ROCA and the Greek Old Calendarists

Discussion about the various True Orthodox Churches around the world including current events. Subforums in other langauges, primarily English on the main forum.


Moderator: Mark Templet

Justin Kissel

Post by Justin Kissel »

Bogo,

Some see Met. Cyprian's teachings regarding grace to be heretical. I won't argue for such a position in this post, but I think the whole Met. Cyprian thing is a clear example that ROCOR did in fact change it's position over the years. Yes, everyone can pull quotes up from different people and give different historical examples of why their position was really the ROCOR position in the past. Whatever the case, we see in formal communion with groups as official a position as one can get, and clearly in 1994 ROCOR decided that communion with Cyprian (and accepting his ecclesiology) was correct, and that communion with Chrysostomos II (and accepting his ecclesiology) was incorrect. That reversed the position that ROCOR had taken for nearly three decades.

Was the acceptance of the Cyprian ecclesiology (as exactly our own???) in essence a move that brought ROCOR under it's own anathema (as I believe one of ROCOR's own bishops said)? Heresy? Anathematization? Well they're certainly weighty questions, whatever the answers.

bogoliubtsy
Sr Member
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed 16 April 2003 4:53 pm
Location: Russia

Post by bogoliubtsy »

I don't want to sidetrack too much but I'd like to share this article from Orthodox Life. Perhaps someone who knows the Greek "situation" more can explain where ROCOR shifted their stance. The Greek situation seems to have always been a confusing situation in relationship to the Church Abroard. Language barriers, new splinter groups being formed, etc.

THE OLD CALENDAR CHURCH OF GREECE

Code: Select all

           Behold how good and joyous it is for brethren to dwell

together in
unity (Ps. 132:1)

Code: Select all

              Concerning the Union of the ROCA and the TOC of Greece

In our days, when the Church is assailed from all sides by heresy and
schism, the knowledge that we are not
alone in our struggle for purity of faith can be extremely comforting.
Recently, a day of great significance in the
resistance against apostasy occurred: the entering into full sacramental
communion of the Russian Orthodox
Church Outside of Russia and the True (Old Calendar) Orthodox Church of
Greece, headed by Metropolitan
Cyprian of Oropos and Fili. As a visible display of unity, Archbishop
Anthony of San Francisco and Bishop
Kyrill of Seattle of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, and
Metropolitan Cyprian, and Bishops Chrysostomos
of Etna and Auxentios of Photiki of the True (Old Calendar Church) of
Greece concelebrated on the feast day of
Saint Vladimir, Equal to the Apostles and Enlightener of the Slavs, on
July 15/28, 1994, in the Cathedral of the
Mother of God, Joy of All Who Sorrow in San Francisco, California.

The history of the Old Calendar Church of Greece is a radiant example of
strength in persecution and
uncompromising love for the Holy Orthodox Faith. The Church of Greece
uncanonically introduced the New,
Gregorian Calendar in 1924. Initially, only a small group of laymen
resisted this innovation. Gradually, a number
of priests began to return to the Old Calendar, especially following the
miraculous apparition of the Cross above
a church outside of Athens which followed the traditional Church
calendar during the Feast of the Elevation of
the Holy Cross according to the Julian (Old) Calendar. The majority of
clergymen at this time (1924-1935) were
monks of the Holy Mountain who travelled throughout Greece, founding
parishes and monasteries. Throughout
this time, the State Church persecuted the Old Calendarists: services
were interrupted, clergy were arrested,
processions were broken up, and churches were closed. Despite these
measures, by 1934 over 800 communities
had been formed throughout Greece following the Old Calendar.

A breakthrough occurred in 1935 when three bishops of the State Church
returned to the Old Calendar:
Metropolitan Germanos of Demetrias, Metropolitan Chrysostomos of
Zakynthos and Metropolitan
Chrysostomos of Florina, who later became known as the leader of the
True Orthodox Christians of Greece.
These three went on to consecrate four more bishops: Germanos of the
Cyclades, Polykarpos of Diavleia,
Christophoros of Megara, and Matthew of Vrestheni. However, sadly,
Metropolitan Chrysostomos of
Zakynthos and two of the newly consecrated bishops, Polykarpos and
Christophoros, returned to the State
Church. The remaining four bishops formed the first Holy Synod of the
Church of True Orthodox Christians of
Greece.

