Dear Alexis:

Keep listening. We hope within these 5 episodes we'll have made the clear case: if you want to stay alive in the grace of Orthodoxy, come to the True Orthodox. The divisions are not insurmountable.

And, sad to say, crazies are everywhere.

In Christ,
Deacon Joseph Suaiden
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission Chapel, Yonkers NY
A Mission of the Orthodox Metropolia in North America
Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of North and South America and the British Isles

For the record, this was written by Fr Victor Dobrov, not any of us at NFTU. We put it up, because the subject matter was newsworthy, not because we agree or disagree with it.

I tend towards thinking this distinction between "Patriarchate" and "Patriarchia" is very novel indeed.

Dear Fr Stefan,

So to see if I understand you correctly, Fr Peter confirmed everything in this report, but claims that the nuns were stavroclasts as his reasoning?

Really?

He also mentions emailing him. How does one get in touch with him?

Fr Nectarios of the OCA writes: "I think there is more to this story than is being told."

Considering that you consider NFTU biased and that we should take our news from official World Orthodox sites, I'd assume you would. But there isn't. How's that Metropolitan Jonah thing working out for you by the way? Still think ocanews.org was exaggerating and that we should trust the official line?

"First, I would question why anyone, regardless of jurisdictional squabbles and politics would refuse to kiss the Cross of Our Lord. It matters not if the cross is offered by someone from the Moscow Patriarchate, Serbian, Coptic or Protestant."

That's insane. Kissing the cross in one's hand is a liturgical action. They weren't participating in the service, so why were they singled out by the priest in question?

"Second, how long after leaving did the nuns decide to return?"

The original story indicates they didn't so much even leave the premises, which would mean the doors were locked behind them.

"Has anyone spoken with the Priest in question? Or are we just in the process of launching accusations about?"

Considering the nuns didn't know who the priest was, and only later were informed it was allegedly Fr Peter Perekrestov, I'd say that we have received no statement from the priest in question. As this was not widely reported until now, I would assume this was not supposed to be given high exposure.

Of course, we'd welcome the priest's response, especially if this was due to a misunderstanding. Certainly an apology is in order. There is no indication that "the church wardens thought everything was over, and sadly due to the times we live in, were just doing the normal relocking of the doors", as you write. This seems like a directed action, and if this was simply throwing some nuns out to get the doors closed-- well, we'd love to hear it.

They haven't retracted it yet.

I will wait to see what they do before retracting.

In Christ,
Deacon Joseph Suaiden
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission Chapel, Yonkers NY

Further, I will add that this release was a _response_ to the original news story released on romfea.org and ocanews.org, perhaps in response to a public outcry. From my perspective, we still don't know what's happening and I am under no obligation to believe the official story from the OCA hierarchy.

Dear Father Nectarios, I am sorry if I offended you and your jurisdiction.

It seems, dear Father, that you think we wrote the article. We did not, nor did we put up the full article. So it was not our "speculation", but that of a news source we have relied on previously on World Orthodoxy with good result. Simply put, www.ocanews.org has been right too many times to not take seriously on the matter. The fact that your complaint matches those of others in the OCA or World Orthodoxy sadly does not help. Unlike Metropolitan Philip, we do not smear and label websites with dissenting views as "pornographic" but take the possibility but take the possibility seriously that they might have something worthwhile to say. And our experience has taught us that when there is already an attempt to tell me "offlist" to be quiet already before a public comment, then there's usually an off handed reason.

If this is erroneous information, I will be glad to retract it, as I have in the past.

In Christ,
Deacon Joseph Suaiden
St Eulalia Orthodox Mission Chapel, Yonkers NY
Holy Synod of Milan

This is last year's text. This is the best part of this year's: "In this infinite joy and Radiant day-to-one only want to encourage you. Do not be embarrassed that we have so few, that the Church of our chase, we have no earthly glory and power. Even if you remain in solitude, not departing from the True Church, does not appeal to the brilliance and power of the Moscow Patriarchate and other heretical churches which have fallen away from Orthodoxy into the heresy of ecumenism. We Christians of the last times, not saved by the fact that he healed the sick, or move the mountain, or a gate in the cave and there will be holding an ascetic life. Required of us quite a bit - to survive until the end and did not change the Bride of the Lamb - His virgin Martyr Church, persecuted [by] the modern Herod and Pilate."

I think that really speaks to us.

See above: "No, this man isn't serious. What he does is twisting the facts." No, he's quite serious. Since this has been a hallmark of his primacy, I am sure he is quite serious.

As to your second comment, I am sorry to say, but considering the Old Calendarists have been around for 80 years, the only way to fully interpret you as sympathetic to the "original cause" is, we'd have to assume, the decade or so they were without Bishops, being martyred and imprisoned with very limited possibilities for self-preservation. God allowed that the people be given Bishops. If that is the "beginning of the end" for you, then we must assume that you could only feel sympathy for a movement with either limited chances of survival or survival in a radically different form, such as the Old Believers.

I didn't bring up the issue of "sympathy" to begin with-- you did. Your subsequent comment indicated that True Orthodox are in some way focused in the hate of men, rather than the love of God. One can assume that you are historically splitting the movement from a "sympathetic" period to a "non-sympathetic" period. Based on my reading of history, there is no way you could make that claim with any serious consistency.

The truth requires you to make judgments of conscience. If you don't the reason is either (a) you see no need to make such judgments regardless of the situation, in which case your faith is academic or (b) you do not think the situation requires a judgment, in which case you do not believe that there is a problem-- in which case you may as well agree with the Patriarch anyway. Even if he is spouting heresy, it would appear you don't care.

And yes, you are trying to "sound brave" if you refuse alternatives on the basis of "being cowardly". People died to protect their faith under the True Orthodox. Your option, standing there while your church whittles itself away to heresy, is far more cowardly than you think.