Three Greek priests join the RTOC Synod - June 2015

[Jean-Serge]

This is pathetic.

Could you explain what you mean?

[Agios_Irineos]

This is pathetic.

Could you explain what you mean?

She probably means that it is pathetic how this forum has become a cheerleading site for one favored GOC jurisdiction and attacks all others.

I would say it's a shame.

[Maria]

This is pathetic.

Could you explain what you mean?

She probably means that it is pathetic how this forum has become a cheerleading site for one favored GOC jurisdiction and attacks all others.

I would say it's a shame.

Yes, it is a shame that our True Orthodox Church is so fractured and divided, but that is the plan of the Freemasons, Illuminati, and Rosacrucians who would destroy us if they could.

Reader Mark, you are free to present your arguments and disprove anything that others, including myself, have said. No one is infallible.

I ask hard questions and present the truth as I see it, but I may be wrong as I have already been in three jurisdictions (GOC-K, Met. John of NY, and now in the GOC under Archbishop Stephanos) seeking the Truth, Christ. I am trying not to follow personalities, but to follow Christ Who is the Truth, the Way, and the Life.

However, if I have violated any rules, please report those posts. Or if I do not know the truth about certain jurisdictions, then please challenge me. Remember that Dr. Jonathan Gress remains as a co-Admin and that he has posted opposite beliefs from mine as he is with the GOC-K. Furthermore, joasia of the RTOC also serves as a moderator here.

Nevertheless, I have been greatly concerned about the Western takeover of Russia led by Jesuit professors in the Russian Seminaries during the past few centuries. This has ushered in some false teachings and an ecumenical spirit in Russia. Even the Patriarch of Moscow, Tikhon, when he was in America attended his Anglican friend's consecration, which he should have not done as it gave the wrong impression. For after this was publicized, Russian Orthodox clergy in America advised their people that they could attend and receive Anglican confession and communion in the US Armed Forces during WW I and WWII as if the Anglican Orders had been regularized when they had not.

When I was in the OCA, I asked my priest about this, and he said it was true. As Russian Orthodox Christian chaplains were very few and even suspiciously regarded by the US Military as spies, Orthodox Christian soldiers were told to submit to Anglican priests, but to avoid Catholic priests.

St. John of Kronstadt wrote about the decay in Russian Orthodox Christianity, and he accurately predicted that Russia was going to fall. Indeed, it was almost destroyed by the evil Bolsheviks forces.

[Agios_Irineos]

Could you explain what you mean?

She probably means that it is pathetic how this forum has become a cheerleading site for one favored GOC jurisdiction and attacks all others.

I would say it's a shame.

Yes, it is a shame that our True Orthodox Church is so fractured and divided, but that is the plan of the Freemasons, Illuminati, and Rosacrucians who would destroy us if they could.

Reader Mark, you are free to present your arguments and disprove anything that others, including myself, have said. No one is infallible.

That statement presupposes everything wrong with the current state of this forum.

People make statements and then call on others to disprove unproven statements. Sorry, that's not my obligation in any circumstance.

Not to be crude, but suppose someone came forward and made a statement that a certain metropolitan was engaged in sexual abuse of children. Is it incumbent on the faithful of that metropolitan's jurisdiction to disprove that? Certainly not. It is incumbent on the person making the charges to prove them.

Moreover, an internet forum is not the place to level charges. For someone so set on arguing canons and legalism, you should know that.

The desire for jurisdictional triumphalism only furthers the division among the True Orthodox. I find it sad, unedifying and discouraging to increased forum participation.

[Maria]

She probably means that it is pathetic how this forum has become a cheerleading site for one favored GOC jurisdiction and attacks all others.

I would say it's a shame.

Yes, it is a shame that our True Orthodox Church is so fractured and divided, but that is the plan of the Freemasons, Illuminati, and Rosacrucians who would destroy us if they could.

Reader Mark, you are free to present your arguments and disprove anything that others, including myself, have said. No one is infallible.

That statement presupposes everything wrong with the current state of this forum.

People make statements and then call on others to disprove unproven statements. Sorry, that's not my obligation in any circumstance.

Not to be crude, but suppose someone came forward and made a statement that a certain metropolitan was engaged in sexual abuse of children. Is it incumbent on the faithful of that metropolitan's jurisdiction to disprove that? Certainly not. It is incumbent on the person making the charges to prove them.

Moreover, an internet forum is not the place to level charges. For someone so set on arguing canons and legalism, you should know that.

The desire for jurisdictional triumphalism only furthers the division among the True Orthodox. I find it sad, unedifying and discouraging to increased forum participation.

I am not asking for proofs for negative assumptions. One can never prove a negative.

So, far the only hierarchs tooting their horn are the retired Metropolitan Chrysostomos and the current Bishop Auxentios of Etna and Portland in all their flowery and lengthy encyclicals, where they put anyone down who dares to challenge their statements. Humble people make brief statements. Arrogance is shown in lengthy statements with lots of threats and logical fallacies to bolster their claims. In the past, these two hierarchs have used the threat of excommunication for any of their faithful who challenge their encyclicals. This is why you will not see any of the GOC-K clergy and laity challenging them and their denial that the late Met. Cyprian did anything wrong.

Notice the title of their last lengthy four page encyclical: http://www.dep.church/downloads/Statement.pdf
An Unpleasant But Necessary Statement About Certain Misrepresentations of Historical Fact

And then read this very long seven page address: "Enthronement Address of His Grace, Bishop Auxentios of Etna and Portland: http://www.dep.church/downloads/Enthronementaddress.pdf

How can one disprove "Certain Misrepresentations" that these two clergymen discuss in the "Unpleasant But Necessary Statement" above? And realize that both men wrote this encyclical.

