The Old Calendar Orthodox Church of Romania on the Holy Synod in Resistance (2010)

 

To Right-Believing People...

By Archbishop and Metropolitan VLASIE

Source: Tradiția Ortodoxă, No. 28, June 2010, pp. 4-8.

 

To the Right-Believing People Everywhere,

By the will of God, I have shepherded the Old Calendar Orthodox Church of Romania for approximately 18 years, and during all this time, the Holy Synod has faced situations similar to the current one, where certain faithful, revealing superficiality in matters of theological knowledge but being lovers of discord, come forward with aggressive suggestions, lacking the right spiritual judgment—by which the Church is governed. I was astonished to learn of the appearance of certain information concerning our Church, with certain ecclesiastical implications, that have no connection to the struggle undertaken to preserve the right faith and true Orthodoxy.

It must be understood that anyone who engages in certain discussions concerning the Church must be endowed with a set of virtues, considering the diversity of situations they will encounter. Moreover, they require experience, right judgment, vigilance, and spiritual discernment, which a person can obtain from God through much prayer and humility. Not everyone who speaks about the Church in theological terms is a true theologian, for a theologian is one who prays and asks from God not the wisdom of the world but the gift of humble-mindedness. Such a person is filled with all virtues, simultaneously acquiring spiritual discernment, necessary for the governance of souls toward salvation, where we are required to combine gentleness with strictness and economy with precision.

Saint Basil the Great calls "tares" all those who corrupt the teachings of the Lord, mingling with the Holy Body of the Church to go unnoticed and cause harm (from the Catechism of Saint Cyril, Patriarch of Jerusalem, p. 121). Sometimes, through the devil's temptation, even from among the elect arise voices that come to disturb the peace of the Church and scandalize the souls of the faithful, as the Lord prophesied: "For many will come in My name, saying: I am Christ; and will deceive many" (Mt. 24:5).

But for the schemes of the lover of turmoil and division to have a chance of success, the spirit of malice comes in the guise of a good Christian deed. It preaches about love, good deeds, or right faith. Thus malice deceives us—by disguising itself as a good deed. As Saint Dorotheos also said: "Neither malice, nor any heresy, nor even the devil himself can deceive anyone, except by disguising himself in the form of a good deed." And, in these circumstances, so delicate from a spiritual point of view, there is the danger that some Christians might be drawn to the "philosophical-theological" ideas of those who, acting on their own authority, rise and speak in the name of the Church.

Beloved Faithful,

The issue we have before us to be discussed is the open letter signed by Mr. Aurelian Botezatu, a faithful member of the Old Calendar Orthodox Church of Romania (O.C.O.C.R.), addressed to the members of our Holy Synod, as well as to certain clergy under our jurisdiction. The said letter was also posted on the blog of a person unrelated to the Old Calendar Orthodox Church (known in the Orthodox virtual sphere as "Mother Ecaterina," with her lay name Monica Fermo, a Jewish convert to Orthodoxy), with whom we have no fellowship. The memorandum by Mr. Botezatu is also praised on another Romanian blog, which does not deserve any mention, as the opinions of its administrator are null and lack objectivity, having from the outset positioned himself in opposition to the O.C.O.C.R. This is simply because the Greek Synod to which he belongs, as a layman, has in the past launched numerous attacks and slanders against the Synod in Resistance of Greece, with which our Church is in Eucharistic communion.

Characterizing this letter in a few words, we can say that it provides countless false pieces of information, being dominated, from beginning to end, by the obsessive repetition of terms such as "anathema," "schismatic," or "heretic," clearly manifesting the tendency to destroy the communion between our Church and the Church of Greece, under the omophorion of His Eminence Cyprian of Oropos—a fraternal relationship that was strengthened with the blessing of Saint Hierarch Glicherie and has endured for almost 31 years. Regarding those who contributed to the editing and publication of the aforementioned letter, who seek to divide the truth and peace of Christ's Church, we can only say the words of Saint John the Theologian: "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out, that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us" (1 John 2:19).

In the lines of this letter, Mr. Botezatu provides us with numerous false pieces of information. The first falsehood would be that "after the calendar change in 1924, the entire Church of Greece adopted the new style." For the uninformed public, the above statement might seem like law. However, the historical truth is as follows: With the introduction of the Gregorian calendar into the usage of the Church of Greece (a decision made by Patriarch Meletius, who adopted it without consulting the opinion of the clergy and the Orthodox people), due to this tense situation, the Traditionalist Orthodox Church (of resistance) was formed in Greece. This Church, preserving the old calendar, consisted of faithful and priests (as at that time there was no hierarchy) who did not accept the calendar change.

