Justice wrote:Isaakos wrote:Maria wrote:Dear Issakos,
It is good to see that you are still among the living.
Which synod are you now embracing?
It sounds like you might be accepting the position of Archbishop Kallinikos and his union with the former SiR, but you address neither the Metropolitan of Florina, Chrysostomos, nor St. Matthew as saints. However, both Archbishop Kallinikos and Archbishop Stephanos claim the title of Archbishop of Athens.
Note that the New Calendarist schismatic also claims the title of Archbishop of Athens, and indeed he is a heretic. Look at his current actions in defrocking priests who disagreed with the heretical Council of Crete in 2016.
So, yes this situation would seem to be highly uncanonical as there are three claimants to the throne of Athens. However, I would not bow down and kiss the ring of this pretender, the New Calendarist schismatic and heretic as that would be an act of apostasy.
In Christ,
MariaI remain in a state of discernment. I never embraced formally the synod of Metropolitan Kirykos.
What I see objectively is that the pride of individuals is our greatest enemy, that and personality worship. We are not united because we know better than everyone else.
So what is a key to me as I discern is to see which groups are the most insular and run away, lol. Christ unites. It is nice to see Cyprus finally has its own Archbishopic for the GOC there Maria. And the current Archbishop looks much like the Metropolitan Epiphanios of Kition of blessed memory.
I WOULD say in agreement with Metropolitan Demetrios of the GOCK, “Don’t make a dogma where there is no dogma.”
How many petty issues are we going to continuously blow into Dogmatic issues? That’s how the Makarian Synod arose. We don’t like the Archbishop handling funds and placing them into an officially incorporated organization. Oh no, ecclesiological heresy!!!!
That’s what I am trying to avoid. We can be right and still be fanatics. Which synods are not characterized by fanaticism, are characterized by order, and who show great signs of unity, growth, and a general humility?
Sign me up with them!
So you believe the GOC-S is fanatical? If so, where have they "made a dogma where there is no dogma?
I never said that. Indeed, the GOC under Archbishop Stephanos ought to be admired for their restraint and prudence dealing with their noisier bishops, as well as their more moderate policies regarding reception from schism. The question with them would be the question with the Matthewites as a whole- who is responsible for the initial schism? Archbishop Matthew and his successors or Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina me the Akakians?
When considering this question there are necessary distinctions to keep in mind-
Scandalous behavior is not intrinsically schismatic, but it can provoke schism in others.
The sin of scandal is a two way street. It is a sin for me to scandalize you, but it is a sin for you to allow scandal to carry you to schism. This is elementary moral theology. Both the scandalized and the scandalizer sin through imprudence.
Whenever two groups separate, both are to blame, and therefore both ought to show humility and overlook offenses. Who has been the one to reach out, and who is the one who insists on remaining offended?
Keep these issues in mind.