It's in the "Essays" section of the site, and if it cannot be reached there, then it can be reached at
http://www.aloofhosting.com/joesuaiden/aroc/contra.html
Joe
NFTU. http://www.roac.tk
Response to Fr John Claypool up
Moderator: Mark Templet
-
Justin Kissel
Joe,
Your response sort of... well... Some of what you say is persuasive. Some of it seems like common sense (though it is good to repeat things that make sense). However, is it not dangerous to be so polemical? You mentioned what a danger Fr. John is in because of certain things he has said, but--whatever you may think of him--he is still technically a priest of ROAC, isn't he? On this forum, I have defended making decisions before a synodal decision vigorously... but isn't it dangerous to make such bold decisions public, and also such fearful accusations as you are making? Wouldn't a response without all the polemic and attempt at pinning down motives be just as persuasive--if not more so (especially for those who are not used to reading more polemical literature)?
-
Seraphim Reeves
- Member
- Posts: 493
- Joined: Sun 27 October 2002 2:10 pm
- Location: Canada
Joe,
I have to agree with Justin. Even where you make good points, I just see personal animosity (both from recent events, and your past dealings with Archbishop Gregory before this started) written all over this. In other words, you're "preaching to the converted", which I'd think is not the point of your article.
Seraphim
-
Suaidan
- Protoposter
- Posts: 1164
- Joined: Thu 8 April 2004 2:31 pm
- Faith: Orthodox
- Jurisdiction: Autonomous Metropolia of the Americas
- Location: Northeast PA
Too Harsh?
Justin Kissel wrote:Joe,
Your response sort of... well... Some of what you say is persuasive. Some of it seems like common sense (though it is good to repeat things that make sense). However, is it not dangerous to be so polemical? You mentioned what a danger Fr. John is in because of certain things he has said, but--whatever you may think of him--he is still technically a priest of ROAC, isn't he? On this forum, I have defended making decisions before a synodal decision vigorously... but isn't it dangerous to make such bold decisions public, and also such fearful accusations as you are making? Wouldn't a response without all the polemic and attempt at pinning down motives be just as persuasive--if not more so (especially for those who are not used to reading more polemical literature)?
Harsh? 
Can't agree. It was a response to a polemic. I had no intention of being irenic. Fr. John violated the canons and had been working on this paper for a long time (he said 12 drafts at one point)-- apparently weeks he claimed to be loyal to the Metropolitan when suddenly the "theft charges" popped up. Amazing length for something that suddenly "popped up" to write in Fr. John's head.
The tone of Fr John's letter demands his deposition. He would have no right to speak that way to Archbishop Gregory if he was his bishop-- and he's not. To speak that way to the First Hierarch of our Church is insulting and stupid. And I refuse to dress it up.
Joe