A Open Letter to the Nishops of ROCOR (L) from an OCA layman

[Joseph]

Please note that according to Orthodox teaching an anathema or excommunication based on past Canons or past anathemas does not come into effect immediately when someone sins or falls into heretical beliefs...but only when a living Council of bishops puts into effect the anathema against certain people...

What is your basis for saying the above? Where is this found? What fathers or councils taught this? The Latins, who believe in created Grace, teach that the council has the power to withhold grace. The Orthodox who believe in uncreated Grace, teach that when someone falls into willful and public heresy, they are thereby separted from Christ since you cannot be in Christ and in that which opposes Christ at the same time. It is heresy that separates from Christ - not a council. There is no such thing as an un-Orthodox Orthdoox. Being Orthodox is not membership in an organization but union with Christ in the Holy Spirit through the truth of Christ in the Church. If I depart from that truth and embrace falsehood, I depart from Christ and His Church.

As to the teachings of various ones it is hard to know what their particular circumstances were and all that went into their decisions and how they would react today in light of all that has happened in more recent years. Also, just because something was permitted out of economia doesn't mean that now becomes the rule for us all. Also, even saints have fallen into error, not deliberate or intentional but through lack of awareness, or worse as with Origen or Augistine, or by being over trusting or for other reasons. Any teachings which contradict the Holy Scriptures or the consensus of the fathers in the councils must be rejected regardless of who said it. It is a known fact that Fr. Seraphim Rose very much changed his thinking in his later years and was becoming more ecumenical. Miracles are not to be trusted unless they confirm the clear and united teaching of the Church. Latins and Charismatics can all attest to miracles that support their beliefs. The antichrist will come with great miracles to decieve many.

We do not say that no one in world Orthodoxy has Grace. We say that whoever publicy teaches heresy has departed from Grace and we should flee for our lives from any communion with heresy. It is like we say that one must be baptized to be saved. Yet, we know there are circumstances where this may not hold. That doesn't mean we now teach that baptism is no longer necessary. We still say that you cannot be saved apart from baptism but we recognize special situations. So we say that grace departs where heresy is embraced but we do not thereby imply that everyone in world Orthodoxy is Graceless. But we dare not now say it doesn't matter. There is much confusion and ignorance and God's Grace does not act legalistically or against those who are seeking Him with sincere hearts. Even if those who have embraced heresy serve communion and it is merely an empty form, God could still impart Grace to the sincere souls who partake out of lack of knowledge or understanding.

[gggxgggx]

St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite said this...Metropolitan Anthony Krahpivisky of the ROCOR also said relating to the anathemas of the 16th century against the papal calendar that these anathemas only relate to the contemperaries of the Patriarchs who issued them...

I agree with you that heresy seperates a man from Grace and not a Council...a Council confirms this seperation or seperates a man from the grace and office of priest or bishop...when a man falls into heretical beliefs he breaks his communion with Christ and therefore cannot recieve His uncreated Energies...
However if the man is a bishop or priest he still performs valid Mysteries...in the Bible we read that Caiphas prophesied (because he was high priest) that it was expedient for one man to die for the people...he was thinking about killing God and was far worse than a heretic...yet because of his position he prophesied...so if a bishop holds a heretical opinion-he himself may lose his union with Christ and deprive himself of God's Energies...but because of the position he holds the Mysteries served by him are valid unless he either breaks from the Church through schism or is expelled from the Church by the other bishops...

That the Roman Church until 1054 was viewed as part of the Church and that the rest of the Church was in communion with it can be seen from the fact that people like St. Stephan of Hungary are on our Orthodox calendar as Saints along with many others who were part of the Church of Rome around the year 1054...

As to Fr. Seraphim Rose...he NEVER became ecumenical...he was always anti ecumenical...in later years he changed his approach somewhat as he acquired more discernment...

The fact is the ROCOR was in communion with all the Local Orthodox Churches for quite some time-even those which were involved in ecumenism...they did not agree with the ecumenism, but they were in union with ecumenists...the Mathewites actually broke communion with the ROCOR in the 70's because ROCOR refused to state all the Churches involved in ecumenism were Graceless...

So in your opinion was ROCOR outside of the Church when they were in union with Churches involved in ecumenism...namely from 1920-1983? And if so then you'd have to say that the Mathewites also fell away from the Church when they entered into communion with ROCOR-if ROCOR was out of the Church due to being in communion with ecumenists...then you'd have to say that a large portion of the Greek Old Calendarist hierarchy which recieved ordinations from ROCOR bishops never actually recieved ordinations because the ROCOR bishops were outside the Church supposedly...then all the people these Greeks ordained are not real bishops or priests either...then you'd have to say all or a large part of the Greek old calendarists have no real bishops or priests...in which case no mysteries either...
So if you follow your beliefs, then World Orthodoxy may be Graceless because their are some ecumenical bishops among them...and ROCOR would be Graceless for being in communion with World Orthodoxy for so long...and then those Greeks they ordained are Graceless...and then so are a large part of the so-called true Orthodox Churches...so everyone is Graceless...is that what you think?

[1937 Miraculous Cross]

Just an intellectual consideration to consider in terms of history and anathemas. You wrote:

Regarding the Mathewites, as far as I understand it the cause of division between them and the Florentines was precisely because the Florentines stated that the new calendar Churches had valid mysteries while the Mathewites stated they do not have valid mysteries...

The original TOC of Greece, before Archimandrite Matthew was consecrated, i.e. bishops Chrysostom formerly of Florina, and the two other bishops, themselves in writing and in preaching proclaimed the State Church (new calendar) of Greece to be under the anathema of the Pan Orthodox councils against the Gregorian Calendar. They stated as a result the State Church was hence in schism without Grace. This is the 1935 Delcaration. They continued to preach this until 1937 when Bp. Chrysostom and Germanos of Demetria began to reverse their position and stated that the State church was only potentially in schism.
It was at this point that the new bishops, Bps Matthew and Germanos of Cyclades, holding firm to the 1935 Declaration wanted clarification from Chrysostom and Germanos of D. Eventually, the two parties parted ways. Chrys. of Fl. returned to his original position in 1950.

The "Florinites" you write of only is pertinent to the florinites who were with the former bishop of Florina when he was alive. The current "Florinites" like the GOC synod of Abp Kiousis have also affirmed the 1935 Declaration...like the Matthewites.

In his written rebuttals to Bp.Chrysostom's rebukes, Bp. Matthew simply stated that he was only applying the Pan Orthodox Anathema against the calendar innovation, and that he was not making up new determinations like a Protestant -- of which he was accused of.

Nectarios