Again, he's not doing anything to help his case. He is being dodgy about who his bishop is, he is putting his own opinions above that of bishops (including those of the jurisdiction he wants to be a part of), and, he is making a theological mountain out of a molehill.
Don't even get me started on his followers that make up a large part of the convert population of DC's ROCOR community which is a large part why I quit going there (that, their intolerance for those on the New Calendar, and adopted Russian chauvinism). The alt-right Orthodox that is as antisemetic as actual Nazis, intolerant of other views, and overly correct? That's his crowd, those are the ones who idolize him and he does nothing to calm them down. Are there bishops who follow the spirit of the law more often then not? Sure thing. Are there those who likewise follow the letter of the law more often then not? Sure thing. But, the issue of how converts from other Christian traditions are received into the Church is not exactly the issue to cause division over especially when every Divine Liturgy we say the Nicene Creed where we say "I believe in ONE baptism for the remission of sin". Read, ONE, not MANY. He's turning a certain strain of American Orthodoxy into the Westboro Baptists of Orthodoxy and I don't think that's the solution to any of our problems. The Orthodox Church is the hospital for the soul, not the vanguard for the conservative end of the culture war and that's what he and his crowd are turning Her into. The American Orthodox who think that the solution is for us all to follow Putin? That's the Heers crowd again. If we are to know people by their followers, than just look at what he's produced.
Now if you'll excuse me, I am going to follow the ruling of my bishop; who signed the letter by the Assembly not to affiliate with this priest who, to use rusmeister's term, is behaving like a neo-Gnostic and acting like he knows better than the collective Tradition of the Orthodox Church. Remember: among the canons of the Seven Ecumenical Councils it spells out that certain heretics who repent are to be received back into the Church via Chrismation, others by Baptism, others by Confession. Many of those heretics were further from the True Faith than today's Roman Catholics, Anglicans, and Lutherans. And since this pre-dates the Great Schism, it was Fr Peter Moglia of the Russian Orthodox Church who established the practice of receiving Roman Catholics via Chrismation in the 18th century. A century or so before that the Synod of Jerusalem 1672 established similar guidelines: Catholics via Chrismation, Protestants via Baptism. If Fr Peter Heers wants to be part of the Russian Church in some fashion, maybe he should start by following its not-so-ancient tradition instead of his own personal opinions. At the end of the day, his dodgyness and rhetoric make him the liability he has become so that no bishop wants to deal with his problems. Why take someone in who won't be obedient? Sure, ROCOR could take him in, hold a Spiritual Court, and depose him removing him from the clergy. But given the trend, he'll probably call their decision invalid, their Synod compromised, himself a "victim", and, continue afterwards as he were still a priest ignoring the decision of the jurisdiction he still claims to be a part of, even though it clearly disowned him.