The author continues presenting false information (we quote verbatim): "In 1935, three hierarchs of the official Church of the new style returned to the old style, thus reconstituting the Church as it was before the calendar change, also making a public confession of faith. The three hierarchs mentioned were: His Grace Chrysostom, His Grace Germanos of Demetrias, and His Grace Chrysostom of Florina, who testified to the absence of grace in the new style Church. After the return of these three hierarchs to the True Body of the Church and the reconstitution of the Holy Synod, the successive Metropolitans and Primates were: His Grace Chrysostom of Florina, His Grace Acacius, His Eminence Auxentius, and the current Metropolitan Primate, His Eminence Kioussis."

The truth was as follows: the three hierarchs did not "reconstitute" the Church (an illogical notion, as the Church cannot vanish into nothingness) but rather the hierarchy of the Church. Within this hierarchy, the primate was not His Eminence Chrysostom of Florina but Metropolitan Germanos of Demetrias, as the first to be ordained. Only after 1940, when His Eminence Germanos (who passed away in 1943) resigned from the rank of metropolitan, did the leadership of the Old Calendar Orthodox Church of Greece pass to His Eminence Chrysostom, former Metropolitan of Florina, who remained the head of this Church until his death in 1955. Bishop Chrysostom of Zakynthos, unfortunately, while in exile on the island of Strofades, sought forgiveness from the Synod of the new calendar Church of Greece. He was subsequently reinstated in his diocese, where he died around the year 1950.

Regarding the "current Metropolitan Primate His Eminence Kioussis" mentioned by the author, I believe it refers to His Eminence Chrysostomos Kioussis, who is the primate only over a part of the Old Calendar Church of Greece, specifically the Metropolis of Athens. Statements regarding the absence or presence of grace in the new calendar Church of Greece fluctuated until 1983, when Bishop Cyprian of Oropos was tasked by Metropolitan Kallistos of Corinth with drafting a confession of faith for the Old Calendar Church of Greece. Until the development of this ecclesiology, there were oscillations, as some hierarchs acknowledged the presence of grace in the new calendar Church, while others rejected it.

The following two decades saw extensive persecutions of the Old Calendar Orthodox Church of Greece, carried out by state authorities and the new calendar Church. During this period, in 1955, His Eminence Archbishop and Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina passed away, being the last hierarch of that time of the traditionalist Church of Greece. In 1960, left without a hierarchy, the Old Calendar Church of Greece turned to the Russian Church Abroad (with which it shared the same confession of faith) for assistance in ordaining new bishops. Under these circumstances, in that year, His Grace Acacius was ordained as a bishop in Detroit, taking over the leadership of the Old Calendar Church of Greece. In 1961, in Athens, the following were ordained as bishops: His Grace Auxentius, His Grace Gerontios, His Grace Parthenios, His Grace Chrysostomos (Naslimes), and His Grace Akakios (the younger). All these bishops were ordained for the Old Calendar Church of Greece by hierarchs of the Russian Church Abroad, under the omophorion of Archbishop Anastasy, the primate of the Russian Synod at that time.

Based on these ordinations, liturgical communion began between the Old Calendar Greek Orthodox Church in resistance and the Russian Church Abroad, with the two Churches becoming sister Churches. Thus, Metropolitan Akakios initiated the third primacy of the Old Calendar Church of Greece, and after his passing, he was succeeded by His Eminence Auxentios, who inaugurated the fourth primacy, covering the years 1963–1984.

In the year 1969, Hieromonk Cyprian (later Metropolitan Cyprian) left the new calendar Orthodox Church of Greece and joined the Old Calendar Orthodox Church, which at that time was under the archpastorship of Metropolitan [Archbishop] Auxentios. Hieromonk Cyprian was received without any ordination or elevation, given that the ecclesiology of the "Florinite" Synod (named after Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina) had not yet been precisely clarified.

Regarding Metropolitan Cyprian of Oropos, in the same protest letter, Mr. Aurelian Botezatu expresses himself with the following words: "The priest Cyprian left the official Church precisely because of its affiliation with the ecumenist movement, and now he considers its Holy Mysteries fully valid! The extremes between which the faith of His Eminence Cyprian oscillates are incomprehensible!" The author of these statements must be informed that His Eminence Cyprian, the president of the Synod of the Old Calendar Church of Greece, has published 14 books with apologetic and dogmatic content, in which he professes the Orthodox patristic position, unequivocally and without any doubt opposing the ecumenical movement. Furthermore, he joined the omophorion of His Eminence Auxentios in 1969 precisely because of the infiltration of ecumenism into the new calendar Church of Greece. An objective analysis of the ecclesiology of the Synod in Resistance, developed under the signature of His Eminence Cyprian and known as the "Cyprianite Theses," reveals no "anti-Christian, heretical, blasphemous teachings, entirely opposed to the teachings of our Church," as claimed by the author in question.

