Metropolitans Philaret and Vitaly on Grace in New Calendarist / Ecumenist churches

Metropolitans Philaret (+1985) and Vitaly (+2006) of New York on the Issue of Sacramental Grace in New Calendarist / Ecumenist Churches

 

[I]t is unilaterally impossible for a bishop or the Synod of Bishops to declare the New Calendarists graceless, despite their errors and innovations.

- Metropolitan Philaret to Metropolitan Kallistos of Corinth, Краткий очерк экклезиологических и юрисдикционных споров в Греческой Старостильной Церкви (“A Brief Sketch of the Ecclesiological and Jurisdictional Disputes in the Greek Old Calendar Church”), by S.V. Kryzhanovsky, p. 37, footnote 70.

Online: https://antiorthodox.files.wordpress.com/2020/09/sketch-old-style.pdf

+++

The Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia considers the introduction of the new style as an error that brought confusion into the life of the Church and, ultimately, as the cause of schism. For this reason, she did not, does not, and will not accept it, and avoids concelebrating with New Calendarists. Regarding the question of the presence or absence of grace among the New Calendarists, the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia does not consider itself or any other Local Church to have the authority to make a final decision, since a categorical assessment of this matter can only be made by a duly convened, competent Ecumenical Council, with the obligatory participation of the free Church of Russia.

- Metropolitan Philaret, First Resolution of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, September 12/25, 1974.

Online: https://sinod.ruschurchabroad.org/Arh%20Sobor%201974%20Rezol.htm

+++

7. Bishop Laurus reads an excerpt from a Greek newspaper and the determination of the Synod of Bishops regarding the Synod of Bishop Andreas’ resolution to break communion with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia.

Protopresbyter G. Grabbe reads a letter from Metropolitan Epiphanius of Kition to the Council of Bishops.

Archbishop Vitaly believes that we should not accept any demands. We are going our own way, occupying a certain position in the world and cannot be influenced from the outside to violate the accepted position. The Greeks want us to declare all New Calendarists schismatics and heretics, deprived of Church grace, but this is not in our competence.

The Chairman [Metropolitan Philaret] finds that the Council could confirm the Synod's determination and say that the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia has never departed from its long-established principles. It remains with what it professed at the time when it received His Eminences Epiphanius and Kallistos into communion. If our Greek brethren now believe that our position is un-Orthodox, it means that the act of receiving them into communion is invalid for them, and they return to the position they occupied before.

The Council agrees with the Chairman.

- Protocol No. 7, Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, 23 September/6 October 1976.

Online: https://sinod.ruschurchabroad.org/Arh%20Sobor%201976-Prot.htm

+++

By proclaiming this anathema, we have protected our flock from this apocalyptic temptation and, at the same time, have reluctantly put before the conscience of all the local Churches a serious issue, which sooner or later they must resolve in one way or the other. The future spiritual fate of the universal Orthodox Church depends on the resolution of this problem. The anathema we have proclaimed is de jure a manifestation of a purely local character of the Russian Church Abroad, but de facto it has immense significance for the history of the universal Church, for ecumenism is a heresy on a universal scale. The place of the Russian Church Abroad is now plain in the conscience of all the Orthodox. The Lord has laid a great cross upon us, but it is, however, no longer possible to remain silent, for continued silence would be like a betrayal of the Truth, from which may the Lord deliver us all!

- “The Council of Bishops of 1983,” by Archbishop Vitaly of Montreal.

Online: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j8fmWaW_kV6dF1SR8R-3rHna5ZSYRBAT/view?usp=sharing

+++

To perceive, to distinguish the true Church in the midst of the hundreds of so-called churches, both large and small, one must bear in mind, first of all, Her historical, unbroken visible succession in time, from Christ Himself and His holy apostles, and, secondly, the pearl of truth within this visible vessel, as within a shell of mother-of-pearl. The one cannot exist without the other. These two characteristics pertain only to the universal Orthodox Church, which consists of many local Churches. At the present time, the majority of the local Churches have been shaken throughout by a dreadful twofold blow: the New Calendar and the heresy of ecumenism. Despite this lamentable situation, however, we dare not assert (and may God preserve us from this, for such is the duty only of an Ecumenical Council!) that they are devoid of the grace of God. We have pronounced an anathema upon the heresy of ecumenism for the benefit of the faithful of our Church alone, yet we thereby also call upon the local Churches (in a modest but firm, gentle but decisive manner) to give serious thought to the implications of our action. This is the role of our small, modest, somewhat persecuted, but always vigilant, true Church. De facto, we concelebrate neither with the New Calendarists, nor with the ecumenists; but if anyone of our clergy, indulging in ecclesiastical leniency, has ventured to take part in such a concelebratìon, this isolated fact in no way affects our stand for the Truth.

- 1986 Nativity Epistle of Metropolitan Vitaly of New York.

Online: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_b-p1W1po27Do9yKBuHg-lAqx0sRJrHB/view?usp=sharing