WHO ARE THE G.O.C.?his Hermitage of Blessed Seraphim Rose in Etna, California just after his repose in the Lord. Apparently, Fr. Lawrence’s two main sources were by the Bulgarian

An OrthodoxWest Publication

WHO ARE THE G.O.C.? Genuine Orthodox Christians & the Metropolia of the Americas & British Isles

Syracuse, NY

2018 A.D.

1 | P a g e

WHO ARE THE G.O.C.? Genuine Orthodox Christians

and the

Metropolia of the Americas & British Isles

Monk Symeon of Syracuse editor

2 | P a g e

WHO ARE THE G.O.C.? Genuine Orthodox Christians and the Metropolia of the Americas & British Isles

Monk Symeon of Syracuse, compiler & editor Copyright © 2018 Community of True Orthodox Christians NYS, inc.

OrthodoxWest™ Publications an imprint of the CTOCNYS

Hermitage of St Michael Archangel 349 South Collingwood Avenue Syracuse NY 13206-2940

U N I T E D S T A T E S of A M E R I C A

3 | P a g e

Acknowledgements

This Electronic Book is a compilation, not an original work, of various

authors, publications and websites. The editor, therefore, wishes to express his indebtedness to those authors of what has been presented herein in

what might seem as a patchwork but is, we hope, more of a gestalt from the various sources that tells the story of the Genuine Orthodox Christians and

the True Orthodox Metropolia of the Americas and British Isles.

Foremost, we are grateful to the Reverend Hieromonk Lawrence (Williams) for the large part of this publication. We are equally grateful to the many

authors of Wikipedia articles we utilized and the webmasters of the various websites we had gleaned information all of which are attributed and cited in

this publication’s Sources and Endnotes.

On a more personal note, THANK YOU to: Metropolitan John, my Archpastor and spiritual father. And Hieromonk

Enoch (Fetter), Deacon Joseph, Bishop Photius of Triaditsa, Presbyter Srboljub Miletić, Monk Seraphim (Zissis), Bishop Irineos (Plac),

Archpriest Mark Templet

Dedication

Reader Nathaniel M. Bensimon

(1988 – 2006) May His Name Be Eternal

In Memoriam

Hierodeacon John Chrysostom (Nelson)

( + 19/07/2017 o.s. ) May He Dwell Among the Blessed

4 | P a g e

Table of Contents

............................................................................................................................................... 5

WHO ARE THE G.O.C.? ...................................................................................................... 5

Genuine Orthodox Christians & the Metropolia of the Americas & British Isles .......... 5

Introduction. ......................................................................................................................... 5

The Pope’s Calendar: Trojan Horse of Ecumenism ............................................................. 6

King Constantine and Eleftherios Venizelos ...................................................................... 8

in Thessalonica, 1915 ........................................................................................................... 8

Revolutionary Government & the Innovative Church ..................................................... 15

The Miraculous Appearance of The Cross, ........................................................................ 22

September 14, 1925 .............................................................................................................. 22

St. Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina & His Struggle for Unity and Truth ............... 27

Part II The Genuine Orthodox Church moves Westward............................................. 43

The Fall of Milan & the Rise of Unity Among the TOC/GOC ........................................ 47

Unity Sought but Not ......................................................................................................... 53

at the Cost of Orthodoxy ................................................................................................... 53

Even in the Struggle the Gospel is Preached and the Church Grows .............................. 57

“The International Union of Genuine Orthodox Churches”. ........................................... 58

The Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia ........................................................................... 61

of North and South America and the British Isles .......................................................... 61

Sources ................................................................................................................................................................... 66

ENDNOTES ........................................................................................................................ 67

5 | P a g e

WHO ARE THE G.O.C.?

Genuine Orthodox Christians & the Metropolia of the Americas & British Isles

Based on the Essay Originally Titled

“Who We Are the Holy Synod of The Traditional Church of Greece — G.O.C.” by

the late Rev’d Hieromonk Lawrence (Williams) Hermitage of Blessed Seraphim Rose

Etna, California

Compiled, expanded and edited by

Rev’d Stavrophoremonk Symeon of Syracuse Hermitage of Saint Archangel Michael (Anglo-American TOC Metropolia)

Syracuse, New York

Introduction. This paper has been expanded from the original essay entitled, “Who We Are: the Holy Synod of The Traditional Church of Greece — G.O.C.” by the late Rev’d Hieromonk Lawrence (Williams). Fr. Lawrence’s essay had been discovered in the archive of the –now defunct-- website attributed to his Hermitage of Blessed Seraphim Rose in Etna, California just after his repose in the Lord. Apparently, Fr. Lawrence’s two main sources were by the Bulgarian TOCi hierarch, Bishop Photius of Triaditsaii and “Meletios (Metaxakis) Metropolitan, Archbishop, Pope and Patriarch” by Presbyter Srboljub Miletićiii. Monk Symeon has expanded the original essay including additional quotes and sources to the first part. The second part is a completely added section regarding the authentic inheritors of the Florinite GOC apostolic lineage of succession.

6 | P a g e

The Pope’s Calendar: Trojan Horse of Ecumenism

It was in October of 1582 A.D. that the Roman Catholic Pope Gregory XIIIiv

decreed that the "Julian Calendar" be changed and the one named after himself, the

"Gregorian Calendar", be substituted in place of the Julian Calendar. From that time on,

both the liturgical cycle of the Roman Catholic Church and all civil proceedings,

transactions and the like, were accounted according to the "New" Gregorian Calendar.

However, the Orthodox Church is the Mother Church. She is the first and oldest

Church in history. Since the Roman Patriarchate severed ties with the Eastern (Orthodox)

Church in 1054 A.D. it was no longer considered a part of the "Church of the Apostles".

Therefore, any decrees by a Roman Pope were laughed at as having no jurisdiction over

Orthodox Christians. So: If the Pope changes the calendar, it has no effect on the

Orthodox. They will continue to be faithful to the teachings of Jesus Christ, His Apostles,

The Apostolic Fathers, the Ecumenical Councils and all that comprises the Holy Orthodox

Faith.

But in the 1920's, some of the "innovative" Orthodox sought after and obtained a

change from the Julian Calendar to the observance of the Roman Catholic "Gregorian

Calendar." It would become that, for those who changed the calendar, and observed this

change, that being acceptable and in step with the times, was more important than

faithfulness to our Lord, God and Saviour Jesus Christ. Those who wished to remain

faithful to Jesus Christ and His original Church, could not and would not become part of

this calendar innovation. Therefore, since 1924, Christians in Greece, along with other

sister churches around the world, who have faithfully remained devoted to the Tradition

of the Orthodox Church have been referred to as "Old Calendarists" or

"Palaioimerologites" in the Greek language. This is because they have remained in full

7 | P a g e

adherence to the traditional liturgical calendar (Julian Calendar) used by the Orthodox

Church for over the past 1600 years.

In January of 1920 the Patriarchal locum tenens of the Church of Constantinople,

Metropolitan Dorotheos of Prusa, and ten other metropolitans, released an Encyclical

entitled "To the Churches of Christ Wheresoever They Might Be," addressing the

denominational sects outside the Holy Orthodox Church as "fellow heirs and partakers

of the same promise of God in Jesus Christ." The title of this Encyclical already

presupposed that the Church was not One. The first item in this agenda proposed the

adoption of a common festal calendar so that all the "churches", (i.e.; the denominations

and sects) could celebrate the Christian feasts simultaneously. For faithful Orthodox

Christians, bishops, presbyters, deacons, monks, nuns and laity, this was a slap in the

face.

This Encyclical was the product of the revolutionary Church reforms that were

being spread by two men, politician Eleftherios Venizelos and hierarchal accomplice

Meletios Metaxakis. Both these men were anti-monarchist, party Liberals and

Freemasons. In his 2017 paper, “Some Preliminary Notes On The Influence Of

Freemasonry On Early Greek Ecumenism”, Monk Seraphim (Zissis), stated, “the

first decades of the 20th century, was marked by a vigorous and global Masonic and

Theosophic effort to promote not only inter-religious and inter-Christian

Ecumenism, the WCC being the most notorious manifestation thereof, but also

an embryonic Global Government (League of Nations)”.v Venizelos on the worldly

political front, and, Metaxakis (as a wolf in sheep's clothing) on the ecclesiastical front:

both wishing to modernize Greece and the Orthodox Church.

8 | P a g e

King Constantine and Eleftherios Venizelos

in Thessalonica, 1915

Venizelos (1864 - 1936) was seen in the

public eye as a very ambitious politician who was

instrumental in unifying his native island of Crete

with the nation of Greece. Later he went on to

become the Prime Minister of Greece and is

responsible for expanding the Greek territory

within the bounds of the dying Ottoman Empire.

His was considered a revolutionary because of

the run in he had with the sovereigns of Greece. He finally turned completely against them

and during the First World War he established a rival government (with military help

from France and Britain) in Thessalonica. He sought the complete abolition of the royalist

government. His reforms were not only political but advanced upon the religious beliefs

of the people of the Greek Orthodox Church. His reforms had been in planning for quite

some time. Even as early as November 10, 1916, one Andrew Michalakopoulos, a minister

in the "revolutionary" Greek government, wrote in a letter to Eleftherios about the long-

range plans these two politicians had for the Greek Orthodox Church and how Archbishop

Meletios Metaxakis could help them in accomplishing their common goal. The following

is a quote from that letter:

"Mr. President, I told you a long time ago in the Council of Ministers that after we had brought to a successful conclusion the national struggle that you have undertaken, it would be necessary, for the good of the country, for you to take care of another, equally important, struggle, that of modernizing our religious affairs .... To head this truly revolutionary reform, you will need a far-seeing Hierarch, one almost like you in politics. You have one: We are speaking about the hierarch from Cyprus [Archbishop Meletios Metaxakis]. Under your guidance he will become the “Venizelos of the Church of Greece”. Once the political revolution has removed Archbishop Prokopios of Athens and

those like him, what are the elements that will require reform in intellectual and monastic

circles, when they will have been put in place an ecclesiastical Hierarchy and a universal

Synod, or perhaps only a Greek Synod?"