And yet another argument against the false accusations directed at the sister Church of Greece: as can also be observed by accessing the website of the Synod in Resistance, the Monastery of Saints Cyprian and Justina in Filli, Attica—the metropolitan seat and simultaneously the most important monastic establishment of the Old Calendar Church of Greece—regularly hosts, with the blessing of His Eminence Cyprian, multiple annual conferences open to the faithful public. At these conferences, issues of great relevance are discussed, both those concerning the internal organization of the Church and those addressing the ecumenical trajectory and the dimensions of the apostasy of the new calendar Churches involved in inter-religious dialogue. These conferences are recorded and translated into several widely spoken international languages, constituting excellent study material—objective and well-founded in patristic theology—very useful for any traditionalist Orthodox believer who must also be well-informed about these quite pressing issues facing Orthodoxy today.

Regarding the episcopal ordinations within the Old Calendar Church of Greece, brought up by Mr. Botezatu, it is known that these ordinations represented, to some extent, a turning point in the history of the Synod. This was because His Eminence Auxentios gave verbal blessing for their performance, although he later expressed reservations about the new ordinations to the priesthood and episcopate carried out at the initiative of Bishop Kallistus of Corinth and other Synod members. Shortly before his repose, however, His Eminence Auxentios confirmed the fullness of these ordinations, performed in 1979 (among which was the ordination of Bishop Cyprian), recognizing their validity. From this point, however, to making the gratuitous claim that "the Kallistite group had as its primary objective the ordination of then-priest Cyprian as a bishop"—as asserted in the letter under discussion—is a considerable stretch.

In this context, based on misunderstandings related to the official non-recognition of the ordinations performed in 1979 by His Eminence Kallistos and the other bishops of the Synod, multiple church groups—several Synods—were formed within the Old Calendar Church of Greece. However, this was not due to any ecclesiological, canonical, or dogmatic changes. According to the testimonies of the current bishops of the Old Calendar Church of Greece, it is known that His Eminence Kallistos never returned to the Synod led by Archbishop Auxentios. He separated from Archbishop Auxentios's Synod and was elected metropolitan of [what was to become] the Synod in Resistance, which also included His Grace Cyprian.

The Eucharistic communion between the O.C.O.C.R. and the Old Calendar Orthodox Church of Greece, whose primate was His Eminence Kallistos, was established on October 30, 1979, under the archpastorship of Saint Hierarch Glicherie, who authorized His Grace Silvestru Onofrei to take all necessary steps to achieve this unity in Christ.

On October 31, 1979, at the church of the Monastery in Fili, a memorable page in history was written, as a Holy Liturgy was celebrated with the participation of His Grace Silvestru alongside the entire Synod in Resistance, led by Metropolitan Kallistos. On this occasion, all ordinations performed within our Church since 1956 (those conducted by Metropolitan Galaction Cordun) were recognized without any supplemental ordination (that is, without any validation of the ordinations). The act of recognition of the ordinations within our Church, as well as that concerning liturgical communion, was signed by: His Eminence Kallistos (as Metropolitan and President of the Synod), and the bishops: Anthony of Megara, Cyprian of Oropos, Maximos of Magnesia, Callinicus of Achaia, Matthew of Oinoi, Germanos of Aeolia, Kallinikos of the Dodecanese, Mercurius of Knossos, and Kalliopios of Pentapolis.

Given the above, the following statement by Mr. Botezatu sounds at least ridiculous: "The bishops of the Slătioara Metropolis receive supplemental chirotesia from the bishops of the Kallistite Synod in Greece, a fact carefully hidden from the faithful until today." There is nothing to hide, as no chirotesia of any kind has ever taken place in our Church! Furthermore, we inform the faithful that in 1992, on the occasion of the canonization of Saint Hierarch John Maximovitch, the Russian Church Abroad also recognized the ordinations within our Church. The act of recognition of the ordinations and the commencement of communion between our sister Churches was signed by Metropolitan Vitaly Ustinov, as President of the Synod; Archbishop Anthony of Los Angeles; Archbishop Anthony of San Francisco and Western America; Archbishop Laurus of Syracuse; and the bishops: Benjamin of Chernomorsk, Daniel of Erie, Valentin of Suzdal and Vladimir, Hilarion of Manhattan, Mitrophan of Boston, and Bishop Gregory.

