Moderator: Mark Templet
The Cyprianites seem to believe the solution to this will be a "future Council", attended by both Orthodox and ecumenists, which will condemn these errors - if that is the case, that means heretics will be judging themselves.
However, as Daniel pointed out, all of the errors of the ecumenists have been condemned previously - as have the heresies of those they commune with.
Seraphim
"Walling-off" is a perfectly Orthodox concept. If you read the Cyprianite documents, you will see multiple Church Fathers (including Sts. Basil the Great, Theodore the Studite, and others) speak of such a concept. In fact, the Cyprianite language comes directly from the patristics (they didn't coin their own terminology for the resistance). The problem is that all of these Fathers, when they "walled off," did so either saying 1) that those that they were walled off from were ill, but could be treated (e.g., lapses in morality, or minor canonical violations), or 2) that those that they were walled off from were heretics, and could not be said to have grace (though they might not have immediately declared them to be without grace). Cyprianism seems to want to add a third option, one that the Fathers very rarely (and probably never) used: 3) they say that those who they are walled off from are heretics, but that one cannot deny that they have grace. I don't see that anywhere in the Fathers--even in the Fathers that they quote. In fact, in the very evidence that Cyprianites present, I see mostly evidence against their position.
anastasios
ROCOR is in communion with Cyprian. ROCOR is also in imperfect communion with Jerusalem and probably full communion with Serbia. ROCOR communicates New Calendarists. So if you disagree with Cyprianism, how can you justify being in ROCOR?
Isn't it odd that Cyprianites get accused of being too ecumenical, but then it's actually Met. Cyprian who rightly questions ROCOR's relationship with the Serbs and JP?
Personally, I'm trying not to justify... just struggling 
seraphim reeves
The Cyprianites seem to believe the solution to this will be a "future Council", attended by both Orthodox and ecumenists, which will condemn these errors - if that is the case, that means heretics will be judging themselves.
Yeah, I'm actually having a problem understanding the intricacies of their ecclesiology. Their position seems to be that world Orthodox Christians are for the most part unquestionably heretics and enemies of God (for participation in the pan-heresy of ecumenism), but also that they will not deny that these same "heretical" groups have grace, and say that they cannot be said to be fully or totally condemned until they are condemned by a council. What's more--it just gets more confusing 
--they seem to say that past councils are sort of authoritative, but sort of useless without another council:
Since 1924, the innovators have been awaiting judgment and shall be judged on the basis of the decisions of the holy Synods, both Ecumenical and local, and, to be sure, on the basis of the ecclesiastical pronouncements of the sixteenth century against what were then Papal proposals for changes in the Festal Calendar. - Met. Cyprian, An Ecclesiological Position Paper for Orthodox Opposed to the Pan-Heresy of Ecumenism
If I may be so bold as to say so, I think part of the problem is that Met. Cyprian's synod is still holding to an ecclesiological position put forth generations ago, and that this position seems untenable now (or at least approaching an untenable state). Whether such an ecclesiological approach was ever a good one to have during the current assault on the Church or not, certainly things have gotten much worse in the last 40 or 50 years.
Daniel
Are there any ROCOR bishops that will not communion/have communion with the Cyprianites, the Jerusalem and Serb partriarchates, and any other new-calenderist/ecumenist group?
I think it was Methodius who brought this letter from Met. Cyprian to ROCOR (in 2001) up before, and it might be good to quote from it here:
For us, this was the first and main meaning or our eucharistic unity with You, with the prospect of fruitful common work, the beginning of which was laid during the first two years after the establishment of our unity, in other words up to 1996.
(1)Since then, notwithstanding our sincere feelings of love and respect toward You, we have observed that You started to keep a certain "distance" from us. Then to our surprise, we had to deal with a certain unpleasant and sometimes unbrotherly position of some Archhierarchs of Your Holy Synod, which forced us with great patience, magnanimity and prayer to respond to some accusations and voluntarily and clearly offer You necessary explanations, as for example our letter No. 244 from 10.1.1997.
The rest of the letter is indeed thought-provoking. I'm not sure who the Archhierarchs are that he spoke of, or what "unpleasant and sometimes unbrotherly position" they held to.
