info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The ONLY REAL American Church that is INCLUSIVE - the OCA!
18 views
Skip to first unread message
nickk - not the imposter
Jul 6, 2016, 8:38:36 AM7/6/16
to
Anymore need to be said?
Lucky Velotres
Jul 6, 2016, 10:50:57 AM7/6/16
to
Every goat wants your throat. Boycott stewardship. Put a green slip, empty envelope or only penny in collection tray.
https://sites.google.com/site/quitodox/
Clearly the Ochrafux Cherks was always communist. Parable of Talents (Matthew 25) glorifies capitalism as opposed to the slothful envy of communism, but Soviet Seleucid Grystlestolm wrote "The rich are in possession of the goods of the poor, even if they have acquired them honestly" (Lazarus 11) and "Questioning is the subversion of faith" (Timothy 1). Theodosian Code promoted confiscatory taxation and promoted Diocletian socialist feudalism (Rostovtzeff 1926, Gibbon ch. 13) that Toynbee (1939, IV p. 399) said caused Anatolia to apostase into Turkishness. Gun control hails back to Justinian's Novella 85.
https://sites.google.com/site/quitodox/
Clearly the Ochrafux Cherks was always communist. Parable of Talents (Matthew 25) glorifies capitalism as opposed to the slothful envy of communism, but Soviet Seleucid Grystlestolm wrote "The rich are in possession of the goods of the poor, even if they have acquired them honestly" (Lazarus 11) and "Questioning is the subversion of faith" (Timothy 1). Theodosian Code promoted confiscatory taxation and promoted Diocletian socialist feudalism (Rostovtzeff 1926, Gibbon ch. 13) that Toynbee (1939, IV p. 399) said caused Anatolia to apostase into Turkishness. Gun control hails back to Justinian's Novella 85.
Percival P. Cassidy
Jul 7, 2016, 10:56:14 AM7/7/16
to
On 07/06/2016 08:38 AM, nickk - not the imposter wrote:
> Anymore need to be said?
Yes -- questions, at least:
> Anymore need to be said?
1. Is the autocephalous status of the OCA generally accepted? I suspect
the answer is "No."
2. If the answer to the above *is* "Yes," what about the obligations --
moral, or even canonical -- of the other hierarchs in America to their
own Patriarchs?
3. What do you mean by inclusive"? If you mean ethnically inclusive,
then the OCA does not have a monopoly on such inclusivity: our
"Antiochian" parish has Russian, German, Chinese, Romanian, and "Anglo"
members and catechumens, and not a single person from the Middle East; I
know of an MP parish that had an Australian priest and a predominantly
non-Russian congregation; there are "Greek" parishes with few Greeks.
Perce
nickk - not the imposter
Jul 7, 2016, 11:29:29 AM7/7/16
to
1) The OCA is "FORMALLY" recognized by all "Slavic" Churches who respect the ROC. Those GREEK Churches that are cronies of Istanbul, follow suit with Istanbul in not "FORMALLY" recognizing the OCA's autocephaly. The OCA is in Holy Communion with ALL canonical Orthodox Churches worldwide. De facto, the OCA is recognized by ALL canonical Orthodox Churches worldwide.
2) Hierarchs not in the OCA show their allegiance to their top hierarch in the U.S. or overseas. The issue is, Orthodox Canon Law is clear that foreign hierarchs ONLY have authority within their own territory. The Moscow Patriarch doesn't have authority outside Russia; same with Antioch; same with Serbia, etc. When these foreign bishops helped their ethnic people set up churches in the U.S. or elsewhere, this is a "TEMPORARY" assist not permanent. Foreign bishops are holding on to the idea of "COLONIZATION" in other countries that is NON-CANONICAL. American ethnic churches are operating in a non-canonical fashion.
3) The OCA is "INCLUSIVE" in that it tries very hard not to bias against any peoples or ethnic backgrounds. And although you can find converts in other Orthodox jurisdictions, take a close look at who runs their churches and who gets the nod and who doesn't. Recently in the Antiochian Archdiocese when they had to choose a new American leader, the popular candidate was an American born son of Arab heritage. The overseas bishops pushed their own foreign born person into the position. Time to cut ties with ALL foreign bishops. They have no authority here!
2) Hierarchs not in the OCA show their allegiance to their top hierarch in the U.S. or overseas. The issue is, Orthodox Canon Law is clear that foreign hierarchs ONLY have authority within their own territory. The Moscow Patriarch doesn't have authority outside Russia; same with Antioch; same with Serbia, etc. When these foreign bishops helped their ethnic people set up churches in the U.S. or elsewhere, this is a "TEMPORARY" assist not permanent. Foreign bishops are holding on to the idea of "COLONIZATION" in other countries that is NON-CANONICAL. American ethnic churches are operating in a non-canonical fashion.
3) The OCA is "INCLUSIVE" in that it tries very hard not to bias against any peoples or ethnic backgrounds. And although you can find converts in other Orthodox jurisdictions, take a close look at who runs their churches and who gets the nod and who doesn't. Recently in the Antiochian Archdiocese when they had to choose a new American leader, the popular candidate was an American born son of Arab heritage. The overseas bishops pushed their own foreign born person into the position. Time to cut ties with ALL foreign bishops. They have no authority here!
0 new messages