say whuh? MP calls RC its brother!

Anastasios · Post by **Anastasios** » Thu 11 December 2003 10:36 pm

I doubt we can trust capitalization because capitalization rules may be different in Russian and English and the translator might have messed up, and even so I don't think a capitalization proves your point.

Still, a non-Orthodox bishop is a non-Orthodox bishop. Met Kallinikos used to emphasize that when the State Church of Greece switched to the new Calendar, it lost grace, and he would walk to a light switch and turn it off to show what he meant. In the same way, if Bp Gregory left the Synod of Chrysostomos II, then he too lost grace instantaneously and is no better than the Pope, in Chrystostomos II-ite eyes.

anastasios

Daniel · Post by **Daniel** » Sat 13 December 2003 9:42 am

anastasios wrote:
And our own Orthodoxy or Death just called Bp Gregory of ROAC a bishop--even though having left the Synod of Chrysostomos II and not being in communion with him he cannot be considered either an Orthodox bishop or to have grace in OOD's eyes...

anastasios wrote:
In the same way, if Bp Gregory left the Synod of Chrysostomos II, then he too lost grace instantaneously and is no better than the Pope, in Chrystostomos II-ite eyes.

Anastasios,
Before committing the the above statements please this recent postby OOD on Bp. Gregory. Besides, I don't ever remembering OOD ever saying that just because someone is not in communion with ArchBp. Chrysostomos that they have so Grace in their Mysteries. I don't think I have said that everyone not in communion with us are outside the Church and devoid of Grace.

Getting back to the birthday greeting above. It wouldn't look so bad if Alexy had prefaced the word 'bishop' with something like pseudo or false.

OrthodoxyOrDeath · Sat 13 December 2003 11:07 am

Anastasios,

You said:

And our own Orthodoxy or Death just called Bp Gregory of ROAC a bishop--even though having left the Synod of Chrysostomos II and not being in communion with him he cannot be considered either an Orthodox bishop or to have grace in OOD's eyes...

I refuse to get into all the details as I fear it would quickly degenerate. But let me just say that then Archmandrite Gregory was not deposed by our Synod. Obviously his time with the Lamians is very problematic for me, but since he is part of the ROAC now, I guess I could not say anything more than what our Holy Synod does officially, which is nothing. I call him a Bishop out of respect for the office in the spirit of our synods neutral stance. I feel that if you read what I said carefully, I said, “I have found nothing which seems to suggest he is not now an Orthodox bishop.”

(of course if I learned he was now concelebrating with the Lamians North American leader Niphon, that would also be very problematic)

Keep in mind that St. Photius was deposed by St. Ignatius who signed the decree with his own blood! We see other cases where saints refused to commune with other saints, such in the case of St. Athanasius. There has always been some degree of confusion as to the Orthodoxy of other people.

Bottom line, As I have stated some months ago, I am neutral on the ROAC since I am obedient to the Holy Synod.

OrthodoxyOrDeath · Sat 13 December 2003 11:21 am

Anastasios,

Met Kallinikos used to emphasize that when the State Church of Greece switched to the new Calendar, it lost grace, and he would walk to a light switch and turn it off to show what he meant.

The Lamian Kallinikos? Curious to know how you know of this (not that I'm doubting you).

Some people need an analogy like this to understand. For others a better analogy might be the building of a dam. The more the people become aware of the heresy and the evil, or simply don't care, by so much more is the dam holding back God's Grace and the Mysteries of the Church built.

OrthodoxyOrDeath · Sat 13 December 2003 11:36 am

Ania,

Perhaps you read to fast

I for one would never hope or pray the "Lord would strengthen" the pope in in his spreading and maintaning of heresy, and thereby the separation of millions of people from the Church.

In fact, I would write: "We hope and pray the Lord will strengthen you in your eventual return to the Church of Christ." - That is charitable.

Anastasios · Post by **Anastasios** » Sat 13 December 2003 1:28 pm

OOD,

One is either in or out of the Church according to your ecclesiology. The reading of Basil Canon 1 that I have seen is that once someone leaves communion and goes into schism, "grace departs." You can't have it both ways. If someone is not in communion with your Synod then they cannot be Orthodox because the Church is one.

When St Ignatius condemned St Photios and vice versa, there were not two parallel hierarchies established. Each time the deposed person bowed to the will of the Church and the State. In our modern times a deposition means nothing because the deposed just seems to start his own church.

The idea of asking Bp Gregory to leave without deposing him is even more problematic because how can you claim to be THE Orthodox Church but then kick someone out and not depose him? In/Out is all I hear preached here, so according to your standards Gregory cannot be a bishop of the Orthodox Church.

I support your decision to be neutral acctually because it accords with MY ecclesiological outlook but it seems inconsistent with yours. Now calling him a bishop out of respect for the office is what I was saying is called for in ALL cases. That's why I stopped calling Met. Valentine Mr Valentine because I thought that was rude to our ROAC posters.

The Met Kallinikos I was refering to was the Matthewite who joined Auxentius only to leave after consecrating Met Cyprian "back in the day, back in '79".

OrthodoxyOrDeath · Sat 13 December 2003 3:26 pm

Anastasios,

The Church is One because it is found in Christ, who is one Truth, not many “truths”. Our knowledge of this Truth and our acceptance of it above our own self-will and our freedom is what distinguishes those who are in communion with Christ and those who are not. Therefore, freedom separates each of us into two groups. There are two types of people, as there are two types of angels: the friends of God and the enemies of God.

I think what has been said is that once someone persists in preaching heresy, they are automatically out of the Church. This is the only “black and white issue” I have ever forwarded. Of course schismatics are no within the Church. But just as the heretics can repent, so to can schismatics be lead back to the Chruch.

Now I have never claimed those in my Synod are the only Orthodox on the Earth. In fact, what I said was that our opinion regarding the ROAC was nuetral.