9 | P a g e

Michalakopoulos further states in the letter what reforms he feels will be needed:

a) Abolition of the Fasts ("Nobody keeps the Fasts, except those who have nothing to eat"). b) Modernization of the ceremonies and Liturgies ("two or three hymns ... during a half hour period" is all that is necessary). c) Priests educated in "special schools" (so that they can speak "in an intelligible way" about "love of one's country" and "the political duties of their listeners"). d) Abolition of the different Feasts (they are "only an excuse for idleness"). e) Abolition of the monasteries (Their lands will pass into the hands of the peasants ..."). He goes on to say, "Of course, all the foregoing is just a very small part of the program.”. Elsewhere in the letter Michalakopoulos complains "... unfortunately, it is not possible to make the idea of holiness disappear;" however, through the publication of appropriate books, and with "the collaboration of good Church and lay writers, .... the word 'holy' will disappear”.vi Under the indirect influence of powerful progressive and revolutionary ideas, which had their origins in and were advocated by those initiated into Masonry [which strives to unite everyone, but denies the exclusive truth of Orthodoxy], religious free-thinking was introduced into Orthodoxy. This free-thinking was especially characteristic of the so-called Russian religious renaissance during the first decades of this century. Religious free-thinking prepared the way for renovationism in Russia and the first manifestations of modernism to form itself into an "Orthodox Church" (in fact a new, Eastern rite Protestantism) in our century. Renovationism was a religious movement typified in post-revolutionary Russia, in its most extreme and crude forms, and in the Greek Orthodox world of the 1920's, with corresponding similarities. Illustrations of renovationist tendencies are the Council of the "Living Church" in Russia (opened April 16/29, 1923), and the "Pan-Orthodox Congress" in Constantinople (May 10 - June 8, 1923), which took place at nearly the same time. In spite of the fact that the Constantinople Congress made a resolution in defense of Patriarch Tikhon and thus, in a way, separated itself from the Living Church, the decisions of both forums were nonetheless very similar: they both changed the Church Calendar, allowed second marriages for clergy and published other similar declarations, discussing reforms in the spirit of religious liberalism, unthinkable only a few years previously.vii

The first realization that there may be a "calendar change," was in January 1919,

when Venizelos was Prime Minister and Meletios Metaxakis was Archbishop of Athens.

10 | P a g e

Who was Metaxakis? A great deal has been written by Bishop Photios of Triaditsaviii and

it contains some very important information about this high-ranking Freemason, who

was in actuality imbued with an attitude of, and the belief in universalism.ix

Freemason, Patriarch, Scoundrel,

Great Heresiarch

Meletius IV (Metaxakis) of Constantinople His name in

the world was Emmanuel Metaxakis; born on September 21, 1870

in the village of Parsas on the island of Crete. He entered the

Seminary of the Holy Cross in Jerusalem in 1889. He was tonsured

with the name Meletios and ordained hierodeacon in 1892. He

completed the theological courses at Holy Cross and was assigned

as secretary to the Holy Synod in Jerusalem by Patriarch Damianos

in 1900. Meletios was evicted from the Holy Land by Patriarch

Damianos, along with the then administrator Chrysostom, later Archbishop of Athens, in

1908 for "activity against the Holy Sepulcher."

Alexander Zervoudakis, in his book entitled "Famous Freemasons”, writes that

in the year 1909 when Metaxakis and two other clergymen were visiting Cyprus, (One of

these clergymen was metropolitan Basil of Anchialos, an official representative of the

Ecumenical Patriarchate) all three of them were initiated into the Masonic Lodge.x In

1910, Metaxakis became Metropolitan of Kition in Cyprus. Driven by a "violent,

impetuous, and caviling spirit," as Zervoudakis — his admirer — records, Metaxakis

sought to become Ecumenical Patriarch in 1912. Failing in this, he turned his attention

again to Cyprusxi. Failing there also, he abandoned his flock and went to Greece where,

with the support of Venizelos, he became Archbishop of Athens in 1918. But when

Venizelos lost the next election, Metaxakis likewise was ousted from his see.

Now, continuing with the narrative of Bishop Photios of Triaditsa:

... In February 1921, Meletios visited the United States. On December

17, 1921, the Greek Ambassador in Washington, D.C. sent a message to the

11 | P a g e

prefect at Thessalonica stating that Meletios "vested, took part in an

Anglican service, knelt in prayer with Anglicans, venerated their Holy

Table, gave a sermon, and later blessed those present." xii

When the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece learned of Metaxakis' activities they

formed a commission to investigate Metaxakis in November of 1921.xiii But, as noted by

Bishop Photios of Triaditsa:

While the investigation was proceeding against Metaxakis, he was unexpectedly

elected Patriarch of Constantinople. Nonetheless, The Holy Synod of the Church of Greece

deposed Meletios Metaxakis on December 9, 1921 for a series of infractions against canon

law and for causing a schism.xiv In spite of this decision, Meletios Metaxakis was

enthroned as the Ecumenical Patriarch on January 24, 1922. Under intense political

pressure, Meletios' deposition was uncanonically lifted on September 24, 1922. Political

circles around Venizelos and the Anglican Church had been involved in Meletios' election

as Patriarch.xv Metropolitan Germanos (Karavangeis) of the Holy Synod of

Constantinople wrote of these events, "My election in 1921 to the Ecumenical Throne was

unquestioned. Of the seventeen votes cast, sixteen were in my favor. Then one of my lay

friends offered me £10,000 if I would forfeit my election in favor of Meletios Metaxakis.

Naturally I refused his offer, displeased and disgusted. At the same time, one night a

delegation of three men unexpectedly visited me from the "National Defense League"

and began to earnestly entreat me to forfeit my candidacy in favor of Meletios

Metaxakis. The delegates said that Meletios could bring $100,000 for the Patriarchate

and, since he had very friendly relations with Protestant bishops in England and

America, could be useful in [Greece's] international causes. Therefore, international

interests demanded that Meletios be elected Patriarch. Such was also the will of

Eleftherios Venizelos. I thought over the proposal all night. Economic chaos reigned in

the Patriarchate. The government in Athens had stopped sending subsidies, and there

was no other source of income. Regular salaries had not been paid for nine months. The

charitable organizations of the Patriarchate were in a critical financial state. For these

reasons and for the good of the people [or so thought the deceived hierarch] I accepted

the offer ..."xvi Thus, to everyone's amazement, the next day, November 25, 1921, Meletios

Metaxakis became the Patriarch of Constantinople.

12 | P a g e

The uncanonical nature of his election became evident when, two days before the

election, November 23, 1921, there was a proposal made by the Synod of Constantinople

to postpone the election on canonical grounds. The majority of the members voted to

accept this proposal. At the same time, on the very day of the election, the bishops who

had voted to postpone the election were replaced by other bishops. This move allowed the

election of Meletios as Patriarch. Consequently, the majority of bishops of the

Patriarchate of Constantinople who had been circumvented met in Thessalonica. They

announced later that, "the election of Meletios Metaxakis was done in open violation of

the holy canons," and proposed to undertake, "a valid and canonical election of the

Patriarch of Constantinople." In the spirit of this, Meletios was confirmed on the

Patriarchal Throne.xvii

Under pressure from Meletios, the Patriarchate of Constantinople accepted the

validity of Anglican orders in 1922 ... Then in 1923 Meletios initiated the "Pan-

Orthodox" Congress (May 19 - June 8).

The Orthodox World Community was not pleased with the outcome of this "Pan-

Orthodox Congress. In the middle of June an attack was made on the Patriarchal

premises. In an article entitled "The Julian Calendar", one Ludmilla Perepiolkinaxviii has

given history an apt account of Meletios Metaxakis' rapid departure from Constantinople:

"Meletios IV was forced to go into retirement in connection with the extreme indignation

of the Orthodox population of Constantinople; the Greeks wrecked the premises of his

patriarchate and 'subjected him to assault and battery."'xix

Continuing on with the narrative of Bishop Photios:

On July 1, 1923, on the pretext of illness and the need for medical treatment,

Meletios left Constantinople. On September 20, 1923, under pressure from the Greek

government and through the intervention of Archbishop Chrysostom of Athens, Meletios

resigned as Patriarch.

In Egypt, with the help of Anglican clergymen, and, due to the fact that this was

still the time of the British mandate in Egypt, under extreme pressure from the British

government, the Egyptian government confirmed Meletios Metaxakis as Patriarch of

13 | P a g e

Alexandria in May of 1926. In his concluding words about Meletios Metaxakis, Bishop

Photios relates thus:

As Patriarch, "at the cost of disapproval and division," Meletios instituted the new

calendar in the Alexandrian Patriarchatexx. While still Patriarch of Constantinople he

established ties with the [Soviet-sponsored] "Living Church." The synod of the "Living

Church," on the occasion of the election of Meletios as Patriarch of Alexandria, wrote:

"The Holy Synod [sic] recalls with sincere best wishes the moral support which Your

Beatitude showed us while you were yet Patriarch of Constantinople by entering into

communion with us as the only rightful ruling organ of the Russian Orthodox Church."xxi

Finally, although critically ill, Meletios offered himself as a candidate for Patriarch

of Jerusalem, but no election took place. Metropolitan Methodios Kondostanos wrote:

"This exile from the Holy Land, from Kition, from Athens, from Constantinople, Meletios

Metaxakis — an unstable, restless, power-hungry spirit, an evil demon — had no qualms

about grabbing for the Throne of Jerusalem even from Alexandria in his desire to further

himself."xxii Meletios Metaxakis died on July 28, 1935, and was buried in Cairo.

An eye-witness, at the time an archdeacon, Archbishop Athenagoras of Thyateira

and Great Britain testifies that Meletios Metaxakis was given a full Masonic funeral.

As Ecumenical Patriarch, Metaxakis oversaw a full ten sessions of the "Pan-

Orthodox" Congress in 1923. At this Congress an Anglican bishop named Charles Gore

was in attendance at the invitation of Metaxakis. He was even asked to sit at the

Ecumenical Patriarch's right side, and to participate in the sessions. Such proposals that

were brought forth and adopted by this Congress were a change in the Paschalion and in

the festal calendar to coincide with that used by the West, a reduction of fasts and church

services, the abolition of the proscription against marriage of the clergy after ordination,

and the abolition of special clerical garb.