In 1937, Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina, when asked whether the
State Church still possessed
sacramental Grace, replied that, although it was wrong in accepting the
New Calendar, nonetheless it still
possessed Grace, for it had not been condemned by a pan-Orthodox
council. This statement caused division;
Bishops Matthew and Germanos separated themselves from Metropolitan
Chrysostomos, tragically weakening
the strength of the Old Calendar movement. A positive event occurred
however, in 1945, when Bishops
Polykarpos of Diavleia and Christophoros of Megara were reunited to
Metropolitan Chrysostomos, followed, in
1950, by Bishop Germanos of the Cyclades.

The fiercest persecutions of the Old Calendarists occurred starting in
1949, when Archbishop Spyridon was
elected primate of the State Church. Priests and monastics were
arrested, beaten, and forcibly shaved; churches
were seized; Old Calendarists were barred from theological schools.
Metropolitan Chrysostomos himself was
arrested in 1951. Yet the members of the True Church remained firm in
their defense of the Faith, preferring
persecution to compromise. Only in 1954 did the persecution come to an
end. Unfortunately, however, Bishops
Polykarpos and Christophoros once again returned to the State Church,
leaving Metropolitan Chrysostomos
alone, unable to consecrate a successor before his blessed repose.

In 1960, two bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad consecrated
to the episcopacy Archimandrite
Akakios. Shortly thereafter, a third bishop from the Church Abroad,
along with Bishop Akakios, consecrated
further bishops.

Following the repose of Archbishop Akakios, Archbishop Auxentios of
Gardikia was elected Archbishop of the
True Orthodox Church of Greece. Following a period of growth and
strengthening, the direction of the church
began to wane under Archbishop Auxentios' poor guidance.

Therefore, in February, 1979, with the encouragement and agreement of
Archbishop Auxentios, Metropolitan
Callistos of Corinth and Antonios of Megara consecrated eight new
bishops in order to strengthen the Church.
Unfortunately, however, Archbishop Auxentios' fellow bishops refused to
accept these consecrations. Thus, a
new synod was formed by Metropolitans Callistos, Antonios, and the newly
consecrated bishops. During this
time communion was established with the Old Calendar Church of Romania.
Following a period of confusion,
Metropolitan Cyprian of Fili and Oropos was established as president of
the Synod.

Metropolitan Cyprian is one of the most influential and respected
hierarchs in modern day Greece. He was a
spiritual son of the Blessed Archimandrite Philotheos (Zervakos) and is
the founder and abbot of the Holy
Monastery of Saints Cyprian and Justina in Fili, a spiritual center for
all of Greece. His ecclesiastical stand is
significant for its moderate, yet uncompromising, view. While separating
from the State Church for reasons of
faith, he refuses to declare them devoid of Grace, following the
position of Metropolitan Chrysostomos of
Florina. It is precisely this point which separates his Synod from the
other, extremist, Old Calendar groups.

The Synod of Metropolitan Cyprian has parishes and monasteries
throughout Greece, Africa, Australia, Sweden,
and North America. It is in full ecclesiastical communion with the Old
Calendar Church of Romania, headed by
Metropolitan Vlasie, the Old Calendar Church of Bulgaria, headed by
Bishop Photios, and now, the Russian
Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, headed by Metropolitan Vitaly.

Bishop Photios, the sole Old Calendarist hierarch in Romania, was
consecrated to the episcopacy by
Metropolitan Cyprian and Bishops Chrysostomos of Etna and Pahomie of the
Romanian Church. Bishop Photios
was a student and disciple of the renowned confessors of faith and
theologians, Archimandrites Seraphim and
Sergey of Bulgaria. Vladyka Photios concelebrated with Metropolitan
Vitaly and several other bishops of the
Russian Church Abroad on July 4/17, 1994, in the Church of Saint John
the Baptist in Mayfield, Pennsylvania.