On behalf of our Church, at this solemn moment, two bishops were invited as witnesses: myself, as Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Church, and His Grace Demosthenes, accompanied by Archimandrite Chiprian as translator. On November 27/December 10, 1992, we celebrated the first hierarchical Holy Liturgy of communion with the Russian Church Abroad, and once again, there was no question of any kind of supplemental chirotesia.

To be convinced of the falsehood of Mr. Botezatu's claims, who states: "On strictly personal grounds, without any spiritual, ecclesiological, or canonical basis, rather on a relationship of friendship with Bishop Cyprian, the Synod of our Church unilaterally decided to renounce the first communion, thereby following Metropolitan Cyprian into schism and heresy, thus bringing upon our Church the anathema, curses, and depositions that befell him, along with the condemnations of the Synod from which he broke away and his deposition from office," readers must appeal to right judgment. Officially, we have no knowledge that Bishop Cyprian ever shared certain heretical beliefs or ideas that would alter or damage the doctrine of the Orthodox Church, given that the connection between our Church and the Greek Church was established after a thorough examination of the canonicity, church regulations, and doctrinal adherence of the Synod led by His Eminence Metropolitan Kallistos. Moreover, since Bishop Cyprian himself was entrusted with the canonical and administrative efforts necessary to initiate this communion, any possible deviation from the truth on his part would have been detected. In other words, if he had acted in bad faith, it would have been immediately evident, precisely because he was appointed to conduct the dialogue with us. Furthermore, we have no knowledge that Bishop Cyprian was ever condemned or deposed by any [canonical] ecclesiastical Synod in Greece, as the author of the letter claims above. As an addition, we must note that Church law stipulates that a bishop (if the situation requires it) is to be judged and condemned only by the Synod to which he belongs (therefore, one jurisdiction cannot interfere with the regulations of another jurisdiction).

The cessation of liturgical communion with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia was due to its dialogue with the Moscow Patriarchate (affected by ecumenist, modernist, and Sergianist tendencies), in which it became involved. This dialogue led to the unification of the two Churches, a process finalized on May 17, 2007, when the act of unification was signed in a solemn ceremony held in Moscow at the Cathedral of Christ the Savior by the primates Alexei II (on behalf of the Moscow Patriarchate) and Laurus (on behalf of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia).

After 1979 (more precisely in 1984), due to the fact that "unworthy" bishops (we limit ourselves to this epithet) had been ordained within the Greek Old Calendar Church, the Holy Synod under the leadership of His Eminence Kallistos dissolved into various groups. With the Metropolitan remaining isolated and nearly alone at the helm of the Church, four of the bishops from his former Synod moved under the omophorion of Archbishop [Metropolitan] Gerontius. The only ones who continued the synodal activity of Metropolitan Callistus were Bishops Cyprian and John. Regarding Bishop John, it is known (and it has never been hidden!) that he was indeed a Catholic monk, later ordained as a priest within the Moscow Patriarchate, where, under unknown circumstances, he was received by chrismation alone! Upon joining the Old Calendar Church of Greece, he was baptized and then ordained as a deacon, priest, and bishop. Thus, Bishop Giovanni (John, as referred to in the letter) was ordained after his baptism by the bishops of the Greek Old Calendar Church, not by the Nestorian heretics, as the author claims. It is possible that he may have had connections with the Nestorian heretics prior to converting to Orthodoxy.

Under these circumstances, the O.C.O.C.R. did not break communion with Metropolitan Kallistos. On the other hand, the political situation in Romania at that time, marked by totalitarianism and communist terror, did not allow our bishops to travel to Greece for the celebration of joint services. Nor was Metropolitan Kallistos, being quite advanced in age and suffering, able to come to Romania.

Among the successors of the former Synod of Metropolitan Kallistos, the only one who maintains communion with our Church is Bishop Cyprian, who later became a metropolitan. Metropolitan Gerontios never showed any interest in our Church. Metropolitan Kallistos withdrew from episcopal service and later separated from the Synod of Metropolitan Cyprian, remaining completely isolated and without a synod until his death.

During the communist era, Metropolitan Cyprian was arrested and exiled from Romania twice, due to his visits aimed at strengthening the communion with our Church. Despite the difficulties in communication and the obstacles imposed by the communist authorities, a strong spiritual bond was established between the Synod in Resistance, led by Metropolitan Cyprian, and the O.C.O.C.R., with the blessing of Saint Glicherie and the efforts of His Grace Silvestru Onofrei.