It is very telling that only three national Orthodox Churches were represented in

the Congress — Greece, Romania, and, Serbia; Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem were

not. Meletios Metaxakis and his Synod adopted the above-mentioned resolutions in

disregard of the Pan-Orthodox Councils of 1583, 1587, and 1593, which had condemned

14 | P a g e

the use of the Gregorian calendar for liturgical use in the Orthodox Church. Using the

Gregorian calendar liturgically had been synodically condemned on so many other

occasions as well. Of special note is the act of its condemnation by Patriarch Dositheos of

Jerusalem in 1670, Ecumenical Patriarch Agathangelos in 1827, Ecumenical Patriarch

Anthimos in 1895, the Holy Synod of the Church of Constantinople in 1902 and 1904; the

Holy Synods of Russia, of Jerusalem, of Greece, and of Romania, each independently, in

1903; the Holy Synod of Greece again in 1919; and the Holy Synod of the Patriarchate of

Alexandria in 1924.

The Churches of Constantinople, Greece and Romania — the only ones that

accepted the calendar innovation right away — broke their liturgical unity with the other

local Orthodox Churches only in order to celebrate with the heterodox. To put it another

way the calendar change was accepted for the exact reason it was condemned by three

Pan-Orthodox Councils in the sixteenth century: Uniatism. The fact is obvious that this is

so is the fulfillment of the first proposal of the Ecumenical Patriarchate's 1920

"Encyclical to the Churches of Christ Wheresoever They Might Be."

The basis for Church Calendar reform obviously does not have its roots in tradition,

theology, liturgical life or the canonical rules of the Orthodox Church, but rather in the

one-sided, semi-religious, semi-social approach of the ecumenical cult which is grounded

in a political-religious ideal of "Christian unity."

It is worthwhile to take notice of Meletios Metaxakis' untruthful practices. As

Perepiolkina points out, "The methods which Meletios IV (Metaxakis) used in introducing

the new style [calendar] merit special attention. Thus, in his letter to Archbishop

Seraphim of Finland, dated 10 July, 1923, Meletios tells a manifest lie, by affirming that

the new style was accepted according to popular demand and a consensus of the Orthodox

Churches."xxiii

15 | P a g e

Revolutionary Government & the Innovative Church

Quite a few years before the developments just described, in 1918, Archimandrite

Chrysostom Papadopoulos produced and article he had written that was published in the

ecclesiastical periodical Church Herald. This article was not in favor of the calendar

reform and quite decisively rejected it. The basis for such a rejection are cited on the

decisions of the Pan-Orthodox Councils of the sixteenth century.xxiv Then, in 1919

Papadopoulos inscribed another article on behalf of the Church of Greece in which he

strongly rejects the change in the calendar on the basis of all previous tradition. Yet, even

after all of this, when this Papadopoulos became Archbishop of Athens he changed the

Church of Greece to observance of the Gregorian Calendar in 1924. This, we have been

informed was due to pressure from the Greek government.

The new Revolutionary Government of Colonel Nicholas Plastiras, of sorry

memory, says in one study, "did not find Archbishop Theokletos [predecessor of

Chrysostom Papadopoulos] suitable to their purposes," and it arbitrarily replaced him

with the aforementioned Archimandrite Chrysostom Papadopoulos on February 25, 1923.

On December 14 of the same year, the Revolutionary Government abolished the old

charter under which the Church of Greece had operated for seventy years and established

a new charter whereby the Governing Synod of five bishops was abolished and the sole

governing body became the full Synod of Bishops called once a year. Meanwhile, the day

to day affairs of church administration were left in the hands of the archbishop, to be

ratified each year at the annual Synod. What is more, is that the government reserved the

right to transfer or retire bishops on the grounds of 'suitability.'

"It was under these conditions that a general Synod of the Church of Greece was

held in December 24 - 30, 1923, at which the dictator Plastiras, the Prime Minister of the

Revolution, Gonatas, and Minister of Religious Affairs and Education, A. Stratigopoulos,

were present. The Minister of Religious Affairs underscored the necessity of agreement

between civil and religious calendars."xxv

Colonel Plastiras made his plans known to the bishops of the Church of Greece on

no uncertain terms:

16 | P a g e

"The Revolution requests you then, my respected hierarchs, to leave all personal

preference to one side and proceed to purge the Church ... The Revolution hopes that a

useful work for the new generation will result from your labors, and it will reckon itself

happy to see the rebirth of the Church set in motion ... Consequently, it would not have

you limit yourselves to the ancestral Canons, but to proceed to radical measures."xxvi

Archpriest George Lardas recorded, when as a seminarian, the following

information in his unpublished history:

Archbishop Chrysostom Papadopoulos obtained from the Synod a

resolution giving him the authority to make a change in the calendar, if the

rest of the Orthodox Churches complied with the decision of the Congress

of 1923 and with the approval of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. In fact, no

other Orthodox Church was seriously contemplating such a change,

including the Ecumenical Patriarchate, for Patriarch Meletios was driven

from Constantinople by his own flock at the end of the Congress in 1923. He

was succeeded by Patriarch Gregory who was preoccupied with putting the

Church in Constantinople in order after the exchange of populations

between Greece and Turkey. Archbishop Chrysostom obtained a resolution

on the condition that he supply the Greek Synod with proof in the form of

written evidence that the various local Churches had approved the new

calendar at the "Pan-Orthodox" Congress earlier that year. He failed to

produce the evidence.

For the next two months, Archbishop Chrysostom conducted correspondence with

Ecumenical Patriarch Gregory trying to persuade him to accept the new calendar, but

Patriarch Gregory hesitated, asking letters from the other Orthodox Churches.

Archbishop Chrysostom had already decided the matter, that the change should take

place on March 10/23, 1924. As that date approached and nothing was forthcoming from

Constantinople, Archbishop Chrysostom used the offices of the Greek Ministry of Foreign

Affairs to put pressure on Patriarch Gregory. He requested that the Ministry inform the

Eastern Churches that the Church of Greece was putting to effect the "decision" of the

Ecumenical Patriarchate to reform the calendar, and to inform the Patriarchate in

17 | P a g e

particular that this had already been decided by the Church of Greece. This letter was

dated March 4, 1924. It is no secret that the Ecumenical Patriarchate is dependent on the

Greek state for [financial] support and hardly oppose its wishes. The calendar change took

place on March 10/23, 1924 as planned. It was announced by an encyclical signed only by

Archbishop Chrysostom on behalf of the Synod of the Church of Greece only seven days

before the change. It was disseminated by telegraph to the various newspapers and was

published that Sunday, March 3/16, 1924.

The immediate reaction of the other local Orthodox Churches was strongly

negative, The Patriarch of Jerusalem emphasized that the new calendar was unacceptable

to his Church because of the dangers of Latin proselytism at the Holy Places. The

Patriarch of Antioch saw it as a danger to the unity of the Church. Only the Churches of

Constantinople and Romania accepted the change.

The strongest opposition to the calendar change was on the part of Patriarch

Photios of Alexandria. He called a local Synod in Alexandria in which it was decided that

there was absolutely no necessity to change the calendar, and having consulted with

Patriarch Gregory of Antioch, Patriarch Damianos of Jerusalem, and Archbishop Cyril of

Cyprus, it was decided that there should be no change. The Synod expressed sorrow and

pain that such a thing should be considered at all and [declared] that this change was a

danger to the unity of the Orthodox faithful not only in Greece but everywhere. xxvii

However, even the Patriarchate of Alexandria finally succumbed. The

circumstances that brought this about are as follows:

After the Constantinopolitan Congress of 1923, which accepted the new calendar,

Ecumenical Patriarch Meletios Metaxakis — as mentioned above — had to flee for his life

from his angry flock because of his innovations and also because of the political and

military reversals Greece suffered at the hands of Kemal Ataturk's military forces in Asia

Minor in 1924. He came finally to Alexandria in 1926 where, with political support, he

succeeded Patriarch Photios, who had strongly objected to the change of the calendar. Not

dissuaded by his predecessor's confession, Metaxakis introduced the new calendar there.

The Patriarchate of Alexandria, nonetheless, remained in sympathy to the traditional

Orthodox Christians in Greece, especially when Patriarch Christopher (1939 - 1966), the

18 | P a g e

former Metropolitan of Leontopolis in Egypt, was raised to the throne of Alexandria.

However, Patriarch Christopher, because of pressure from the Greek government, was

unable to restore the traditional church calendar to the Patriarchate of Alexandria. The

Greek government's "revolutionary reforms" and concerns over the unity of "the Greek

diaspora" apparently had precedence over the Church's unity and its conciliar decisions.

The State Church of Greece and its use of the New Calendar was now

the official Church. The Old Calendarists were considered the evildoers and

schismatics because of their refusal to accept the Roman Catholic Calendar

and their refusal to regard all denominations and sects as "Christian

brothers and sisters" regardless of what these sects believed or taught as

doctrine. To the Old Calendarists, this form of false ecumenical activity and

false Christian unity became a denial of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, so

strong were their convictions.

19 | P a g e

The Ancient Persecutions of the Church Returns in

the 20th Century

This led naturally to the persecution of "Old Calendarists" who maintained that

they were the True or Genuine "Church of Greece" and that those who were now observing

the "New" or "Roman Catholic Calendar" were the Innovators by trying to invent

something unknown to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Eastern Orthodox Church.

The official "New Calendarists" aka “Modernists Orthodox” were backed by

the Greek government because of the fact that the government felt that this

new "Ecumenism" was what the Greek people needed. Those in worldly positions

of authority welcomed and encouraged the "Ecumenical" activity, contact with, as well as

joint public prayer with members of Protestant Reformation Denominations and their

more radical "Sects"! The Greek government of the time was embarrassed by the

Traditional, Old Calendar Orthodox Church. They were trying to, as they put it,

move the Orthodox Church into the 20th Century. They beat their drum to the dictum of

"The Orthodox Church must keep in step with the times"! Sadly, they only achieved in

creating a false alternative to the Church of Christ. For as soon as error and innovations

was embraced then to be promoted by the Hierarchy is the moment the Church in her

stewardship no longer was the Mystical Body of Christ, His Church, thus they and their

Mysteries were then without God’s Grace.

