What is Wrong With Cyprianism?

[Anastasios]

OrthodoxyOrDeath should realize that his approach to Metropolitan Cyprian is at odds with his own Metropolitan's opinion and with his Metropolitan's immediate predecessor, the ever-memorable Metropolitan Petros, who visited the Etna monastery several months before he died. While acknowledging that there are some problems with the way Metropolitan Cyprian expounds upon his ecclesiology, I find that both hierarchs, the present one and the deceased one, were unwilling to condemn Metropolitan Cyprian in the way that OrthodoxyOrDeath frequently does on this site.

I commend Justin for his frank and courageous post.

Anastasios

[Gregory]

Dear Justin --

So, what conclusions have you come to because of this?

Gregory

[Seraphim Reeves]

Justin,

When I found your post this morning, I was taken aback, quite surprised actually. As I've thought (and perhaps said) before, you and I are probably more similar than different.

If there has been a landing strip of grace in the whole Dormition Skete affair (at least for me, though I suspect it's been this way for some other folks as well), it's been a stern lesson - how not to think, how not to be. I'm not refering to any particular idea, so much has how one harbours their collected knowledge.

As strange as it may sound, there is a way of being "correct" all the while ending up absolutely in the wrong. In my own case (I will not pretend to speak for others) it was the realization that I had forgotten my first love, what presumably would be the first love of anyone professing to be a "Christian" of any sort.

So called "strict" ecclessiological positions, while having a symetry and logic to them which is very appealing (though I think if one delves even deeper you'll eventually find problems in this...but that search wasn't immediate for me, it took realizing the following first before I even bothered with this), pose one big problem: they create a noose in which no one will be justified, even those who profess them, not a single one. This includes the position OOD espouses; this even includes those "strictest of the strict", the "Matthewites". Only at the price of entertaining double standards ("forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors"), can one escape this.

But the even bigger "revelation" is that not only do the contemporary "zealots" have the footing cut from beneath themselves, but worse yet, so do our immediate ancestors in Christ - even those who lived well before the contemporary problems which now assail the Orthodox world.

Recent discussions here and (more so) on the Paradosis list involving those still loyal to Archbishop Gregory, embody precisely what I mean. Besides being utterly bereft of even simple human kindness and civility, we are now being told that basically the Russian Orthodox Church has been anti-canonical and crypto-ecumenistic in it's attitude and practice (in receiving converts) toward various western heterodox bodies for centuries (though not with the consequence of actually "undoing" the Russian Church in centuries past...we cannot admit this I suppose, because Gregory's validity depends upon it not being so!). Apparently the likes of St.Elizabeth (the nun and royal martyr) are only counted as Orthodox Saints in the same way we would count catechumen-martyrs as members of Christ - since according to the "correct" logic of the D.S. crowd, she died "unbaptized", save in her own blood! Suffice it to say, this is now the understanding of the Russian Orthodox Church which has canonized her, but why be troubled with such details when we have 20th century men to interpret the sacred patrimony for us with no reference to it's own outlook and assumptions?

While perhaps the D.S. crowd embody this problem unto absurdity, I don't think their error is unique to them: theirs is an extremism in measure, and not in kind...quantity, not quality.

Seraphim

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Anastasios,

It is quite an easy exercise to say such a thing. For instance, I heard that you visited a Mormon temple in New York beofre your trip and activly engaged in their service. But what was really shocking to hear is that you took the "sacramental bread and water" when it was passed to you!

If you have something to show that Met. Pavlos does not share the well established faith of the Holy Synod please prove your case with something other than rumor. Saying things like "Bishop Petros visited Etna" is a claim that means just that, Bishop Petros visited Etna. Very well, you will get no argument from me. But remember, you visit SVS Seminary, does that make you a new-calendar orthodox? Does that mean your faith is Orthodox? Of course I know you are Latin so you of all people should understand that visiting a place, even being taught a faith there does not mean you agree with it.

Please Anastasios, if you have a proof that my Bishop was preaching a faith other than the Holy Synod with "bared head", meaning openly and publicly, then let 's see or hear the evidence, or at least two or three people from the Church who can confirm it.

But if you mean that the Bishops believe there may be people in the new-calendar churches who God is protecting with His Mysteries, then I must point out that that is something I have said myself.

(for the record, I did not hear that you visited Mormon temples, I was just trying to make a point.)

[John Haluska]

It is strongly recommended that one actually make a pilgrimage to either Saint Markella's Cathedral in Astoria, or to the Monastery of the Holy Ascension in Woodstock, New York. Both are true bastions of Orthodoxy, in America.

At the Monastery of The Holy Ascension, one will hear Orthodoxy being proclaimed. (Period!). It is very refreshing and beneficial to one's soul to hear such sermons. The world needs to hear them, for its own benefit.

The services in which Sevasmoitate Pavlos concelebrates are beyond description. The prayer in the Monastery Church is earthshaking! Sevasmoitate Pavlos' sermons are full of, and indeed, the full confession of, the Orthodox faith.

Let no one think otherwise!

John Haluska

[Anastasios]

Dear OrthodoxyOrDeath,

My intent was not to say that Metropolitan Pavlos agrees with Cyrpianism. My point is that he and Bishop Christodoulos refused to INSULT and DISPARAGE Metropolitan Cyrpian and call him a schismatic. Metropolitan Petros' visit to Etna does not prove he ACCEPTED them as is but proves that he RESPECTED them. And that is all I ask.

And for the record, Mr Hanushka:

When I visited St Markella's and spoke with Metropolitan Pavlos and Bp Christodoulos I was so impressed that I can't express it.

anastasios

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

Anastasios,

Well I agree with you. In general the talk about "Grace" and the varying groups and other issues on the internet is a great misrepresentation of reality. I nor anyone I know am very preoccupied with any of this outside the digital realm - this is simply a way to confirm facts, share alternate viewpoints, and find out current events that could effect us. I mean, I don't come to this forum to say morning prayers!

I think anyone posting on the internet is somewhat misreprested by what one would see and experience in reality.

I apologize for mistaking your last post.