In addition, I ask people to look honestly at what the Russian Orthodox Church was doing prior to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 that made St. John of Kronstadt and St. Seraphim of Sarov sound the trumpet and warn the people to be sober and watchful. The Western influence on Holy Russia was strongly felt, and in my opinion, this Roman Catholic influence led to the Name-Worshiping heresy through the Catholic Holy Name Society and eventually to the heresy of ecumenism because Russian Hierarchs, clergy and laity did not want to offend their Roman Catholic professors. Thus, Russian clergy and hierarchs in both the ROC and in the ROCOR were subtly tainted. The only difference in the ROC and in the ROCOR being that the ROCOR broke with the State Church when the communist takeover of the ROC became evident. Ecumenism remained in both churches.

Nevertheless, God's grace did not abandon the ROCOR because we have very obvious ROCOR Saints like St. John of San Francisco. And even though my jurisdiction did not glorify Philaret of New York, he was a very holy man who tried to guide the ROCOR into the truth, but his careful work was sabotaged by his successors. In addition, the late ROCOR Bishop Alexander, who was the pastor of Holy Protection Church on Argyle Street in Los Angeles for many years, was likewise a very holy man who donated his time, treasury, and talent for the building up of the Church. He was one of my first instructors in the Orthodox Christian faith, but he was reassigned, so I lost contact with him for several years.

In the GOC, we can privately venerate St. John of San Francisco, so it should be obvious that the GOC under Archbishop Stephanos does not believe in the light switch theory of grace. Otherwise, why would we honor St. Ephraim the Syrian, St. Issac the Syrian, or for that matter St. Constantine who was baptized by an Arian bishop?

[Maria]

Look more closely at that Enthronement Address by Bishop Auxentios. It reveals two important points:

(1) Like the RTOC, the SiR has its apostolic roots in the ROCOR for it was an ROCOR bishop who assisted in the consecration of the late Met. Cyprian. By this statement below, Bishop Auxentios strongly feels his connections to the former SiR and their connections with the ROCOR.

• Since the Apostolic Succession of our own Church derives directly from the ROCOR, this challenge
  is especially important for us. (p. 3)

(2) The SiR was a sister church to the ROCOR for ten years.

• Sadly, the union of the ROCOR with Moscow, at a time when its strong witness and observance of the Faith had begun to wane, was anything but “crystal clear.” Issues of repentance and Orthodox confession were obfuscated, principles were compromised, and even though it was mufed by the distractions and confused rhetoric of the dialogues, ROCOR suffered a violent rupture with her past. By her union with Moscow, she annulled her previous Synodal acts and proclamations and committed to a course of historical revisionism. Having been a Sister Church of our former Synod in Resistance for ten years, it broke relations with us, as its more forthright Bishops told us, because Moscow demanded this. Of course, our Bishops would not have agreed to a union with Moscow under any circumstances anyway. But the dictated rupture in communion was signicant. (p. 3)

On page 4, Bishop Auxentios sets up straw men and attacks those on the left who dare to attack Christ, the Founder of the Church, by questioning Bishop Auxentios' very authority:

• They no longer trust the Church’s traditional protocol or her hierarchy, let alone the promises of her Divine Founder. Facilitated by the troublesome medium of the Internet, without inhibition they protest and expound on lofty and difcult matters, as though in their own persons they carried the full panoply of spiritual gifts and synodal authority. They and their black-and-white, simplistic opinions become the personal and rational criteria of tradition and authenticity. In essence, they eventually come to a Protestant mentality

Again, on page 4, Bishop Auxentios attacks those on the right:

• These are the Patriarchates, which unhesitatingly proclaim themselves “ofcial,” “canonical,” and even “spiritually supreme,” despite the meaningless and unproven nature of these claims. In such a spirit we have been primed to recognize, before the fact, the Orthodox Synod scheduled to convene in 2016 as “Œcumenical” and inspired, even if no one knows its outcome, suggesting that the decisions of the convocation have been scripted in advance.

For more information on this so-called Right Wing vs Left Wing as seen in the ROCOR, please revisit:
http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/vi ... f=2&t=9082

And yes, the World Orthodox Synod convening in 2016 has been scripted in advance with deliberations made in committees. However, why is the SiR so concerned about this false synod? Why did one of former SiR scholars recently write another paper of 43 pages concerning this false synod. Could this be a wag the dog scenario as if the GOC-K could possibly influence the Patriarch of Constantinople or the Moscow Patriarchate?

Perhaps this is the key. Those in the ROCOR, whether they are in the ROCOR beholden to the MP or the ROCA which is a sister church to the former Synod in Resistance (SiR), and now the GOC-K, feel a certain loyalty to the MP. I have previously mentioned in another post that several parishioners from ROCA's Holy Trinity parish in Oxnard hope that ROCA will join the MP as it was their understanding that ROCOR-MP prematurely joined the MP, but should have waited only five more years. With the passing of seven years now, the time seems right for ROCA, in their opinion, to join the MP.

Again, what would happen if ROCA were to join the MP? Wouldn't that make the GOC-K a sister church to the MP, and since the MP is a sister church with the EP, would not that make the GOC-K a sister church to the EP? I honestly think that the three former GOC-K priests who recently joined RTOC did so because of these very questions.

[Cyprian]

What is the objection as to why anyone would even consider not honoring St. Ephraim the Syrian and St. Isaac of Nineveh?

There is another tradition that speaks of St. Constantine being baptized by St. Sylvester, Pope of Rome. So do we know for certain that it is an established fact that Constantine the Great was baptized by an Arian bishop?