Russian Orthodox churches may unite soon

[Gregory]

As I have so often asked, please show me where any saint, synod, holy father, or any part of Holt Tradition teaches that communion with heresy is an acceptable option, and I will repent of my relishing in the division between the MP and the ROCOR.

Dear OOD --

I agree with you that no saint, synod or holy father taught that communion with heresy is an acceptable option. This is a basic Christian understanding. Even Protestants believe this: what they conceive as heresy is not allowed. Of course heresy is not a subjective feeling or understanding, but an objective non-truth.

However, are you telling me at no time whatsoever was the Church in communion with bishops or priests who had some heretical ideas? Even for a period before things were clarified?

BTW, why do you "relish" in the division between ROCOR and the MP? Ecumenical liturgical activities do not witness to the Truth of Christ, but neither does this constant "relishing" of those you and your synod perceive as heretics.

OCAorDeath!

Greg

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

"OCAorDeath" lol - zealousness is much better than lukewarmness!

However, are you telling me at no time whatsoever was the Church in communion with bishops or priests who had some heretical ideas? Even for a period before things were clarified?

I don't think there is anything in the Church that "at no time whatsoever" would apply to. What the documents tell us is very limited, but generally I think it is clear that the answer is absolutley. In the cases of Nestorius, Iconoclasm, Noviantism, the Aresenites, John Vekos, ect, communion was broken immediatley. And as knowledge of the heresy spread (however slowly), by that much more communion was broken.

BTW, why do you "relish" in the division between ROCOR and the MP? Ecumenical liturgical activities do not witness to the Truth of Christ, but neither does this constant "relishing" of those you and your synod perceive as heretics.

Like I said, it is more accurate to say I am "releaved" by the division, and why am I releaved? Because "Chrysostomos loudly declares not only heretics, but also those who have communion with them, to be enemies of God." St. Theodore the Studite, Epistle of Abbot Theophilus.

[Waldemar]

OOD, Sorry for the misunderstanding.

"...MP's pedigree or communion would be that which was equal to 'Belial' ?!"

"Every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment."

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

"...MP's pedigree or communion would be that which was equal to 'Belial' ?!"

"Every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment."

Then I will stand with the Holy Fathers on this. It is all my other idle words I am worried about.

[Justin Kissel]

Gregory,

So, why are the GOC and OOD never questioned here?

I can only speak for myself, of course, but here are my own thoughts. Last year I questioned OOD quite a bit on this forum; at some points I was far from civil, much to my shame. I also talked to OOD quite a bit via email this past winter, as I was "exploring" the GOC as a possible ecclesiastical home. The end result of this questioning was:

1) I came to believe that the GOC were not "holy remnanticals" (as one poster put it), but rather were perfectly Orthodox, and held to a healthy agnosticism regarding how they related to other groups who they were not in communion with.

2) That I held to a number of incorrect beliefs, and had a distorted understanding of certain things. I also came to believe that the GOC (and OOD) had a good understanding of these things that I had misunderstood.

So, speaking for myself, the reason that I don't question the GOC or OOD much at this point is because I believe that they are correct. I've spent the last year asking them questions; so now I'm all questioned out, really. But by all means, if you have a question about the GOC, please ask. I'd love to see the responses (and perhaps even dare to add a small post).

Waldemar,

What is the Holy Remnantical, Anti-Ecumenist, Traditionalist, ROAC -GOC take on the prophecy of St. Anatole the Younger of Optina?

I have seen numerous prophecies about Russia in the end times, and some have seemed to me to contradict each other. Therefore, rather than think that one prophecy or another is false, I must assume that I simply do not understand the prophecies. Thus, for the most part, the only thing I could offer would be incoherent speculation.

Only one point comes to mind which doesn't seem wholly incoherent, so I'll post that thought. It is prophecied that, In the end times, St. Seraphim of Sarov will rise from the dead. I do not have a hard time believing that the conversion of Russia might happen through that event, and not through dialouges between various groups. Not that I have a problem with attempting to resolve things before St. Seraphim comes back, of course; I'm merely pointing out that we need not necessarily look at the currect happenings as the fulfillment of various prophecies.

[Waldemar]

A slight digression:

On Sunday evening, the foreign church delegation [ROCA] will fly to Nizhny Novgorod to visit Sarov and Diveyevo, the places where St. Serafim of Sarov accomplished his religious feat. This year marks the 250th anniversary of St. Serafim. http://www.interfax.ru/e/B/0/28.html?id_issue=9703284

St. Seraphim of Sarov, pray to God for us sinners!

[尼古拉前执事]

The sub-topic on Saint Seraphim of Sarov has been split off unto a thread of this topic at http://www.euphrosynoscafe.com/forum/vi ... php?t=2379