Address to ROCA, by Bishop Gregory

[Nevski]

OCNyet

[Monk George]

Gelsky wrote:

If I remember correctly, isnt this "Met" Valentine of Suzdal, the bishop who was convicted of a child-molestation or something to that effect??

And if gelsky would read the address by Bishop Gregory, he would learn that this is all instigated by the Moscow Patriarchate, and that if Metropolitan Valentine joined the MP, there would be no charges, there would be no conviction, and the case would be dismissed.

Since this is not refutable, since it is absolutely true, what are we to surmise? That the MP which all of a sudden now seems to be desirous of fellowship with ROCA, wants a child molester to be one of their Bishops? No. We are to surmise what happened in truth: there is no child molestation, there is no reason other than that the ferocious MP wants to destroy all opposition to its monopoly in Russia.

Fr. George

[John the Russian]

Thank God for people like Bishop Gregory and Met Valentin for standing up for the truth and having the courage not to follow the "Modern" orthodox into the heresey of ecumenism, service to an atheistic government and the new calander.
I am not from ROAC, in fact I am from ROCOR and I applaude them and wish them many years!
If ROCOR does sink into this deception then I will surely consider Joining ROAC, the LAmia group or any other one that continues to hold all that is dear to orthodoxy in high regard and refuses to compromise its beliefs.

[Nevski]

OCNyet[/url]

I'm glad to see that someone here besides me has a sense of humor!

[CGW]

And if gelsky would read the address by Bishop Gregory, he would learn that this is all instigated by the Moscow Patriarchate, and that if Metropolitan Valentine joined the MP, there would be no charges, there would be no conviction, and the case would be dismissed.

Since this is not refutable, since it is absolutely true, what are we to surmise?

It hardly seems "absolutely true", or perhaps not even true at all. Bishop Gregory, after all, is not authorized to speak for the MP. Actually, having read the address just now, it doesn't appear to speak to this assertion at all.

[Monk George]

In stating that "we" would "honor such a rapprochement" between the MP and the ROCOR, that is, one that would invole the repentance of the MP Hierarchy, it seems Met. Valentin is not in agreement with Bishop Gregory's statement that "the MP . . . cannot repent . . . "

Bishop Gregory didn't say he wouldn't welcome such a repentance, he said he didn't believe it was possible, following in the footsteps of New Hieromartyr Victor, Archbishop of Vyatka:

“But if the hardening of your [Metropolitan Sergios] heart has gone so far, and there remains no hope of repentance, ..."

This doesn't mean that St. Victor didn't hope for the repentance of the MP, nor does it mean he would reject such a repentance, it means that there exists the possibility that Sergios and by connection the MP, is capable of passing the limit from which there is no repentance.

31“On this account I say to you every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven to men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven to men. [Mt. 12:31]

Saint Chrysostom: “What is it then that He says? That this sin is above all things unpardonable.

Bishop Gregory has written nothing novel or opposed to what the Metropolitan has said. After seventy years of apostasy, and given the last decade of freedom from the communist government in which the MP has not repented of anything, it is highly unlikely that the MP is going to embrace the path of repentance, now that they are on the verge of swallowing the ROCA. In Bishop Gregory's considered opinion, they have passed the limit from which there is no return.

Fr. George

[Bogatyr]

What is asked, and NOT UNREASONABLY, is that the topic be addressed and people not attacked. The issue is the ruinous path of union with the MP.
ORTHODOXIA I THANATOS!
R M Malleev-Pokrovsky