It is our hope that the holy alliance of our sister Churches may be a
show of resistance against the tide of
ecumenism and modernism which have had such a devastating effect on the
Church.

The Editors

Source: The Old Calendar Orthodox Church of Greece by Archimandrite
[Bishop] Chrysostomos with Hieromonk [Bishop] Ambrosios and
Hieromonk [Bishop] Auxentios (Center For Traditionalist Orthodox
Studies, Etna, CA, 1985).

Code: Select all

                Extract From the Minutes of the Council of Bishops

of
The Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia

On 28 June/11 July, 1994, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox
Church Outside of Russia addressed
the question of the possibility of entering into communion in prayer and
the Eucharist with the group of Old
Calendarist Greeks headed by Metropolitan Cyprian.

Circumstances of the case: A petition from the synod of Metropolitan
Cyprian on this matter was received by
the Synod of Bishops in 1993, but was not acted upon. Soon after, a new
request was received, asking that the
matter be reexamined. On 21 July/3 August 1993, the Synod of Bishops
appointed a committee to study this
question and present a report to the Synod of Bishops. In Connection
with this, the Council heard the following:

1) The report of the Committee, which consisted of Their Graces,
Archbishop Laurus and Bishops Daniel and
Mitrophan, who studied the question of the existing divisions within the
Greek Old Calendar Church;

2) A short history of the Greek Old Calendarist Church from its
beginnings to the present day;

3) During deliberations, attention was also given to statements of those
opposed to the union, in which
questions were raised as the canonicity of Metropolitan Cyprian's groups
and their allegedly un-Orthodox
teaching on grace. The remarks of private individuals were also heard
concerning this question;

4) In addition, petitions from the Romanian Old Calendarists and the
Bulgarian Bishop Photios, and from several
private individuals, all urging the reception of the groups of
Metropolitan Cyprian into communion of prayer,
were heard;

5) During the deliberation of all the question outlined above, it was
established that:

a) The Synod of Metropolitan Cyprian adheres wholly to the exact same
ecclesiological and dogmatic principals
as our Russian Church Outside of Russia. This is set forth in detail in
their pamphlet, "An Exposition of the
Doctrine Concerning the Church, for Orthodox Opposed to the Heresy of
Ecumenism";

b) In 1986, the Synod of Archbishop Chrysostomos II tried and deposed
Metropolitan Cyprian in absentia for
allegedly holding to heretical teaching and for refusing to unite
himself to their synod. But as the history of the
Old Calendar divisions shows, Metropolitan Cyprian had never entered the
synod of Archbishop Chrysostomos
II, which was only formed in late 1985, but was a member of the synod of
Metropolitan Callistos in 1983,
Metropolitan Cyprian headed the synod of the former. Metropolitan
Cyprian had never submitted to his
authority; the latter therefore lack the competence to discipline him.

After deliberation and analysis of all aspects of these questions, the
Council of Bishops holds that at the present
time, when apostasy is spreading and many official representatives of
Orthodoxy, such as the Patriarchate of
Constantinople and other patriarchates, are succumbing to and embracing
the position of the modernists and
ecumenists, it is very important for the true Orthodox to unite, stand
together and oppose the betrayers of the
Orthodoxy of the holy fathers. In connection with this, the Council of
Bishops has decided:

1) To establish communion in prayer and the Eucharist with the Greek Old
Calendarist synod of Metropolitan
Cyprian, as well as with His Grace, Bishop Photios of Triaditsa, who
heads the Bulgarian Old Calendar diocese.

2) All parties refrain from interfering in each others' internal
ecclesiastical affairs. If any questions arise which
require deliberation, it is essential to take counsel together.

RESOLVED: 1) To communicate the above-cited decision to Metropolitan
Cyprian and Bishop Photios.

2) To inform our clergy and flock of the Council's decision through
publication in church periodicals.

The Council of Bishops

Published in Orthodox Life, Vol. 44, No. 4 (July-August 1994), pp.
46-50.

