Which Churches Are Orthodox?

[bogoliubtsy]

I think my point is, in addition to the ones above, can any continuation from the real Tikhonite or Josephite Churches(the real catacomb churches) be seen in these new "catacomb" groups? Any group can claim to be a continuation, but there is really no information to support this- in fact, there is much information to show quite the opposite, that the real catacomb churches became extremely disjointed and splintered in the 1950's with no bishops to continue the existence of the real catacomb churches.
Just because an Orthodox church exists in Russia independent from the Patriarchate does not mean they are a legitimate "catacomb" church. In fact, at the beginning of this whole mess, there were a number of fake "catacomb" groups in Russia who the real Josephites and Tikhonites did not accept.
A book called The Russian Orthodox Church Underground, by William C. Fletcher, is good reading on this topic.

[Daniel]

MATTHEWITE BRANCH

Greek Old Calendar Church "Nikolaians"
Archbishop NIKOLAOS, First Hierarch

Greek Old Calendar Church "Andreans"
"Archbishop ANDREAS" (Metropolitan KYRIKOS), First Hierarch

Greek Old Calendar Church "Gregorians"
Metropolitan GREGORIOS

Greek Old Calendar Church "Chrysostomites"
Metropolitan CHRYSOSTOMOS

-----

The First Heirarch for the the Mattewites is Archbishop Nicholas. Here is a link.

The Andreans I can only assume are the 2-3 bishops that thought Archbishop Andreas' retirement was unlawfull, and were rumored to be heading off into schism.

The (5) Gregorians, despite they say that the retired Archbishop Andreas of being, are iconoclasts. In the early-mid '90s there was some issues over the 'Holy Trinity' icon that depicts the Father as an old man and the Holy Spirit as a dove and the Flying Jesus/Jesus in a Box icon. I beleive the was an encylical saying not to vernerate them. Well, the Gregorians accused Andreas of being an iconoclast, and split, depsite the fact the Andreas and the other backed off the issue. But the Gregorians infact are the iconoclast because they reject the 'Descent into Hades' and say only the Flying Jesus/Jesus in a Box icon should only be displayed.

I can't say anything about the Chrysostomites...don't know anything about them.

[OrthodoxyOrDeath]

The Lamians were listed with Kallinikos as "First Hierarch"; but it should be noted that they don't consider him a "First Heirarch", only the "President" of the Synod since they consider themselves as a "divided heirarchy" of the lawful synod of Chyrsostmos II.

This is the same as the Cyprians, since the canons say there cannot be parallel synods, they don't have an "archbishop", only a president as they consider themselves part of a "larger church".

[Nektarios14]

I consider those in SCOBA and in communion with those in SCOBA in addition to the ROCOR and those in communion with her to be Orthodox. Everone else that is on the fringe is a question mark in my mind.

[bogoliubtsy]

Flying Jesus/Jesus in a Box icon. I beleive the was an encylical saying not to vernerate them. Well, the Gregorians accused Andreas of being an iconoclast, and split, depsite the fact the Andreas and the other backed off the issue. But the Gregorians infact are the iconoclast because they reject the 'Descent into Hades' and say only the Flying Jesus/Jesus in a Box icon should only be displayed.

No wonder there are so many schismatic "orthodox" sects being formed - people are going into schism because of this type of thing? I suppose though, when your synod is so small, every little issue can become a cause for big problems. Crazy...

[George Australia]

Since not many people here believe that the MP, EP, etc are Orthodox and that they are without Grace, which Churches, then, are Orthodox? ROAC, GOC, HOCNA, TOC, etc, etc?

I think that this question is based on two erroneous assumptions.

Firstly, there has only ever been, and only ever will be, ONE Church. The Church is the Icon of the Holy Trinity (John 17:21), if it was ever to be divided, it would cease to be an Icon of the Triune God, and therefore, would cease to be the Church. Therefore "two" or more Churches cannot be Orthodox since the body of Christ cannot be divided.

Secondly, walling off from an heretical Bishop does not mean that the juristicion he leads is "without grace". When Nestorios was Patriarch of Constantinople, and fell into heresy, it didn't mean the Church in Constantinople was without grace, nor that grace had departed Her. It simply meant that the overseerer of the Church of Constantinople had fallen into heresy, and therefore, had cut himself off from the Church. When St. Mark of Ephesus broke communion with Constantinople during the false union of Florence, it was with the heretical Clergy that he broke communion, not with the whole Church. Similarly, in our own time, when the Holy Mountain ceased commemorating the Ecumenical Patriarch last century, it was a temporary suspension of communion with him in order to attempt to correct an error. A temporary suspension of communion does not mean schism, and at no time was it considered a break in communion with the faithful of the EP.
George

[Daniel]

It simply meant that the overseerer of the Church of Constantinople had fallen into heresy, and therefore, had cut himself off from the Church.

So, despite the fact he had cut himself off from the Church he still could perform lawful (ie, Grace filled/salvific) Mysteries?