Surprisingly, Fr. Andrey Erastov
read his report on the "metropolitan-districts" and after the
adoption of the resolution, "calls for the ordained clergy
and the laity of the church to not
recognize the jurisdiction of Metropolitan
Agafangel and his Synod," which statement he
signed. What is on his side?:
naivety, hypocrisy, or "dizziness"?
Met. Agafangel
Where is this comment found? Internet Sobor? Facebook? What is the url? The date? The post?
ReplyDeletehere:
ReplyDeletehttp://internetsobor.org/rptsz/tserkovnye-novosti/rptsz/rptsz-arkhiepiskopy-andronik-i-sofronij-zapreshcheny-v-svyashchennosluzhenii
archive screen shot:
http://readerdanielsharing.blogspot.com/1980/01/comment-on-fr-andrei-erastov-by-met.html
So, tell us Daniel, what does this mean in human English? Spellbound Fr. Andrei says that all the fragments should recognize each other in a mutual-self-validation of each other, but that ROCA is not to be recognized by them as valid. (?)
I agree with Vl. Agafangel that this is surprising. Herod is forced to speak the truth even against his will. ROCA will not be included in the future imagined fragment alliance. Yes, this is true. We are excluded even before the fragment alliance is official.
It is the same as when the ROCA was excluded from the left-wing SCOBA. Fr. Andrei is speaking true against his will, prophesying without being aware. ROCA will not be part of any ecumenist organization, whether it be left wing (world orthodoxy) or right wing (fragment alliance).