After misrepresenting me with an obvious straw-man you insulted me. I suggested to advance the topic on St. Tikhon. You said you’d rather talk about “domestic violence” instead. I immediately agreed to accommodate you. We can stop talking but don’t try to posture yourself here like you’re doing me some kind of favor. Please.
There’s your false assumption again. I didn’t put the picture up to “justify decades of joint ecumenical prayer”. I simply added a photo with no comment listing the names of the Orthodox saints in the picture. That’s it. You started making excuses and insulted me as you reverted back to your handy “plot” theory to explain the picture away. You said the Synod was horrified at what St. Tikhon did there. The same Synod that later elected him Patriarch? Let’s talk more about St. Tikhon since you’re the expert.
Hey “genius”, you’re not as clairvoyant as you might believe because I actually don’t think it’s Orthodox policy. You use this “plot” excuse often when historical facts are brought up that contradict your narrative.
Since you’re bringing up ‘intelligence’ I guess St. Tikhon didn’t have the mystical brilliance you possess in the 21st century and got tricked? A lot of people remember you as well. I have no desire to say anything about you as an individual because that would mean I’m trying to deflect. Like what you’re doing now.
@NewsNFTU Stop being such a crybaby. You posted some pictures with Orthodox hierarchs and hierarchs of other Christian faith communities. I did the same. You come back with - as usual - more excuses.
Because Met. Agafangel himself said to a group of our parishioners meeting with him after liturgy during his visit that the MP “has grace” and wasn’t “outside of the Church” (genuine Cyprianism). His position was “it’s too soon yet to unite with MP”.
Shortly after, in 2009 our priest tried to organize a discussion amongst the other Russian fragments for unity, it was clear that there was no interest in that from Met. A unless they all “submitted to him” since he was the “only continuation” of ROCOR, holding out until 2007. That also means Met. A had to recognize all the depositions and denunciations ROCOR did pre-2007 to ROAC, RTOC, ROCOR-V, HOCNA and all the other break aways. As such, it was a waste of time after a few months seeing the real “spirit” of TOC.
Now - answer finally as strait as I have for you above - according to your ecclesiology is Archbishop Gregory of Colorado a part of the Orthodox Church?
@frevagoras But if there’s old nuns and potential loss of property involved - being in communion with so-called “heretics” is acceptable! It’s a sliding scale with exceptions which amounts to a self contradicting ecclesiology.
Let’s focus here because the context is clear and consistent and your assessment is false. You can’t get more officially “in communion” when you literally say the Patriarch’s name first in the Liturgy. The JP is the most ancient see in Orthodoxy.
Don’t you teach here all the time that even if your bishop is in communion with someone who is in communion with a heretic - you’re also a heretic? Yes, you do.
Well, be consistent on this.
Wrong. I have repeatedly pointed out that Fr. SA is a part of the GOC - that’s why I like quoting him to you. He’s never called me a heretic. I think I’ve clearly pointed out why I refer to him - he’s right about ROCOR history.
Let’s advance the topic back to something that you ignored earlier - is Archbishop Gregory of Colorado part of the Church according to your ecclesiology?
What’s damaging is you don’t even realize that you’re actually confirming my position by admitting some of the reasons why ROCOR remained “in communion” with the JP! This is what happens when you aren’t refuting the history because you simply can’t. You make excuses but those excuses only confirm the history, they don’t refute it.
Archpriest Alexander Lebedev spent 2004 and onwards arguing the same point that Fr. SA attests to in his 2010 essay in re ROCOR communion with WO.
We have the fact about Jerusalem that provides the proof of this.
Seriously, nothing you are posting addresses how ROCOR can be subject to the JP on his territory, commemorate the name of that Patriarchate first in the services, serve on antimens signed by him and not be “in communion” with him.
You seem to not want (or are able to) have a sane conversation on that fact.
Fr. SA is right. Dr. Vladimir Moss is right in quoting Fr. SA’s statement I’m repeatedly posting. Even the Matthewites understood this reality and broke communion with ROCOR/Met. Philaret.