In Mr. Botezatu's letter, we, the bishops of the Synod of the O.C.O.C.R., are labeled as "unworthy to shepherd the Church." I will refer to this statement as nothing more than audacity and reckless insolence, and I will also respond by stating that our Church has reached the present day, by the Grace of God, untainted by any heresy and untouched by the spirit of the world. This is not due to insolence or the gossip of daring critics, but to the sufferings and sacrifices of today’s hierarchs or of those already departed to the Lord. With what conscience, Mr. Botezatu, do you dare to call unworthy His Grace Pahomie Morar, His Grace Evloghie Oța, His Grace Meftodie Marinache, or even Saint Glicherie himself? I limit myself to mentioning only those who have departed this life, so as not to disturb those whose sacrifices are kept anonymous out of true humility. These spiritual giants, whose names we are unworthy even to mention, let alone slander with unworthy words, endured the torments of communist prisons—hunger, thirst, cold, and chains that cut into the living flesh of their bodies—so as not to betray the Church and the souls of the faithful!

Did Saint Glicherie show spiritual blindness when he gave his blessing for the commencement of communion with the Synod in Resistance? How is it that Saint Glicherie found neither schism nor heresy in the Greek Church with which we are in communion?

Until our accuser constructs a substantiated argument, his claims regarding the heresy and schism of the Synod in Resistance remain unfounded. As for the statement that "there are approximately 20 Old Calendar Churches in Greece today," which is an exaggeration, this matter does not concern the Synod in Resistance, nor does it concern us (as long as we have no fellowship with them), and even less should it concern Mr. Botezatu.

The author of the letter considers the "Cyprianite Theses" to be "heretical, unanimously condemned by all Traditionalist Orthodox Churches and the Synod from which they broke away." We, the Synod of the O.C.O.C.R., after a thorough examination of them from a canonical and dogmatic perspective, cannot condemn them or label them as heretical. The only differentiation between the ecclesiology of our Church and that of the Synod in Resistance, under the omophorion of His Eminence Cyprian, pertains to the reception of schismatics from the New Calendar Church into the fold of the Old Calendar Orthodox Church.

The Synod of the sister Church, applying ecclesiastical economy (οἰκονομία), receives these individuals without chrismation, as their Church has not experienced contradictory events like those in Romania, where, in the years 1926 and 1929, Pascha was celebrated on a date that defied the decisions of the First Council of Nicaea. Thus, as a result of these events in the Romanian Orthodox Church (R.O.C.), along with other canonical deviations that lead to the loss of the Grace of the Holy Spirit according to the teachings of the Holy Fathers (such as baptism by sprinkling or pouring instead of three immersions, mixed marriages, ecumenical prayers with heretics, etc.), the Holy Synod of the Old Calendar Orthodox Church of Romania adopts the principle of strictness (ἀκρίβεια) of the Holy Fathers. In accordance with Canon 1 of Saint Basil the Great, it receives schismatics from the New Calendar Church who return to Orthodoxy through the Holy Mystery of Chrismation with the Holy and Great Myrrh.

The newspaper Universul, in one of its issues from 1929, presented the official act by which the delegate of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, Metropolitan Chrysanthos, handed Patriarch Miron Cristea the document in which the Ecumenical Patriarchate accused the Romanian Orthodox Church of schism (thus declaring it schismatic) due to the non-compliance with the Paschal conditions established at the First Council of Nicaea.

Since in the Church of Christ the mystery of human salvation operates through the two principles—strictness (ἀκρίβεια) and economy (οἰκονομία)—these differences between the practices of our Church and those of the Old Calendar Church of Greece do not represent an obstacle to liturgical communion. This is as long as the sister Church in Greece follows the calendar and Tradition of the Holy Fathers, rejects communion with official Orthodoxy and other schismatic or heretical Churches, as well as all innovative and modernist currents.

And if the ecclesiology of the Old Calendar Church of Greece, still in accordance with the principle of economy (οἰκονομία) of the Holy Fathers, refers to schismatics as "sick members," awaiting a future synod to condemn them, we, the Holy Synod of our Church, in conformity with the principle of strictness (ἀκρίβεια) of the Holy Fathers and to maintain the purity of the Orthodox faith in our Church, already consider those who have deviated from the Tradition of the Orthodox Church and accepted the papist new calendar as condemned by the synodal tribunal of the Holy Fathers.

 

Scan of the Romanian original: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XcSR13ySC0zMFnsPwrk8r5HzejlXT3Wc/view?usp=sharing