Anastasios,
I just noticed, you could ask your question either way and it'd present a dilemna.
How can you agree with Cyprian and still be in ROCOR (since Cyprian believes we must avoid communion with world Orthodoxy at all costs, something ROCOR obviously doesn't agree with)?
How can you disagree with Cyprian and still be in ROCOR (since they are in communion with one another and supposedly have the same ecclesiology)?
So your question is unfair, it's an (unintentionally loaded) or false question. There's no right answer to it. A better question would be: "do you think that Cyprian is right in his ecclesiology, and in his criticisms of ROCOR, and if so, how is this belief reflected in your actions?"
Nicholas wrote:Anastasios, I am just asking questions is all.
Thanks for explaining--I was getting worried! :shock:
Disclaimer: Many older posts were made before my baptism and thus may not reflect an Orthodox point of view.
Please do not message me with questions about the forum or moderation requests. Jonathan Gress (jgress) will be able to assist you.
Please note that I do not subscribe to "Old Calendar Ecumenism" and believe that only the Synod of Archbishop Kallinikos is the canonical GOC of Greece. I do believe, however, that we can break down barriers and misunderstandings through prayer and discussion on forums such as this one.
Here is a another basic problem with the Cyprian the former Met. of Fili. This is all taken from the Timeline of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Russian and Greece and the Great Apostasy of Orthodoxy on the 20th Century published by Dormition Skete (ROAC). I have also read most of this information on Cyprian from a website (which seems to be no longer functioning) that had info on the Synod of Kallinikos of Lamia.
So, for what it’s worth here’s a time on Cyprian:
Jan 1969 - Archimandrite Cyprian leaves the New Calendar Greek State Church and joins the G. O. C. for “reasons purely of faith”, citing the 15th Canon of the First & Second Council which
permits priests to secede and break communion with their bishops for the “bareheaded” ,“
preaching of heresy” “condemned by the holy Councils or Fathers”. The canon calls these
bishops “false bishops and false teachers”. Cyprian accepts the ecclesiology of the G. O. C.
Fifteen years later Cyprian will cause a schism in the Church, citing the same canon to prove
his new opinions that heretics have grace!June 1974 - The Florinites issue an encyclical to all their clergy reaffirming their position on communion and chrismation with regard to the new calendar State Church, declaring, “The ministration of the Holy Gifts to the new calendarists has been forbidden since the beginning of the schism of the official Church; and you must observe this line of conduct unswervingly...” and that those joining the G.O.C. from the new calendarists “must be chrismated with Holy Chrism of canonical origin, in accordance with the first Canon of St. Basil the Great.” All the Florinite clergy
accepted this confession of the Faith and reaffirmation of their practice, including Abbot Cyprian
of the monastery in Fili.Feb 1979 - Archbp. Auxentios considers more candidates to the bishopric, and rejects those put forth by Met. Gerontios of Salamis. When Archm. Cyprian learns that he is not considered by either Auxentios or Gerontios, he incites Met. Kallistos of Corinth and Met. Anthony of Megara to ordain bishops on their own authority and start a separate Synod.
Feb 1979 - Kallistos of Corinth and Anthony of Megara, without prior knowledge of their Archbp. Auxentios, consecrate the following eight archimandrites: Cyprian of Fili, Maximos,
Kallinikos of Achaia, Matthew, Germanos, Kalliopios, Mercurios, and another Kallinikos
of the Twelve Islands. These ordinations were performed without announcement. At least
two of the archimandrites Maximos and Kallinikos of the Twelve Islands were told that the
consecrations were duly approved by Archbp. Auxentios. After the ordinations were completed,
Bp. Cyprian of Fili announced the supposed reason for starting the new synod. It was
for the cleansing of the Church from the influence of Archbp. Auxentios. Now with the emergence of the uncanonical Kallistite Synod, there are two synods in Greece having the same
ecclesiology. Later in 1983, Kallistos will feel betrayed when Cyprian preaches his new
teaching of grace with the new calendarists and ecumenists, and because of his policy of giving them holy Communion at his monastery. The Kallistite Synod will eventually collapse.March 9, 1979 - Orthodox Typos, the Greek ecclesiastical newspaper, announces the deposition of the ten Kallistite bishops by Archbp. Auxentios for factionalism and uncanonical ordinations. Most of the bishops will eventually return to Archbp. Auxentios, be accepted back into their orders, and be numbered among the Auxentios synod of the G.O.C. Met. Kallistos will retire in
repentance in his monastery in Corinth until his last day. Met. Cyprian will be the only bishop
who will not return.1983-1985 - “Kallistite Synod” reunifications: gradually Antonios of Megara, Maximos, Germanos, Kallinikos, Matthew, Kalliopios, and another Kallinikos return and are accepted back into the synod of Archbp. Auxentios (Florinite). Kallistos retires to his brother’s monastery
and reposes there in the Lord. Thus, as we shall see, the synod that started in 1979 is now
reunited with the synod of Archbp. Auxentios, with one exception, Cyprian, whose ambition
will cause yet more harm to the Church.Jan 20, 1984 - Met. Cyprian of Fili is publicly accused by Orthodox Typos (the major religious newspaper of Greece) of accepting hundreds of new calendarists at his monastery, and of praying with them & giving them communion, a practice which Old Calendarists were forbidden to do.
