Comments on MYSTAGOGY: Ecumenism and Schismatic Old Calendarism

Outstanding. More from this source whenever you c...

2010-02-05T15:22:13.993-05:00

Outstanding. More from this source whenever you can, please.

Sections of Archimandrite Epiphanios' "Th...

2010-02-04T10:58:04.663-05:00

Sections of Archimandrite Epiphanios' "The Two Extremes: Ecumenism and Zealotry" have been translated before, but I hope the entire text gets published in English soon.

Another good article reflecting similar views is "Anti-Patristic: The Stance of the Zealot Old Calendarists", by Fr. Basil of Grigoriou at http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/anti-patristic-stance-old-calendarist-zealots.aspx

The Church is not in heresy and those examples you...

2010-02-04T09:25:13.308-05:00

The Church is not in heresy and those examples you are taking out of context.

If you concede we are living in a time of heresy...

2010-02-04T09:21:15.673-05:00

*If* you concede we are living in a time of heresy (which Elder Epiphanios apparently does, though believes the hierarchs of the Church of Greece are largely untouched by it in his time), deviations from normal canonical order are not unprecedented.

St. Theodore the Studite wrote:

"In times of heresy, owing to pressing needs, things do not always proceed flawlessly, in accordance with what has been prescribed in times of peace; this seems to have been the case with the most blessed Athanasios and the most holy Eusebios, who both performed ordinations outside their respective dioceses; and now, the same thing is evidently being done while the present heresy persists."

In regards to those who believe we should remain in communion with heretics until they are formally condemned by a Synod, perhaps the lives of St. Maximos the Confessor, St. Hypatios of Rouphianon Monastery, St. Kyril of Alexandria, St. Theodore the Studite, among others, should be reviewed.

I would be interested in seeing if anyone can produce a patristic endorsement (as opposed to a mere toleration) of remaining in communion with anyone who blasphemies Christ, the Theotokos, or the Body of Christ - the Church -before their offical condemnation.

In the words of the monks of Constantinople, who broke communion with Nestorios years before he was judged and condemned, "an emperor we have, but no bishop." (Supplication to the Emperor).

Anonymous, I never made that comment. But lets not...

2010-02-04T08:37:58.594-05:00

Anonymous, I never made that comment. But lets not twist this canonical injunction. I fully agree with what Elder Epiphanios writes. However the Elder would say Metro. Cyprian is a schismatic for being a bishop outside of communion with the Church and for ordaining other priests and bishops and being vocal in his opposition, or "walling off".

Sava, You're setting up a straw man - no one...

2010-02-04T08:31:32.830-05:00

Sava,

You're setting up a straw man - no one is saying he supports the Cyprianites as an institution. He opposed all efforts and justifications to establish breakaway groups in Greece. All I have pointed out is he explicitly states "heretics" (as he calls them) remain members of the Church with valid sacraments until they are judged. This is the hallmark of Cyprianism.

Those who read this and think Elder Epiphanios is ...

2010-02-04T08:16:55.383-05:00

Those who read this and think Elder Epiphanios is supporting Cyprianism are reading their own views into this. I think the Elder makes it quite clear that he opposes Cyprianism, and by his time when this letter was written they weren't nearly as established as they are now. He clearly discourages the non-commemoration of Patriarch Athenagoras (who is not Bartholomew by the way), and yet during the tumulteous period when he wrote this he said that if someone chose to not commemorate him they are to do so basically in a private manner without expressing his views and without ordaining bishops and priests, which is a sign of outright schism. I'm looking forward John to your translation we the Elder makes more clear his opposition to Cyprianism, but I personally think he is clear enough in this post.

I think it's important to note Fr. Epiphanios ...

2010-02-04T08:07:29.436-05:00

I think it's important to note Fr. Epiphanios is not delusional about what he is doing: he realizes, when it comes to individual hierarchs like Patriarch Athenagoras and Archbishop Iakovos, that they are/were uncondemned ecumenist heretics, and he was in communion with them due to their status as being unjudged.

Heretics.... as yet uncondemned.

How many people directly under Athenagoras and Iakovos were willing to be that honest? Or did they make excuses for them, and try to deny their "heretical" status, even when they engaged in public, repeated attacks on the Church's ecclesiology?

If only the Greek American Church was under Greece instead of the Phanar...