With the financial support of the Greek government, the innovating, "Church" of

the New Calendar prospered and grew. With this, the persecution of "Old Calendarists"

bishops, parishes and laity also grew. From the very beginning, the Old Calendarists were

violently persecuted by the police authorities at the behest of Archbishop Chrysostom

Papadopoulos of the official, innovating,

On April 24, 1926, the official State Church of Greece issued a most severe

encyclical, Protocol Number 2398/2203, directed against Traditional Orthodox

Christians. This encyclical state the following:

20 | P a g e

They separate themselves from the Church and cut themselves off from the

Body of Christ, drawing upon themselves condemnation and

excommunication, not knowing, or perhaps forgetting, that he who does not

hear the Church is "as the heathen man and publican" [Matthew

18:17]....The decisions of the Church are absolutely obligatory; he who does

not obey them no longer belongs to her; he is deprived of the means of

divine grace; he is separated and cut off from her, and is liable to eternal

torment.

This encyclical is from a church body that only two years before had itself trampled

underfoot the "decisions of the Church" by recognizing the non-Orthodox as "fellow heirs

of God in Jesus Christ"! The heterodox apparently presented no problems. But, being a

Traditionalist "Old Calendar" Orthodox Christian meant a person did not have a share in

that heritage and was "as a heathen man and the publican" and was "deprived of divine

grace." xxviii

Catherine Routis, killed by the police in November of 1927. Attacks on the faithful

such as the one from which she died were always carried out at the behest of the new

calendar Archbishop of Athens, Chrysostom Papadopoulos, State

Church of Greece. To cite one instance, after a Liturgy celebrated on

the Feast of the Holy Archangels on November 8, 1927, the faithful

who were leaving a church building at Mandra of Attica were assaulted

by the police. Two women were hospitalized, one for a gunshot injury

and the other with head injuries from a clubbing by police when she

tried to protect the priest. This woman, now saint Catherine Routis, a new martyr

indeed, the young mother of two children, died a week later on November 15th. A fuller

account may be read here.

21 | P a g e

above ikon, Holy New Martyr Catherine Routis of Atikka killed by the police in November of 1927. Attacks on the faithful such as the one from which she died while protecting her parish priest were always carried out at the behest of the new calendar

Archbishop of Athens, Chrysostom Papadopoulos

In the face of such persecution of the faithful, there was the forced closure and

demolition of their places of worship by the official authorities. Also, by official decree,

Genuine Traditionalist Orthodox Christians (in Greek or G.O.C. in English) were now

supposedly "deprived of the means of divine grace." By 1930 there were about eight

hundred chapters of the G.O.C. in existence throughout Greece. The G.O.C. continued to

submit appeals to the new calendar Synod of the Church of Greece in 1929 and 1933,

pointing out the condemnation of the Gregorian calendar by three Pan-Orthodox

Councils. They called for a return to the traditional calendar in order to avoid schism in

the Church of Greece.xxix Furthermore, even many clergy who had submitted to the

government's decree very, very strongly protested the change.

22 | P a g e

The Miraculous Appearance of The Cross,

September 14, 1925

On the night of the Feast of the Exaltation of the Precious and Life-giving Cross,

September 14, 1925, according to the traditional ecclesiastical calendar a most wonderful

and marvelous miracle of God shone forth. The G.O.C. were given great spiritual strength

by the miraculous appearance of the Cross over the Chapel of Saint John the Theologian

on Mount Hymettos outside Athens. Over two thousand people witnessed the vision,

including the police sent to disband the vigil service and arrest the priest. The miraculous

vision made a profound impression on everyone, and the faithful — including the now-

converted police — continued the service without interruption. xxx

Although there were eleven bishops of the official new calendar State Church who

deeply sympathized and supported the grand effort of the confession of the G.O.C. in

Greece, most were deterred by fear of persecution and the loss of their income from the

government. In May of 1935, however, Metropolitans Germanos of Demetrias,

Chrysostom of Florina, and Chrysostem of Zaknynthos [who was accepted by the first two

23 | P a g e

by the laying on of hands, since he was consecrated after the calendar change], seeing that

their pleas to the official State Synod went unheeded, announced that from henceforth

they would take up the pastoral care of the G.O.C. in Greece and would form the Synod of

the G.O.C. ( in Greek) of the Traditional Church of Greece.

At the order of Chrysostom Papadopoulos, new calendar Archbishop of Athens,

police attack Traditional G.O.C. faithful who had gathered peacefully in front of the

Metropolia Cathedral of Athens, June, 1935.

On May 13, 1935, in the presence of some 25,000 faithful, Metropolitans Germanos

of Demetrias, Chrysostom of Florina, and Chrysostom of Zakynthos consecrated the first

of four new bishops for the G.O.C. in Greece: Germanos of the Cyclades Islands. On

subsequent days, the following were consecrated: Christopher of Megaris, Polycarp of

Diavlia, and Matthew, as a suffragan Bishop of Bresthena. These seven bishops had

Germanos of Demetrias as their president. Metropolitan Germanos had been first in

seniority after Archbishop Chrysostom Papadopoulos of the official State Church.

Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina was one of the most erudite and respected hierarchs

of the official State Church of Greece and now of the or G.O.C. (Genuine Orthodox

Christian) Traditional Church of Greece.

The three Metropolitans who returned to the traditional Church calendar in May

of 1935. From left to right: Chrysostom of Florina, Germanos of Demetrias, and

Chrysostom of Zakynthos.

The actions and declarations of the G.O.C. Synod of Bishops provoked the intense

wrath of the official State Church and government authorities. As a result, the seven

bishops were immediately arrested by the government at the instigation of the official

State Church and brought to ecclesiastical trial in June of 1935, on charges of causing

division and disturbance by organizing "unlawful assemblies," and of showing contempt

for the "legal" and "canonical" church. During this trial, which took place in the

Metropolitan Cathedral of Athens, a large crowd led by forty priests and sixty monastics

gathered quietly in the square in front of the cathedral to chant the Supplicatory Canon

to the Mother of God. This orderly assembly was assaulted by the police and dispersed

24 | P a g e

with fire-hoses and clubs, and over 100 were injured, one of whom was the future

Archbishop Auxentius of Athens and All Greece.

The result of this trial was announced on June 15, 1935. Three of the bishops —

Germanos of Demetrias, Chrysostom of Florina, and Germanos of the Cyclades Islands —

were banished; Matthew of Bresthena, on account of illness, was confined to his

monastery; Chrysostom of Zakynthos, Polycarp of Diavlia, and Christopher of Megaris

recanted and returned to the official State Church.

Before the hierarchs were sent off to their places of exile and imprisonment, they

were able to address their flock with one last Pastoral Encyclical. Since the new

Calendarists refused to end their schism and to recognize the holy Mysteries of the G.O.C.

[while, nonetheless, recognizing the sacraments and priestly orders of the non-Orthodox],

the Synod of Bishops of the G.O.C. of Greece published their Pastoral Encyclical, stating

officially that the official new calendar State Church was in schism and that its mysteries

were invalid — that is to say, they simply affirmed what Chrysostom Papadopoulos

himself had said only one year before he became Archbishop and changed the calendar.xxxi

Below is the text of the Pastoral Encyclical of the Holy Synod of the G.O.C. Traditional Church of Greece: (24)

25 | P a g e

_______________________________________

PASTORAL ENCYCLICAL TO THE ORTHODOX GREEK PEOPLExxxii

Unjustly condemned by the schismatic Synod to deposition and a five-year imprisonment in monasteries, and seized by force by the government [which has become the executory arm of the (new calendar) Archdiocese, which by its mere word has placed itself above the divine canons, the (Church's) Charter, and the Constitution of Greece] because we had the courage and spiritual strength to raise the glorious and venerable banner of Orthodoxy, we consider it our pastoral duty before we depart [for prison] to direct the following admonitions to you that adhere to the Orthodox festal calendar of our fathers: While faithfully following the Apostle's admonition, "Stand fast and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or by our letter," do not cease from struggling by every lawful and Christian means for the strengthening and triumph of our sacred struggle, which looks to the restoration of the patristic and Orthodox festal calendar within the Church; only this can re-establish the diminished Orthodox authority of the Greek Church and bring back the peace and unity of the Orthodox Greek people. By the judgments which the Lord knows, the majority of the hierarchy of the Greek Church, under the influence and initiative of its president, has placed the blot of schism upon what up until now had been its pure and truly Orthodox countenance, when it rejected the Orthodox festal calendar — which has been consecrated by the Seven Ecumenical Councils and ratified by the age-long practice of the Orthodox Eastern Church — and replaced it with the papal calendar. Of course, this schism of the Orthodox Greek people was created by the majority of the hierarchy, which forgot its sacred and national mission and the old Greek [revolutionary] slogan: "Fight for Orthodoxy and for Greek liberty," and which, without the agreement of all the Orthodox Churches, introduced the papal festal calendar into our divine worship, thereby dividing not only the Orthodox Churches, but also the Orthodox Christians into two opposing camps. In assuming the pastorship of the Orthodox Greek populace that follows the Orthodox festal calendar of our fathers, and being conscious of the oath of faith that we took that we would keep all that we have received from the seven Ecumenical Councils, we abjure every innovation and can not but proclaim as schismatic the State Church, which has accepted the papal festal calendar which has been described by Pan-Orthodox Councils as an innovation of the heretics and as an arbitrary trampling underfoot of the divine and sacred canons of the ecclesiastical traditions. On account of this, we counsel all who follow the Orthodox festal calendar to have no spiritual communion with the schismatic Church and its schismatic ministers, from whom the grace of the All-holy Spirit has departed, since they have set at nought the resolutions of the Fathers of the Seven Ecumenical Councils and the Pan-Orthodox Councils that

26 | P a g e

condemned the Gregorian festal calendar. The fact that the Schismatic Church does not have grace and the Holy Spirit is confirmed by Saint Basil the Great, who says: "Even though the schismatics have not erred in doctrines, yet because Christ is the Head of the Body of the Church, according to the divine Apostle, and from Him are all the members quickened and receive spiritual increase, the [schismatics] have been torn from the consonance of the members of the Body and no longer have the grace of the Holy Spirit abiding with them. And how, indeed, can they impart to others that which they have not?" While the Schismatic Church imposes oppressive and intolerable measures in order to violate our Orthodox conscience, we exhort you to endure all things and to preserve the Orthodox heritage intact and unstained, even as we received it from our pious Fathers, having us as luminous and fortifying examples, seeing we are not afraid — even in the waning years of our lives — to withstand with boldness and dignity the bigoted and medieval measures of our exile and imprisonment in monasteries, as it were in prisons. Esteeming this as honor and glory and joy, according to the Apostle, who enjoins us to rejoice and boast in or sufferings in behalf of Christ, we counsel you also to have endurance and persistence in these griefs, and afflictions, and evils, and outrages to which you will be subjected by a Church that is schismatic; and ever hope in God, Who will not permit that you be tried above what you are able to endure, and Who, in His infinite and unfathomable long-suffering, will be well-pleased to enlighten those who, out of innocence, have been led astray and follow the papal festal calendar; and in the end may he grant you the triumph of Orthodoxy and the unity of those who bear the name of Christ, the Orthodox Greek people, for whom we struggle to the glory of Christ, Whose grace and infinite mercy be with you all. June 21, 1935

† Germanos of Demetrias

† Chrysostom of Florina

† Germanos of the Cyclades Islands

_______________________________________

Later in that year (1935), with the installation of the Prime Minister, George

Kondylis, who ironically, as it turned out, found this religious persecution politically

embarrassing, the four bishops were released and allowed to return to Athens.xxxiii

Metropolitans Germanos of Demetrias, Chrosostom of Florina, Germanos of the Cyclades

Islands, and Matthew, Bishop of Bresthena, now constituted the Holy Synod of the

27 | P a g e

Εκκλησία Γνήσιων Ορθοδόξων Χριστιανών i.e., Ekklisía Gnísion Orthodóxon Christianón

[ Γ. Ο. Χ. = G.O.C. or sometimes T(rue) O.C.] Genuine Orthodox Christian Church.

St. Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina & His Struggle for Unity and Truth

In 1937, Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina, in a personal letter to Bishop

Germanos of the Cyclades Islands, set forth the opinion that the official State Church was

in "potential schism."

It is evident from this letter that Metropolitan

Chrysostom was attempting to deal with what —

especially in the early years — had become a complex

state of affairs. There were contradictory elements in the

calendar dispute that caused considerable confusion in the

ranks of the G.O.C. as to how they should address the

issues. The main cause of this confusion was the

ambivalence of the new calendar bishops themselves.

One the one hand, it was clear that in itself the

change of the calendar was not a direct change of doctrine, although it did violate the

Church's oneness by disrupting its liturgical unity. On the other, it was equally clear — as

the Ecumenical Patriarchate's Encyclical of 1920 affirmed — that the calendar change was

only "step one" in a rapprochement with the heterodox denominations and sects. This

was a doctrinal issue. Furthermore, although the new official Synod of the innovating

Church of Greece had, by majority of vote, adopted and issued an Encyclical in April of

1926 declaring that the G.O.C. of the Old Calendar Church of Greece and their mysteries

were "bereft of the means of divine grace," and although the Ecumenical Patriarchate in

its notorious Encyclical of 1920 had recognized heterodox denominations and sects as

"Churches of Christ" and "fellow heirs of God," there was nonetheless, a sizeable number

of new calendar hierarchs who rejected these theological innovations and supported the

Church's traditional teaching. Also, although there were new calendar bishops in Greece

who viciously persecuted the G.O.C. of the Old Calendar Church of Greece, and desecrated

1Saint Chrysostom the New

28 | P a g e

their churches and even the Holy Mysteries, there were also new calendar bishops who

sympathized with, supported, and assisted the Genuine Orthodox Christians. Finally,

whereas the Pan-Orthodox Councils of the sixteenth century had placed

under anathema anyone who would change the calendar and the Paschalion,

(the method of reckoning the date of Pascha each year), the official, new calendar Synod

of Greece had indeed, on the one hand, adopted the change of the calendar, but, on the

other, had avoided tampering with the Paschalion, which had been instituted by the First

Ecumenical Council in 325A.D., and which, they say, was alone binding on all

Orthodox.xxxiv

In view of these unprecedented developments, it became evident — to

Metropolitan Chrysostom, at least — that there was no clear answer except "wait and see,"

and because of this, he modified and softened his original position. In addition, he initially

had sincere and, as it appeared to him, justified hopes that a Pan-Orthodox Council of all

the other local churches would soon convene to condemn, once again, these innovations

and put a stop to them, and that the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Church of Greece

would soon return to the G.O.C. of the Old Calendar Church of Greece and the observance

of the Church ("Julian") Calendar. Furthermore, a number of government officials and

ministers promised to support the G.O.C.'s call for an end to the calendar innovation.

Alas, subsequent events demonstrated that Metropolitan Chrysostom's hopes were in

vain.

In November 1937 Metropolitan Chrysostom wrote a lengthy "personal" letter to

Bishop Germanos of the Cyclades Islands. This letter had to do with the manner of

reception of converts from the new calendar church. Both Metropolitan Chrysostom and

Bishop Germanos were of the same mind. That is, that a convert should be received by

confession of faith alone. However, Bishop Germanos had changed his views and now was

of the mind of Bishop Matthew of Bresthena — that is, that all new Calendarists should

be received by holy chrismation since according to strict interpretation of the canons that

deal with schism, grace had departed from the official State Church. However

Metropolitan Chrysostom felt that decisions such as this should be decided at a Pan-

Orthodox Council where all the Orthodox Churches were present. In his letter to Bishop

Germanos, Metropolitan Chrysostom was rather harsh in his style and wording to Bishop

Germanos. Bishop Germanos' change in position concerning reception of new

29 | P a g e

Calendarists deeply wounded Metropolitan Chrysostom and prompted him to write yet

another letter to Bishop Germanos.

It is truly noteworthy to point out that in these letters Metropolitan Chrysostom

emphasizes that in the year 1937 he was expressing his "personal and completely private

opinion" concerning the status of official new calendar Church. Thirteen years later, in

1950, not in a personal and private letter, but in an official Encyclical, together with his

entire Holy Synod, he will ament his purely personal opinion.

Although the President of the Synod of the G.O.C., Germanos of Demetrias, agreed

with Metropolitan Chrysostom's view. Bishops Germanos of the Cyclades Islands and

Matthew of Bresthena viewed this position as a betrayal. Hence, they separated

themselves from Metropolitans Chrysostom and Germanos over this issue. Later, Bishops

Matthew and Germanos of the Cyclades disagreed over yet some other issue and

separated from each other. xxxv

As a result of these divisions, the followers of Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina

[who were in the great majority] came to be known as "Florinites," and those who

followed Bishop Matthew came to be called "Matthewites." In 1943, during the Nazi

occupation of Greece, Metropolitan Germanos of Demetrias died, leaving Metropolitan

Chrysostom by himself.xxxvi However, in 1944, Christopher of Christianopolis (formerly of

Megaris) and Polycarp of Diavlia, two of the bishops who had been consecrated in 1935

by Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina and Germanos of Demetrias and had

subsequently recanted and rejoined the official State Church because of persecution,

returned again to the G.O.C. Traditional Church of Greece headed by Metropolitan

Chrysostom. In addition, Germanos of the Cyclades, who had separated from

Metropolitan Chrysostom, was again meeting with him at this time, seeking to resolve

their differences. These developments appeared to lend support at the time to

Metropolitan Chrysostom's manner of dealing with the new calendar schism.

Meanwhile, Bishop Matthew, now alone, eventually despaired of finding bishops

who shared his own views. Hence, in violation of the First Apostolic Canon he

30 | P a g e

consecrated, single-handedly, four new bishops in August of 1948. The bishops' names

and titles were Spyridon of Trimythus, Andrew of Patras, Demetrios of Thessalonica, and

Kallistos of Corinth. One of these bishops, the saintly Spyridon of Trimythus, spent the

last years of his life in seclusion, refusing to celebrate as a hierarch because he had

repented of being consecrated in this completely uncanonical way. These unlawful

consecrations were a blow to many of Bishop Matthew's

supporters; and many clergy, monastics, and laity left him,

since they were unable to accept his uncanonical course of

action. They argued: "How can we censure others for not

keeping the holy canons, when we ourselves violate basic

canons concerning the consecration of bishops?" Although

Bishop Matthew's integrity, personal virtue, and asceticism

were admitted by all, his course of action only widened the

division between the "Matthewites" and "Florinites."

In January of 1950, Metropolitan Germanos of the Cyclades, who had been

imprisoned for ordaining priests, was released and was once again united with the G.O.C.

Traditional Church of Greece and Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina. This brought great

joy to all the Old Calendar G.O.C. of the Traditional Church of Greece.

The "Matthewites" and "Florinites." made many attempts at reconciliation, but all

were unsuccessful. Stavros Karamitsos, a theologian and author of the book The Agony in

the Garden of Gethsemane, describes as an eye-witness the two instances in which

metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina personally attempted to meet with Bishop Matthew.

Unfortunately, on both occasions the abbess and senior nuns of the Keratea Convent, at

the prompting of Matthewite protopresbyter, Eugene Tombros, intervened and would not

allow Metropolitan Chrysostom to speak with Bishop Matthew. In May of 1950, when

Bishop Matthew was on his deathbed and had been unconscious for three days,

Metropolitan Chrysostom arrived at Bishop Matthew's quarters and approached his

bedside. Standing at his side, Metropolitan Chrysostom bowed down and quietly asked

him, "My holy brother, how are you feeling?" To the astonishment of all present, Bishop

Matthew regained consciousness and opened his eyes. When he saw the Metropolitan, he

sought to sit up out of deference and began to whisper something faintly. At that very

moment, the Abbess Mariam of the Convent of Keratea entered the room with several

31 | P a g e

other sisters and demanded that all the visitors leave. Only a few days later, on May 14,

1950, Bishop Matthew died, and the two hierarchs were never again to meet in this life.

On May 26, 1950 — some twenty-six years after the calendar innovation — seeing

that the new Calendarists of the official church showed no signs of changing direction

despite the many appeals addressed to the Holy Synod of the official State Church,

Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina and the other bishop of the G.O.C. Synod, published

an encyclical, in which they said that the time had arrived to apply more strictly the

canons that deal with schism. Henceforth, in accordance with the First Canon of Saint

Basil the Great. The mysteries of the official State Church were to be considered invalid

and those who belonged to the official State Church were to be received into the G.O.C.

by holy chrismation. The encyclical was signed by Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina,

who was now presiding bishop of the Synod of the Traditional Church of Greece of

Genuine Orthodox Christians, as well as being signed by Metropolitans Germanos of the

Cyclades, Christopher of Christianopolis (formerly of Megaris), and Polycarp of Diavlia.

