasting his marshmellows on it and having a big laugh.
Soon there will be lone priests, with no bishops, serving from their homes. It will become an epidemic.
Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me. (Ps. 50)
Joasia,
I agree with you...there is, or are, spiritual diseases: "old calendarism" and ecumenism.
Nectarios
You said: And I'm not picking on any specific Synod. In my eyes, they all have the same mentality. It's a spiritual disease that is spreading like wild fire and satan is roasting his marshmellows on it and having a big laugh.