Justin Kissel

Post by Justin Kissel »

Bogo,

If you'd like, I can take the last two posts and make a new thread from them?

bogoliubtsy
Sr Member
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed 16 April 2003 4:53 pm
Location: Russia

Post by bogoliubtsy »

Not a huge fan of this type of cutting and pasting but I believe this one needs to be shared as it sums up my sentiments. From Fr. John Whiteford, :

"He(another list member) claimed that the ROCA held the position
that the New Calendar Greeks were without grace, and claimed that
this was proven by the fact that the ROCA entered into communion
with the Old Calendar Greeks.

This is demonstrably false, as evidenced by his Eminence Vitaly's
1986 nativity epistle, which I quoted for you yesterday, and also
as witnessed by the fact that the ROCA entered into communion
with Met. Cyprianos' synod and stated that we have always shared
their ecclesiology when we did so.

See: http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/tocgreece.htm

Of course what the ROCA said in 1994 will not be considered proof
by schismatic Panteleimonites (who are prepared to believe
anything, except the overwhelming evidence that their guru is a sodomite),
but it should be plenty enough proof for a ROCA reader -- no?

Are you suggesting that in 1986, Metropolitan Vitaly did not understand
what the position of the ROCA was vis-a-vis the New Calendarists?

Are you suggesting that the entire Sobor did not understand the
position of the ROCA in 1994?

And once again, if you wish to continue arguing that the ROCA ever
held a contrary position, then simply cite the official ROCA documents
which state that position."

bogoliubtsy
Sr Member
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed 16 April 2003 4:53 pm
Location: Russia

Post by bogoliubtsy »

Paradosis wrote:

Bogo,

If you'd like, I can take the last two posts and make a new thread from them?

Sounds like a great idea. Thanks.

Daniel
Member
Posts: 443
Joined: Thu 10 July 2003 9:00 pm

Post by Daniel »

Therefore, in February, 1979, with the encouragement and agreement of
Archbishop Auxentios, Metropolitan
Callistos of Corinth and Antonios of Megara consecrated eight new
bishops in order to strengthen the Church.
Unfortunately, however, Archbishop Auxentios' fellow bishops refused to
accept these consecrations. Thus, a
new synod was formed by Metropolitans Callistos, Antonios, and the newly
consecrated bishops. During this
time communion was established with the Old Calendar Church of Romania.
Following a period of confusion,
Metropolitan Cyprian of Fili and Oropos was established as president of
the Synod.

If I'm not totally mistaken, I think most of those bishops went back under Chrystomos II when Auxentios was removed.

Justin Kissel

Post by Justin Kissel »

In our days, when the Church is assailed from all sides by heresy and schism, the knowledge that we are not alone in our struggle for purity of faith can be extremely comforting. Recently, a day of great significance in the resistance against apostasy occurred: the entering into full sacramental communion of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia and the True (Old Calendar) Orthodox Church of Greece, headed by Metropolitan Cyprian of Oropos and Fili.

Perhaps this was the feeling immediately upon hearing the announcement of the Cyprian Union. If it was, I don't think such a positive outlook could have been long maintained. At the time of the Cyprian union, some people left ROCOR, and the Cyprian union inevitably played a part in the FROC/ROAC not being with ROCOR (though of course there were other factors). Also, by joining in communion with Cyprian, the Chrysostom II Synod (GOC) was forced to break communion with ROCOR (this was necessary for a number of reasons, such as: the Chrysostom Synod had--according to them--deposed Cyprian, and therefore did not recognize him; Cyprian had an ecclesiology that was considered either heretical or near-heretical, depending on who you asked).

In late 1994, therefore, ROCOR joined communion with a small though well-known Old Calendarist group with some very peculiar beliefs, and alienated itself from many Orthodox in Russia and Greece. Not only did this not strengthen the traditionalist cause (as the article seems to imply), but it considerably hurt it. It is indeed "comforting" to think that we are not alone in a battle, but I'm not sure exactly how comforting this particular time could have been for those in ROCOR. We (ie. ROCOR), in essence, turned away from millions of Orthodox so that we could embrace Met. Cyprian and his synod.