1984 - Met. Cyprian of Fili causes confusion among the remaining Old Calendar bishops of his synod, because he now believes the new calendarists have grace (several years before, he confessed the opposite). Thus, after the Kallistite synod reunifications were complete, there remained only two: Giovanni, who felt no affinity with the Florinites, and Cyprian of Fili, who alienates himself from his synod and all other Old Calendar bishops in Greece because of his novel
teaching of “Holy Heretics”—heretical ecumenists, who can call down the grace of the Holy
Spirit upon their altars to sanctify their mysteries.1985 - The Florinite bishops now number 17 with the return of the Kallistite synod. Cyprian and
Giovanni remain separate from the bishops of their synod, and hastily ordain Niphon of
Kenya, and Chrysostomos of Etna (USA), both believed to be of questionable character.
Later, Niphon is deposed for reportedly having 10 wives! Cyprian is then elected president of
their synod, calling himself the “Genuine Orthodox Church of Greece” (same title as the Florinites), and then the True Orthodox Church (T.O.C.), a synod of “Resisters” with a “new”
theology on grace. He regards himself as being the only hierarch in Greece who has a correct
confession of faith! He demands all his followers to call him and refer to him as “THE FATHER”!Nov 1986 - Archbp. Chrysostomos (Kiousis) and the Florinite synod depose Met. Cyprian of Oropos and Fili, together with the bishops consecrated by him for: 1) teaching that the new calendarist ecumenists have the grace of the Holy Spirit in their mysteries; 2) giving communion to new calendarists & ecumenists; and 3) going into schism and creating their own synod in Greece (taking the same name as the G.O.C. and thereby causing confusion among the people.) Before his deposition Cyprian was summoned three times to answer for his actions. He refused to
appear, stating that the Florinites, the bishops who had ordained him, had no authority over
him! He now begins a campaign to vilify the true Holy Synod of bishops by calling them
extremists (for their true confession of the Faith).1987 - Archbp. Mark, without permission of Met Vitaly, starts visiting Greece yearly to concelebrate with the deposed Met. Cyprian of Fili. He is not reproved.
July 1994 - Russian Church Abroad unites with the deposed Ecumenist Met. Cyprian of Fili and his “Synod of Resisters,” against the stated wishes of Metropolitan Vitaly, who accepts the consensus of his bishops. He promises, however, not to concelebrate with Cyprian. In justifying
this union, the Russian Church Abroad now affirms that Cyprian’s theology is identical to its
own, thereby affirming that the Ecumenists are part of the Church and have true Mysteries!
Metropolitan Vitaly promises Archimandrite Gregory of Dormition Skete that he (Metropolitan
Vitaly) will never concelebrate and consumate the union with Cyprian, and urges him not to leave the ROCA. Archimandrite Gregory believes Met. Vitaly and remains.Nov. 1994 - The G.O.C. breaks communion with the Russian Church Abroad because of the union with the deposed Ecumenist Cyprian, but only after the G.O.C. sent the Cyprian deposition papers to the Russian Synod meeting in Lesna, France, and received no reply.
I hope this adds something to the discussion.
