GOC

[1937 Miraculous Cross]

Dear George,

I agree with you in general that we tend to "destroy" other people with labels and such, and the word schism is very destructive. I am particularly sensitive about this in situations where a "schism" occurs because of administrative/personality differences, such as in the case of the many Floro-Acacian divisions, and the recent Matthewite history.
In many of these cases, the splintering groups actually believe and confess the same ecclesiology, but make a big deal about who the "real" Archbishop is, who changed the synod address without the consent of the other bishops, and so on. Bascially, stupid things in my opinion.

On the other hand, when does one call a spade a spade? As we all know (Matthewite or Cyprianite), there was liturgical harmony for centuries.(It has always been the mindset of the Church to have liturgical oneness.) There were multiple anathemas and condemnations (13 councils) against the calendar innovation. The line was drawn and the State Church crossed the line in violation of all these councils and destroyed liturgical unity. I'm not trying to be hardcore about this, but it seems rather easy to see this as a schism. It wasn't just the 1935 OC bishops who declared this as schism. The church had 5 centuries of walling this off. If we don't call the Calendar innovation a schism (or worse -- an instrument of heresey/ecumenism/freemasonry) then how will those in the Schism know where the truth is?

Regarding the salvation of those souls in the NC churches...don't we all acknowledge that God judges us all? Being OC is not a guarantee to salvation.

Nectarios

[George Australia]

On the other hand, when does one call a spade a spade?

Dear in Christ Nectarios,
Personally, I prefer to call it a "digging impliment".

There were multiple anathemas and condemnations (13 councils) against the calendar innovation.

Most of these Canons are concerning the Paschalion which hasn't really been changed. "Anathema" is another dreadful word people seem to use today with abandon. We shouldn't be too quick to pronounce it on others, especially since people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. The 101st Canon of the Sixth Ecumenical Council pronounces an anathema on the use of a spoon to administer Holy Communion.

The line was drawn and the State Church crossed the line in violation of all these councils and destroyed liturgical unity. I'm not trying to be hardcore about this, but it seems rather easy to see this as a schism.

I know that you will just point at me and cry 'Cyprianite', but I don't think the calendar issue is worth tearing Christ's Tunic and creating a schism over.

[1937 Miraculous Cross]

George,

...or a spade is something in a deck of cards!

Regarding the use of the word "anathema", I'm only citing historical fact and haven't "pronunced it on others", as you say. The Gregorian paschalian AND menologian were anathematized. It is not for me to quibble over why the Fathers did this. They proclaimed it. That's why I used the word "Tradition" because it has been the mindset of the Church to maintain liturgical harmony, not just a peculiar focus about the dating of Pascha. It is all about the Church being of one body and celebrating the same feasts together on the same days. the New Calendarists are splitting hairs on pseudo-technicalities by saying the anathemas were against the paschalian and menologian, and they are only tinkering with the menologian. This is of course a phronema contrary to the Holy Tradition of the Church.

Regarding you being a "Cyprianite", I haven't said anything against this. However, if you don't feel the calendar innovation is worth tearing "Christ's tunic over", fine. You are entitled to your opinion. I however believe that it was the beginning of Freemasonry inspired ecumenism, and as such the "new" Calendar has profound consequences (they tore the "tunic"...but then again, I realize that many don't feel ecumenism is anything of importance either. Ultimately, God is the judge. If His miraculous cross appearances in 1925 and 1937 are indeed indicators of His will, then I'd rather not argue against it.

in Christ,
Nectarios

[Anastasios]

A friend of mine, someone to whom you could never completely explain the struggle against ecumenism, because she has a simple faith in Christ and the Orthodox Church where she finds it (the OCA) (God bless her simple faith by the way, she is far more Christian than I), did happen to understand one aspect of the calendar controversy: she said it was right of the bishops to resist the calendar change (something that theoretically is changeable by a universal Synod) because you have to "draw the line" at the first instance of heresy. The Calendar per se may not be an issue of dogma but what it represents and represented is dogmatic.*

Anastasios

• (Context is everything. Patriarch Meletios IV of sorry memory for instance was clearly involved in pre-WCC ecumenism when he forced the calendar change, which was to further the prospect of eucharistic unity with Anglicans (something even RC's won't do!)).

[joasia]

What are the canons for if not to give us a unified understanding of what is right and wrong with the hierarchal actions? Afterall, the hierarchy are the ones who have been placed to follow the canons for the sake of preserving Orthodoxy.

I say that the hierarchy should be scrutinized for their actions concerning the church welfare. AND, they should answer to the body of the Church, us laymen, for their actions. Why did so-and-so concelebrate with what's-his-name? And why isn't something being done about it? Why do they brush us off and pat us on the heads and say: don't worry about it..it's okay? If WE didn't show up to church, AT All...there would be no church to serve. They are serving for our sakes and I refuse to be way-layed into silence because I am not a theologian.

We seem to be falling into a worse demise than the Florence council. Thanks be to God that St. Mark of Ephesus was there to straighten the matter out. But, who will straighten it out for us now?

Judgement is not ours. But, having discernment of Holy Matters should be every layman's concern. Otherwise, we might be led off the main path and not know it.

[gphadraig]

First, I call it a shovel..............

Second, there will always be bishops, rightly divinely the word of truth, with their flocks for Christ promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against her.

[1937 Miraculous Cross]

Dittos to everyone. (a spade is a shovel... )

Anastasios

• (Context is everything. Patriarch Meletios IV of sorry memory for instance was clearly involved in pre-WCC ecumenism when he forced the calendar change, which was to further the prospect of eucharistic unity with Anglicans (something even RC's won't do!)).

Anastasios, you're correct on pointing out the underlying reason for the Calendar innovation: Meletios, Freemasonry, unity with the West, etc.
According to The Sturggle Against Ecumenism, page 312, in 1922 Ecumenical Patriarch Meletios Metaxakis "recognizes the validity of Anglican orders." So, ecumenism was being born! The Calendar innovation is not just a trifle difference in 13 days. It is the tool for ecumenism. ( Besides the Gregorian Menologian being anathematized in Pan Orthodox councils, in 1924 the Patriarchs of Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, and the Abp. of Cyprus "condem" the introduction of the calendar innovation. This is in the same year the State church adopts the schismatic calendar.)

How much clearer can it get? The Church universal -- has made this clear. God Himself made it clear with the Miraculous Cross appearances in 1925 and in 1937.

This is not about "jurisdiction bashing" or condeming some people. It is about proclaiming the Church's Truth. Plus, I think the notion that many people have that there needs to be another Ecumenical Council to decide the matter is incorrect, as the Church has already declared on the matter. That is why the returning 3 OC bishops in 1935 were not stating something new about the NC. They were condeming what was already condemned previously and rightfully called it a schism without Grace according to the Canon of St. Basil

Nectarios