OCA Receives uniate Monastery

OrthodoxyOrDeath · Post by **OrthodoxyOrDeath** » Thu 4 December 2003 2:43 pm

As I told Mor Ephrem, I can certainly sympathize with your skepticism.

Nevski · Post by **Nevski** » Thu 4 December 2003 3:18 pm

OrthodoxyOrDeath wrote:
As I told Mor Ephrem, I can certainly sympathize with your skepticism.

Yes, well, this is just another instance of what I referred to in "The OCA" thread, to wit, where super-trads such as you make some sensational public allegation about heretics being communed or heretics being received in their orders, etc., and then, when asked to support the allegation, either clam up or say such things as "I am not at liberty to discuss this publicly; go ask so and so." In other words, public allegations are freely made, but somehow an excuse is always made as to why it's not appropriate to discuss the evidence publicly. I think that's real weasel-like, OOD.

Natasha · Post by **Natasha** » Thu 4 December 2003 3:49 pm

oi! this is too much! please forgive all of us super-trad "weasels", dear nevski-judge, jury, executioner. :ohvey:

Since you cannot rely on "liars" such as ourselves, maybe you should launch your own investigation and present the desired paperwork to the appropriate authorities.

I feel sorry for you that you feel the need to pursue this and make such strong statements against people. I think you should be happy that your local church doesn't have any of these problems occurring.

OrthodoxyOrDeath · Post by **OrthodoxyOrDeath** » Thu 4 December 2003 4:03 pm

Nevski,

I am sorry you feel this way about my explanation.

I should once again point out that I never said (on the other thread) the OCA communed, I said they were in communion, for which I illustrated very concisely this fact.

I think if you look again you will see this.

God bless.

Nevski · Post by **Nevski** » Thu 4 December 2003 4:37 pm

Natasha wrote:
Since you cannot rely on "liars" such as ourselves, maybe you should launch your own investigation and present the desired paperwork to the appropriate authorities.

I feel sorry for you that you feel the need to pursue this and make such strong statements against people. I think you should be happy that your local church doesn't have any of these problems occurring.

I might be able to rely on you if you'd only present some evidence in support of your claims. But once again, I see, instead of presenting it yourself you ask me to "launch my own investigation."

I have no need at the present, Natasha, to lauch any such investigation, for I've seen nothing to lead me to believe that such things as you describe are taking place, except perhaps by accident and very infrequently. You, however, say they are. You are the one "making strong statements against people." Very well, you make the allegations so you provide the evidence. Those are the rules of the game.

As for me, I am seeing a pattern here, and I find it most illuminating.

尼古拉前执事 · Thu 4 December 2003 4:42 pm

Nevski, let me clarify. OOD is saying that the OCA is in communion with the Antiochians. The Antiochians are in communion with the Monophysites. Thus the OCA is in communion with the Monophysites, as to be in communion with someone, to commune them, to concelebrate with them (As Antioch & the OCA do and Antoch & the Monphysites do) is to share one Faith, one ecclesiology.

Nevski · Post by **Nevski** » Thu 4 December 2003 5:08 pm

Nicholas wrote:
Nevski, let me clarify. OOD is saying that the OCA is in communion with the Antiochians. The Antiochians are in communion with the Monophysites. Thus the OCA is in communion with the Monophysites, as to be in communion with someone, to commune them, to concelebrate with them (As Antioch & the OCA do and Antoch & the Monphysites do) is to share one Faith, one ecclesiology.

Understood, Nicholas. Except that, as you stated previously, it is really more of an "indirect" communion. In response to your previous post, I likened it to how ROCOR is "in communion" with "world Orthodoxy" by virtue of its being in communion with the Church of Serbia (and also the JP, if I'm not mistaken). In other words, ROCOR is "in communion" with ecumenist heretics. Would you accept that analogy or not? If not, why?

Concerning what the Patriarchate of Antioch does with respect to the Oriental Orthodox, I would have to say, first of all, that it's not crystal clear what's going on here, so I think charity demands that we suspend a certain amount of judgment at least. Secondly, I would say that of all the ecclesial divisions in this world, the one that would appear to be most easily healed (at least theoretically) would be, please God, the division between the Byzantine and Oriental Orthodox. Whether the super-trads like it or not, steps are being taken to heal that breach. The church may stumble and err in the process of doing this, and it surely opens itself to appropriate criticism when it does, but I will trust the Church and her bishops -- or more accurately the Holy Spirit that works in Her to lead the Church and Her bishops into all truth -- more than I will a handful of noisy schismatics.