To make matters worse, according to Met. Cyprian himself, we in ROCOR started distancing ourselves from the Cyprian Synod a few years later. One is therefore led to ask: what did we go through so much ecclesiastical division and heartache for?. I would not say that our bishops (then or now) are incompetent, but things like this certainly make all the stories and charges made by some groups of costly ROCOR miscalculations and errors more plausible.

Regarding the Cyprian-ROCOR relationship... it is indeed an enigma . How exactly we have the same ecclesiology as Met. Cyprian I've not yet figured out. I've never heard anyone in ROCOR, for instance, say that a group can 1) have grace in their sacraments, and 2) be heretics, at the very same time. Neither have I ever heard anyone in ROCOR claim that we needed to convene a pan-Orthodox council to declare the heretics without grace (If there is no pan-Orthodox council for 200 years, then they will have grace for the next 200 years?) I find this "same ecclesiology" stuff very confusing.

I must admit at this point--while I'm pointing fingers and have three pointing back at me--that I once held to a similar set of beliefs. I'm not sure if that makes this post hypocritical or even more persuasive (having held the beliefs and now left them). In any event, I do not try to hide the fact that I've waffled in my understanding over the years. Sorry about the digression, I'll return to the topic (Met. Cyprian).

The only person to affirm anything near Met. Cyprian's stance was Met. Chrysostom, who sometimes held that the New Calendarists were only "potentially" in schism. However, in the late 1940's, and publically in 1950, Met. Chrysostom returned to his original (from 1935) belief: that the new calendarists were in fact schismatic, and therefore lacked grace. Met. Chrysostom asked that people ignore the speculations that he had made during the years between 1935 and 1950.

As of 1950, then, so far as I know, every single Greek Old Calendarist group held to this (what some might call) "extreme" ecclesiological position. In spite of the commotion and problems caused by Met. Chrysostom's changing his mind a number of times, he is nonetheless highly venerated today (I also think that his relics also gave off a sweet smell when his body was exhumed).

ROCOR obviously did not share this ecclesiological position of looking on the calendar innovation as a schismatic act (and which, therefore, deprived the new calendarists of grace). However, they were not against this ecclesiology either. They did not break ties with the Greek State Church, Constantinople, etc. over the calendar change. Then again, this "extreme" ecclesiology did not prevent ROCOR from later recognizing some Greek Old Calendarist groups as legit, and in fact joining in a communion with them that was to last for not a few years.

Met. Cyprian later introduced a new teaching regarding grace into the old calendarist movement. I don't know if it's fair to say that this new teaching was new to "Orthodoxy" as a whole since the ecumenists teach something like it in their recognition of heterodox sacraments. Certainly none of the old calendarists, including even Met. Chrysostom, had taught what Met. Cyprian began to teach, though.

This new teaching is this: Met. Cyprian says that ecumenism is heresy, but that we can't declare them graceless (or make a judgment about whether they have grace) until a pan-Orthodox Council is convened. In other words, they are heretics that have grace. Now, as someone in ROCOR, I wouldn't have a problem if all Met. Cyprian said was "I think that those who use the new calendar have grace." That, in fact, was the ROCOR position all along. However, Cyprian went beyond this, and said that you could be a heretic and still have grace-filled sacraments. You could be in heresy and still part of the body of Christ.

Saint Basil's first canon speaks of what could be called a "lingering grace"--but he says that there is no grace in the sacraments of even schismatics, even if there is grace lingering for the conversion of said schismatics. Some go further and say that schismatics have not only lingering grace, but grace in their sacraments. This would have been Met. Cyprian's teaching had the issue only been regarding the calendar change (which deals with schism, and not outright heresy).

But Met. Cyprian goes even further than this, saying that heretics have grace in their sacraments. His position is not even one of agnosticism, it is an affirmation that heretics do in fact have grace-filled sacraments. This is the ecclesiology that ROCOR, in 1994, declared was their own when they said: "The Synod of Metropolitan Cyprian adheres wholly to the exact same ecclesiological and dogmatic principals as our Russian Church Outside of Russia." This is something that gravely worries me.

Post Reply