(above photo) Metropolitans Germanos of the Cyclades, Chrysostom of Florina, Christopher of

Christianopolis (formerly of Megaris), and Polycarp of Diavlia, 1944

_______________________________________

32 | P a g e

The text of this encyclical is as follows:

TO THE MOST REVEREND PRIESTS OF OUR MOST HOLY CHURCH OF THE GENUINE ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS IN GREECE xxxvii May 26, 1950 Protocol Number 13 Beloved Children in the Lord, Grace and peace be unto you from God, and prayer and blessing from us. Taking into consideration reports that some of our most pious priests are negligent in fulfilling the duties on the basis of the canons and the confession [of faith] we made in the year of Salvation, 1935, the Sacred Synod of our Most Holy Church undertakes to remind all of the following: In the year of Salvation, 1935, we proclaimed the Church of the innovating new Calendarists schismatic; we reiterate this proclamation once again and, consequently, we enjoin that the First Canon of Saint Basil the Great be applied, given that the mysteries celebrated by the new Calendarists are — since they are schismatics — deprived of sanctifying grace. Hence, you must not receive any new Calendarists into the bosom of our Most Holy Church, nor, as a consequence, minister unto them without their having previously made a confession [of faith], whereby they condemn the innovation of the new Calendarists and proclaim their Church as schismatic. Those who have been baptized by the innovators should be Chrismated with holy chrism of Orthodox provenance, which also we have in sufficiency. On this occasion we direct this final appeal to all Genuine Orthodox Christians, inviting them paternally to unite with us. The furtherance of our struggle for the piety of our Fathers demands this and is the fervent desire of all of us. In extending this invitation to you, we do away with the stumbling-blocks that were created through our responsibility, and to this end we revoke and repudiate whatever was written or spoken by us from 1937 until today, either in sermons, pronouncements, publications, or encyclicals, and whatever was incompatible with or contrary to the principles of the Eastern Orthodox Church of Christ and our sacred struggle in behalf of Orthodoxy, as it was proclaimed in the encyclical published by the Sacred Synod in the year 1935, without any addition or omission, including even the technical phrase "potentially and in actuality". These things do we affirm this final time for the sake of the scandalized Christians, whose spiritual salvation we desire; and on this occasion we [again] proclaim that all of us must preserve intact even to the end of our days the confession we made in 1935, invoking God's mercy for every deviation. Wherefore, let us stand well. With fervent prayers, The Sacred Synod. The President †Chrysostom, formerly Metropolitan of Florina The Members † Germanos, Metropolitan of the Cyclades Islands † Christopher, Metropolitan of Christianopolis † Polycarp, Metropolitan of Diavlia

_______________________________________

33 | P a g e

The reaction of Archbishop Spyridon of the official State Church was immediate.

The most violent and ruthless persecution of the Genuine Orthodox Church now broke

out and lasted for five years (1950 - 1955). "In a memorandum to the Greek government

in June of 1950, Archbishop Spyridon Vlahos stated that Old Calendarism was more

dangerous to the nation than any propaganda, and more dangerous even than

Communism [!], and that the Old Calendar movement was just as much a vanguard of

pan-Slavism as Communism, and was part of an attempt to enslave the Greek nation. He

suggested that the State abolish all Old Calendarists societies and make Old Calendarism

equivalent to rebellion (treason); furthermore, he proposed [that the government

institute]

BEFORE

AFTER

BEFORE

AFTER

Archimandrite Gerasimos Skourtaniotis Fr. Nicholas Smyrlis of Kalamata

Before and After being forcibly stripped of their priestly garb and forcefully shaven by

the police authorities, at the behest of the new calendar Archbishop of Athens, during

the persecutions of the early 1950's. This was an attempt to completely wipe out the

G.O.C. Traditional Church of Greece. The G.O.C.'s only crime was trying to keep the

faith and calendar passed on to them by their Spiritual Fathers!!!

... police surveillance and deportation of monastics to Mount Athos, and that the baptisms

and weddings [of the traditional Orthodox] not be recognized by the State as valid. In

comparing Old Calendarism with communism and identifying it with pan-Slavism,

Archbishop Spyridon was playing on the fears of communism and the bitter memories

arising out of the [Greek] civil war of 1945 - 49.

"On January 3, 1951, the Cabinet of Ministers of the Greek Government enacted a

decree (No. 45) of persecution of the Genuine Orthodox Christians by the State.".xxxviii

34 | P a g e

Procession to the burial place

of Metropolitan Germanos of

the Cyclades. The authorities

refused to allow a funeral, or

even a memorial service for

him

Metropolitan

Chrysostom of

Florina under

arrest

Procession with the newly

reposed Metropolitan

Chrysostom of Florina,

September 8, 1955

The Blessed Repose of

Metropolitan

Chrysostom of Florina,

September 8, 1955

Archimandrite Gerasimos Skourtaniotis of the Holy Transfiguration Monastery,

Attica, and Fr. Nicholas Smyrlis of Kalamata (the two photos on the right) before and after

being forcibly stripped of their priestly garb and forcefully shaven by the police

authorities, at the behest of the new calendar Archbishop of Athens, during the

persecutions of the early 1950's. This was an attempt to completely wipe out the G.O.C.

Traditional Church of Greece. The G.O.C.'s only crime was trying to keep the faith and

calendar passed on to them by their Spiritual Fathers!!!

Hence, the church buildings of the traditional Christians were closed, confiscated,

or demolished. During Holy and Great Friday, the Epitaphios [Plashanitsa] [Winding

Sheet] processions of the faithful were broken up by police and the Epitaphios's were

overturned and thrown to the ground. The clergy and monks were hauled into police

stations where they were forcibly shaved and stripped of their clerical garb. Holy Tables

were overturned, the holy Mysteries desecrated. This persecution was motivated only by

the malice against the G.O.C. for their confession of faith: the church buildings, clergy and

faithful of the heterodox denominations and sects throughout Greece remained safe and

sound.

"On the first of February, 1951, Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina, who was in

hiding, was discovered, arrested and exiled. He was eighty-two years old at the time.

Metropolitan Germanos of the Cyclades, who also was in hiding reposed during this

35 | P a g e

period. The civil and church authorities refused permission for a church funeral for

Metropolitan Germanos, nor would they allow any priest to serve even a memorial service.

Hence, he was buried by laymen. Many traditional Orthodox clergy who came to the burial

were arrested.

"In February of 1954, Metropolitans Christopher and Polycarp, despairing of the

future of the Genuine Orthodox Church under such persecutions, again capitulated and

returned to the official State Church.".xxxix

As a result of this, Chrysostom of Florina remained alone

as the head of the much larger group of the Genuine Orthodox

Church until his death. Several candidates for the episcopacy

were presented to him. Bishop Nikolai (Velimirović) of the

Serbian Church, who was then residing in the United States,

offered to help him consecrate new bishops. However, although

he could have done so had he chosen, Metropolitan Chrysostom

declined to consecrate any of the candidates. In answer to the

pleas of his flock for bishops, he directed that they come to terms

with the bishops Matthew had consecrated and have them somehow regularized

according to the canons. While matters stood thus, a full five years after his Encyclical

of 1950, Metropolitan Chrysostom reposed on September 7, 1955. Could it be that

Metropolitan Chrysostom saw into the future and had something better prepared for his

faithful flock of the G.O.C. in Greece? Could it be that this was the reason he did not

choose to have any of the candidates presented to him consecrated to the episcopacy?

On September 25, 1955, in the Patriarchal Church of Saint Sabbas the Sanctified

in Alexandria, Egypt, Patriarch Christopher of Alexandria presided at a solemn memorial

service for the repose of the soul of Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina. Three years later,

his grave at the Convent of the Dormition of the Theotokos in Parnitha, Attica was opened

and his remains were found to be fragrant. In fact, the fragrance was so strong that lay

workers came to ask what the source was of this sweet aroma that had filled the entire

surrounding area.

36 | P a g e

After the death of Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina, his flock was left without

bishops. For various reasons — but primarily because of Bishop Matthew's uncanonical

consecrations — they could not reconcile themselves to Matthew's Synod. For the time

being the affairs of the Genuine Orthodox Church (G.O.C.) Were managed by a twelve-

member ecclesiastical commission. Some of the bishops of the official State Church —

such as Metropolitan Evloghius of Korytsa — seemed sympathetic and interested in

assisting the Traditionalist G.O.C. Movement, but nothing actually came to pass. In

November of 1958, Patriarch Christopher also interceded for the G.O.C. before the Greek

government and the official State Church, but to no avail.xl

In December of 1960, Archimandrite Akakios Pappas traveled to the United States

to petition the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia to consecrate bishops for the

G.O.C... This was not the first time the G.O.C. Had petitioned the Russian Orthodox

Church Abroad to consecrate bishops.

Metropolitan Anastasy of the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia, well

known for his extreme caution, decided that there was no need to get involved with any

haste. However, Archbishop Seraphim of Chicago [who received the monastic

tonsure on the Holy Mountain and was acquainted with the zealot movement there] and

Bishop Theophil Ionescu of Detroit, both of the Russian Orthodox Church

outside Russia, agreed to consecrate Archimandrite Akakios, who received the title

"Bishop of Talantion" [in Greece]. This consecration was done without the blessing and

knowledge of Metropolitan Anastasy who was the Chief Hierarch of the Synod of the

Russian Church outside Russia. In addition, because of the uncanonical circumstances

under which his consecration had taken place, Bishop Akakios would not reveal what

bishops had consecrated him, nor would he present any certificate of consecration.

Hence, suspicions arose on all sides.

Later, in 1962, Archbishop Leonty of Chile also of the Russian Orthodox

Church outside Russia traveled to Greece and, together with Archbishop Akakios

Pappas, consecrated Parthenios of the Cyclades, Auxentios of Gardikion, and

Chrysostom of Magnesia. The consecrations also were done without the knowledge or

blessing of the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad. Subsequent to these

events, Archimandrite Akakios (the nephew of Archbishop Akakios Pappas of Talantion)

37 | P a g e

was consecrated for the diocese of Diavlia, and Archimandrite Gerontios was

consecrated bishop for Salamis. It should be noted that the above-mentioned

Archimandrite Auxentius — like many other Matthewite priest-monks and monastics —

had left the Synod of Bishop Matthew in protest over Matthew's consecration of bishops

by himself alone. The G.O.C. Old Calendar Church of Greece now had a Synod of six

bishops, with Archbishop Akakios of Talantion as their president. On the sixth of

December, 1963, Metropolitan Parthenios of the Cyclades reposed, followed soon after by

Archbishop Akakios in the same month of the same year. Bishop Auxentius of Gardikion

was then elected and elevated to the Archiepiscopal Throne of Athens and All Greece.