He doesn't say that Anonymous. You should re-r...

2010-02-04T07:56:52.006-05:00

He doesn't say that Anonymous. You should re-read it. Elder Epiphanios opposed Cyprianism, as reflected in other letters I will make available.

John, I agree that he opposes, among other things...

2010-02-04T07:54:42.476-05:00

John,

I agree that he opposes, among other things, setting up rival jurisdictions; however, he agrees with the most essential, controverisal, and disputed part of Cyprianism: that heretics remain part of the Church and in possession of valid sacraments up until they are condemned by the Church.

You were quite critical of the Cyprianites for holding this position in previous postings.

Anonymous 1, you must have missed the part where h...

2010-02-03T23:58:43.576-05:00

Anonymous 1, you must have missed the part where he talks about the prohibition to not have separated bishops if you dare to cease commemoration. He makes this more clear in other letters where he opposes the ecclesiology of the Synod of Resistance.

Anonymous 2, the distinction has existed since the beginning if you will recall your church history. You can start with the two examples the Elder gives of St Cyril and St Anatolios. In fact, it was very common for this to be so especially in the first millenium of the Church.

I wholeheartedly agree with Fr. Peter, John. Grea...

2010-02-03T23:35:52.286-05:00

I wholeheartedly agree with Fr. Peter, John. Great, great choice. I will definitely read it again and again.

The Royal Path!

In IC XC,

DB

"Also, there is a difference between one who ...

2010-02-03T21:07:31.977-05:00

"Also, there is a difference between one who preaches heretical beliefs but does not remove himself from the Church (nor is excised by the Church), and one who leaves the Church on his own initiative (and founds his own "church" or accedes to another, heretical or schismatic one), or who has been excised by the Church, pursuant to a trial and conviction. It is with the second kind that every Orthodox must have no communion whatsoever. However, communion with the first kind (until he has been convicted) is left, by the sacred Canons, to the discretion of each Orthodox faithful.

In other words, we have the right, that has been provided by the sacred Canons, to cease a commemoration, but we are not bound to do so."

I have never seen a single citation from a Father or Saint making this distinction. Quite the contrary, they consistently say to flee anyone who preaches heresy. The only evidence I have seen is the observation that the canons do not punish anyone who remains in communion with a heretic prior to their official condemnation. This is more likely leniency on the part of the Church in a time of confusion, as opposed to an endorsement of passivity.

The famous Serbian canonist Bishop Nikodim Milash says "clergy have a right AND AT THE SAME TIME AN OBLIGATION to separate themselves worthwith" from any bishop who "begins to preach publicly in Church any heretical doctrine" ("The Canons of the Orthodox Church, With a Commentary," Vol. 2, pp. 290-291).

This understanding was confirmed during the 2004 Inter-Orthodox Conference on Ecumenism at the University of Thessaloniki, which concluded:

"That it be made manifest to church leaders everywhere that, in the event that they continue to participate in, and lend support to, the pan-heresy of Ecumenism — both inter-christian and inter-religious — the OBLIGATORY, salvific, canonical and patristic course for the faithful, clergy and laity, is excommunication: in other words, ceasing to commemorate bishops, who are co-responsible for, and co-communicants with, heresy and delusion. This is not a recourse to schism but rather to a God-pleasing confession, just as the ancient Fathers, and bishop-confessors in our own day have done, such as the esteemed and respected former Metropolitan of Florina, Augustinos, and the Fathers of the Holy Mountain (Athos)."

"However, there are two kinds of heretics: Th...

2010-02-03T20:49:42.402-05:00

"However, there are two kinds of heretics: Those whom the Church has put on trial and has convicted and excised from Her Body, and those who have neither been convicted as yet by the Church, nor have left the Church of their own volition, but instead have remained in the Body of the Church. One such case is the case of the Patriarch. Patriarch Athenagoras has preached heretical beliefs. But he has not been convicted yet by the Church, nor has he renounced the Church and removed himself from Her. He has remained inside the Church and continues to minister inside the Church and consequently, he is still a channel of Grace; He performs Sacraments."

He agrees with the Synod in Resistance!

AWESOME! The most honest and balanced perspective ...

2010-02-03T16:14:17.312-05:00

AWESOME! The most honest and balanced perspective I've heard to date. Keep posting more John. Schismatic Old Calendarists seem to have taken over the web with their propaganda.