As a result of these developments, the Matthewites, not knowing the full story,

now condemned the uncanonical nature of the consecrations of the Florinite bishops.

Each side was quick to blame the other for not observing the holy canons, while at the

same time justifying its own side's canonical deficiencies as economia. The truth is that,

according to proper canonical order, both sides had flawed episcopal consecrations.

The seriousness of this matter and the controversy it engendered both in Greece and

abroad prompted the G.O.C. Traditional Florinite Synod presided over by Archbishop

Auxentius of Athens and All-Greece to appeal to (now Saint) Metropolitan Philaret

of New York, of Blessed Memory, Chief Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church

outside Russia in 1969. Upon consulting with clergy of Greek background who were under

the omophorion of the Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia and hearing their

positive reports concerning the character of Archbishop Auxentius, Metropolitan Philaret

presented the petition of the Traditional Church of Greece (G.O.C.) to his Holy Synod,

where the matter was discussed.

Thus, on December 18, 1969, Metropolitan Philaret and the entire Synod of the

Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia officially and canonically ratified and

recognized the consecrations of the G.O.C. Traditional Church of Greece of the Florinite

jurisdiction; thereby, they accepted the G.O.C. as the lawful Traditional Church of Greece

under the presidency of Archbishop Auxentius of Athens and All Greece as a sister church

and declared that full ecclesiastical communion should be established. The text of this

decision and the original photographically reproduced document containing the

38 | P a g e

episcopal signatures follows on the next page (in Russian) and on the page thereafter in

English. Cf., footnote xli

39 | P a g e

English translation of the above Encyclical

________________________________

HIERARCHICAL SYNOD RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH

ABROAD 18 / 31 December 1969 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 East 93 St. New York 23. N.Y. Phone: Lehigh 4-1601

To His Beatitude , Archbishop Auxentios

Archbishop of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece

Your Beatitude: Your Beatitude's brotherly epistle of 25 November, 1969, was read by us in a meeting of the Hierarchical Synod on this day.

The many trials that the Orthodox Church has lived through from the beginning of its history, is especially strong in our evil times, and consequently, this especially requires unity between those who hold true to the faith given to us by our Fathers. With these feelings we wish to inform you that the Hierarchical Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad recognizes the authenticity of the episcopal ordinations of your predecessor of blessed memory Archbishop Akakia, and consequent ordinations of those bishops following him in your Holy Church. With this in mind and taking into account also various other circumstances, our Hierarchical Synod is acknowledging your Episcopal Hierarchy as brothers in Christ in full communion with us. May the blessing of God rest upon all the clergy and faithful of your Church, especially during the coming days of the Nativity in the flesh of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

The President of the Hierarchical Synod † Metropolitan Philaret The Members: † Nikon, Archbishop of Washington and Florida

† Seraphim, Archbishop of Chicago and Detroit

† Vitaly, Archbishop of Montreal and Canada

† Anthony, Archbishop of Los Angeles and Texas

† Averky, Archbishop of Syracuse and Holy Trinity Monastery

† Anthony, Archbishop of Western America and San Francisco

† Sava, Bishop of Edmonton

† Nektary, Bishop of Seattle

† Andrei, Bishop of Rockland Member of the Synod and Secretary

† Laurus, Bishop of Manhattan

40 | P a g e

One author in Greece offers what is, perhaps, the best evaluation of the entire

matter regarding the consecration of Archimandrite Akakios Pappas to the episcopacy as

follows:

"The phariseeism of the of the defenders of the new Calendarism and

Ecumenism reaches its apogee when it concerns itself with the consecration of the contemporary old calendar bishops. The agreement of all ecumenistic bishops with Masonic syncretism does not bother them; nor does the fact that most of the new calendar bishops in Greece today are simoniacs and adulterer bishops. Even the question of transferring one bishop from one diocese to another, which at other times unsettled them, does not appear to impress them any longer. One matter alone appears completely unacceptable to them — that the old calendar bishop (Akakios Pappas) was consecrated by two bishops. They rend their clothes and shout, "What further need have we of witnesses?' (Matthew 26:65); the consecration of a bishop by two bishops is uncanonical!".xlii "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye pay tithes of mint and anise and cumin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgement, mercy and faith ... ye blind guides which strain out a gnat, and swallow a camel!" (Matthew 23:23-24).

By using the same method and by applying exactness, one can prove that all the new calendar bishops of the official State Church of Greece are uncanonical. If there were irregularities in the consecration of some old Calendarists, these were dictated by the persecutions they were enduring at the hands of the ecumenists and the unavoidable necessity of the times, and they were later corrected. What necessity, however, dictates the terrible and unforgivable lack of canonicity in the consecration of ecumenist bishops? Besides, as long as they themselves later accept the doctrinal substantiality of the old calendar ordinations (inasmuch as the new Calendarists say that the uncanonicity of a consecration is one issue and its doctrinal substantiality is another), why do they continue to discuss the canonicity of the old calendar consecrations? Even if out of necessity and because of the persecutions, the old Calendarists made some mistakes in their consecrations, nonetheless, they preserved the Faith. The ecumenists, however, violate both the Faith and the canons and are the last to have the right to speak about the violation of the canons. People who consecrate bishops, despite the fact that the laity in the church are shouting, “Anaxios!”, "Unworthy!" and while those standing outside are scornfully hooting both the consecrators and the ones being consecrated, must have much effrontery in order to judge the consecrations of the G.O.C."

It is true that the episcopal consecrations of the G.O.C., all performed under

conditions of duress, confusion and persecution, were, from a strict canonical standpoint,

flawed. In such troubled times, as Church History shows, because of unavoidable

circumstances, irregularities do occur. Had it not been for the decision of a greater synod

41 | P a g e

which examined and regularized these consecrations, as the Synod of the Russian

Orthodox Church Abroad did in 1969 for the Florinites, the consecrations would have

remained deficient and flawed. Our author continues:

"Later, we observe that another hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (Archbishop Leonty of Chile) traveled to Greece and, together with Archbishop Akakios (Pappas), consecrated the rest of the bishops of the G.O.C. of Greece. The agreement of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad for the consecration of the Greek old calendar hierarchs is shown by the subsequent (ex post facto) official recognition of them by the whole Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad in December of 1969. "The consecration of the Genuine Orthodox Bishops of Greece," say the ecumenists, "was performed by bishops of America, an action that is prohibited by the canons." "The Holy Synod of the Church of Greece," they write, "is prohibited from consecrating a bishop or another clergyman for the Church of Cyprus, or of Crete, Serbia, Bulgaria, etc." We agree that this is indeed prohibited when the Churches of Crete, of Cyprus, of Serbia, of Bulgaria, etc., are Orthodox in all things. If, however, it were supposed that the Church of Cyprus had become heretical, would it continue to be prohibited by the canons for the Church of Greece to consecrate one or two bishops for the few remaining Orthodox of Cyprus? Would it not be criminal negligence if she did not perform such consecrations? If the festal calendar had not been changed in Greece; if the innovating bishops had not taken the road of Ecumenism; if Greece, for example, had remained truly Orthodox; then, indeed, the consecration of Greek bishops by the Russian hierarchy in America would have to be considered extra-jurisdictional, and therefore uncanonical. Now, however, not only are they not uncanonical, not only can they not be considered extra-jurisdictional, but on the contrary, they are unto salvation. In this manner was the remnant of grace — the chosen people of the old Calendarists — preserved in Greece. Like Israel of old, in spite of all their provincialism and failings, they serve as a bridge of truth upon which all who still worship God in spirit and in truth will tread in order to cross the raging torrent of the present trial of Ecumenism."

"By 1973, the Synod of the Traditional Church of Greece (G.O.C.) had ten bishops,

123 churches in Greece, thirty-nine monasteries and convents, several charitable

organizations, numerous periodicals, and most of the Traditional Orthodox faithful in

Greece."xliii

His Beatitude Archbishop Auxentius of Athens and All Greece ruled the G.O.C.

Traditional Church of Greece from the Archiepiscopal Throne as chief hierarch for thirty-

one years. He reposed on November 4, 1994.

42 | P a g e

His Beatitude Archbishop Maximos of Athens and All Greece was born in

Cephalonia in 1924. He was tonsured to the Great-Schema (Megaloschema) at the

Monastery of St. Paul on the Holy Mount of Athos in 1946. In 1950 he was ordained

Hierodeacon and then Hieromonk. On February 19, 1979 he was consecrated

Metropolitan of Cephalonia. And, as aforesaid, was raised to the Archiepiscopal Throne

on January 7, 1995.

Unfortunately, during Archbishop Maximos’ Archiepiscopal Ministry there would

be rival autogenic synods and usurpers for the Seat of the Archbishop of Athens and all-

Greece of the Genuine Orthodox Church. Due to such chaos the Greek GOC Archbishopric

remain vacant, as of this writing, following the repose in the Lord of Archbishop Maximos.

However, in the first quarter of this 21st Century, there has been positive movement

amongst these dispersed groups to be united, giving witness as a single ecclesial body.

Meanwhile, six True Orthodox Christian Synods have also come into Eucharistic

Communion as equals; this unity has come to be known as the “The International Union

of Genuine Orthodox Churches”.

Thus Concludes Part One

43 | P a g e

Part II

The Genuine Orthodox Church moves Westward

Going back prior to Archbishop Auxentius’ repose, on June 18, 1978, the Holy

Synod, under Archbishop Auxentius’ presidency, applied Canon CXIX of Carthage in re-

establishing the Orthodox Diocese of Lisbon in Portugal. There had been a sizeable influx

of Western European nationals into the Old

Calendar Greek Church. On 27th March 1984

Archbishops Auxentius and Gabriel of

Lisbon, together with Metropolitans

Maximos, Kallinikos, and Gerasimos,

consecrated Bishop Tiugo (James) of Coirnbru in

Portugal. The opportunity for the evangelical

spread of the True Faith into papist Europe was a

fact not lost on Archbishop Auxentius. But

knowing how Greeks are, he sought to allow the

new Diocese great latitude in its administration.

The Holy Synod of Athens of the traditionalist

Greek Church instructed the bishops in Eparchy of

Lisbon, Gabriel of Lisbon and Tiago of Coimbra, to

consecrate Archimandrite Evloghius

(Hessler) on September 9 as bishop of Milan. and Gregory (Bacolini), Bishop of

Turin on September 22.

The administrative latitude intended came on 14 of September 1984 in the Church

Calendar (Sept 27 ns), with the consent of the Holy Synod, Archbishop Auxentius had

issued the tomos of autonomy to their Western European Eparchy naming them the

Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of Western Europe headquartered in Lisbon,

Portugal. Following the self-determined transference in 1989 of its first Chief Hierarch,

Metropolitan Gabriel of Lisbon, together with his two Portuguese bishops, Tiago di

Coimbra and Teodoro di Evora, took their leave to the schismatic Autocephalous Church

of Poland, Bishop Evloghius of Milan was chosen as second Chief Hierarch. Since his

44 | P a g e

enthronement, Metropolitan Evloghius remains at the helm of the Holy Synod of Milan;

not without some controversy. Metropolia of Western Europe has often been nicknamed

as The Milan Synod. Despite its rocky history The Milan Synod remains among the

Genuine Orthodox Christians in its uses the Julian calendar exclusively, and firmly resists

the heresies of false ecumenism and trans-religious syncretism."

In 1989 Archbishop Evloghius of Milan receives an official acknowledgment of full

communion with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Exile in America led by

Metropolitan Mstyslav I; future and first Patriarch of Kiev in modern times. By this

time, the Old Calendar Church of Greece under Archbishop Auxentios had already been

in communion with this Ukrainian Church. A little known but canonical autocephalous

jurisdiction given its nomenclature as “The Synod of Orthodox Bishops for the Western

Rite” (SOBWR) likewise had already been in communion with this Ukrainian Church in

Exile under Metropolitan Mstyslav. We will have more to say later about the SOBWR. A

more indepth history of the SOBWR is in preparation by this editor and OrthodoxWest™

Publications.

In 1990 On September 27, the Holy Synod, met in the Monastery of Saint Michael

in Flayosc Provence of the South of France. Present were, their Eminences Gregory of

Torino, Vigil of Paris, Evloghius of Milan. At that time, Archbishop Evloghius was elevated

Metropolitan Primate of the Holy Synod of Milan and the Archimandrite Lazar (Puhalo)

of Vancouver (Canada), was elected then consecrated Bishop for Canada on 28

September; today he remains in schism as a retired Archbishop in the modernist

Orthodox Church of America.

The Synod also made a few attempts to mediate the situation among the disparate

factions of the True Orthodox Church in Greece. On one occasion it attempted to repair

the situation with elder Metropolitan Cyprian of Fili and the other True Orthodox. As

such, Metropolitan Evloghius agreed to participate in a consecration of a Bishop to aid

Metropolitan Cyprian, a Bishop Chrysostom of Etna (California, USA). Several visits

45 | P a g e

were made, but, ultimately, the situation among the different fragmented Synods in

Greece proved too difficult in that age to overcome.

Metropolitan Evloghius of Milan (left); next to the

newly consecrated Bishop Chrysostom of Etna

As such, the True Orthodox Church in Western Europe continued to maintain

communion only with Archbishop Auxentius of Athens, learning a valuable lesson about

the unfortunate and conflicting ecclesiastical situation after the various schisms.

Also in 1990, Metropolitan Evloghius became a member of the Holy Synod of the

Kiev Patriarchate under (former, Metropolitan) Patriarch Mstyslav I. In 1993,

Metropolitan Evloghius, on behalf of the Metropolia of Western Europe received its

second Tomos of Autonomy for the Holy Synod of Milan, this time from of the Patriarch

Volodymyr of Kiev. Sadly, however, the situation in Ukraine was to show to be similar

to the one in Greece, as the Patriarchate of Kyiv would eventually split into factions. This

fractionalization forced the Bishops of the Synod of Milan to separate from the newly-

elected Patriarch, former Bishop Filaret (Denisenko, of the Moscow Patriarchate.).

46 | P a g e

Patr. Mstyslav I of Kiev

1st in 20th c.

Patr. Volodymyr of Kiev

2nd in 20th c.

Filaret Denisenko

3rd in 20th c.

The Orthodox Church in the West, after the repose of Archbishop Auxentius in

1994, recognized the election of Metropolitan Maximos of

Cephalonia as the successor to Archbishop Auxentius to the

Archiepiscopal Throne of Athens and all-Greece, of the

Genuine Orthodox Christian Church. While there continued

to be schisms, factions and spin-offs from the authentic

Florinite line amongst the Greeks, todayxliv the True Orthodox

Metropolia of the Americas and British Isles remain

unreservedly canonical with direct descendancy within the

Florinite line of apostolic succession.

Despite the relationship with foreign Orthodox Churches in Greece and the former

Soviet Union, the Synod maintained its firm missionary stance. This resulted in an event

that would later provide safety for our American TOC Church amidst the rocky assaults

on Orthodoxy that were to come.

In photo is Metr. Maximos (left) next to Abp. Auxentios

47 | P a g e

In 1997, The Milan Synod had taken in the original autocephalous jurisdiction,

then known as, the Synod of Orthodox Bishops for the Western Rite (SOBWR),

once headquartered in Woodstock, New York (USA) later transferred to The Abbey of the

Holy Name in West Milford, New Jersey (USA). The two hierarchs of SOBWR +Hilarion

of Austin & all-Western America and +John of New York & all-Eastern America were

received through Cherothesia known as a “correctional ordination”. They then were

organically part of the Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of Western Europe &

Americas.

The Fall of Milan & the Rise of Unity Among the TOC/GOC

In 2011, Archbishop John traveled to Milan Synod headquarters with Hieromonk

Phanurios. On this visit, Archbishop John (LoBue) was formally elevated to the status

of Metropolitan by Metropolitan Evloghius. Hieromonk Phanurios had previously been

elected to serve as a vicar bishop to Metropolitan John; thus, was he consecrated by

Metropolitan John and Metropolitan Evloghius. During this event Metropolitan

Evloghius granted a Tomos of Autonomy to the now former Archdioceses in America of

the Milan Synod. The former American eparchies and British deanery of the Milan Synod

were given the extraneous nomenclature: The Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia

of North and South America and the British Isles. In unofficial, yet common, use

they have come to be referred to as the ‘True Orthodox Metropolia of the Americas and

British Isles’ and alternatively by others as the ‘Anglo-American TOC Metropolia’.

Heretofore, we shall utilize these two short forms of this jurisdiction in reference to it in

this paper.

48 | P a g e

2011 Decree (tomos) of Autonomy given to the former

American Dioceses & UK Deanery of the Synod of Milan.

“The Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of North and South America and the

British Isles was created by order of the Holy Synod of Milan on February 27, 2011. A

complicating factor to the issuance of said Tomos was the issuance of a Tomos giving

jurisdiction over South America to Archbishop Chrysostomos of Ecuador, a Bishop of the

True Orthodox Church of Metropolitan Anghelos, five months before with Metropolitan

Evloghios' signature on it. This has led to jurisdictional overlap between the two Synods,

though in practice such overlap has involved only a few clergy or missions”.xlv

“On April 4, 2011, the Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia formally recognized that, for the

present, communion with the Holy Synod of Milan had been broken by the latter and

reaffirmed its communion with the other True Orthodox churches in communion with

the American Metropolia.”xlvi

Under the influence of a bishop Abundius of Como, soon after the Tomos of

Autonomy was given to the American Hierarchy, Metropolitan Evloghius, declared that

49 | P a g e

he was severing communion with the Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of North and

South America and the British Isles, as well as several Greek Bishops in Greece that he

was in communion with him. Then in contradiction, he applied to join the Moscow

Patriarchate. Many appeals were made to him to renounce this course and re-establish

communion with his former Sister Synods. But this was not new unusual behavior for the

Chief Hierarch of the Milan Synod.

In order to stem the tide of confusion, a Clergy Confession containing a concise

statement of their Synod on key issues concerning Orthodox Christianity was released

with the blessing of Metropolitan John.

“On Sunday, February 12 (NS), Bishop Christodoulos of Miami and Cuba

was consecrated by Metropolitan John of New York and Bishop Fanourius of Lincoln,

with the blessing of Archbishop Hilarion of Texas, at the Holy Archangels Eastern

Orthodox Church in Lincoln, Nebraska. The new Bishop will be the Synod’s

representative for Latin American Parishes.”xlvii

In early 2012 the Moscow Patriarchate instructed Milan to transfer all of their

churches in Italy into the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate, only once these

transfers were completed, Metropolitan Evloghius would be accepted. Again, under

Bishop Abundius’ influence, Metropolitan Evloghius and Bishop Abundius renounced

their Episcopal orders requesting only to be received as archimandrites by Moscow.

Finally, after most of their Churches had been turned over to the MP, Milan Synod was

subsequently informed they would now be received as simple monks not as clergy, but

only as, after they agreed to sign over the main church in Milan and all other property to

the Moscow Patriarchate.

“The only hierarch of the Local Council in Italy who did not accept the condition of

giving up the rank of a bishop to join the Moscow Patriarchate was Archbishop Onufrie

Pop de Sondrio and Vercelli, residing in Bergamo. He stated that there is no church canon

that can be invoked in favor of his renunciation of the rank of archbishop. As a result, the

Omnipotent Dr. Onufrie Pop remained until May 4, 2012, as a priest, pasturing the

Diocese of Sondrio and Vercelli”.xlviii

50 | P a g e

“On May 4, 2012 the Autonomous Orthodox Metropolitanate of America led by

Metropolitan John, in agreement with the Russian Orthodox Metropolitanate led by

Metropolitan Rafael, the Greek Orthodox Metropolitan Church of Avlona, led by

Metropolitan Anghelos, the Bulgarian Orthodox Metropolitanate led by Metropolitan

Daniel and the other Churches in communion as the successor to the metropolitan seat of

the Autonomous Orthodox Metropolis of Western Europe (Metropolitanate of Milan and

Aquileia) to be entrusted to the shepherdess of the (Archbishop) Dr. Onufrie Pop

(as Locum Tenens)”.xlix

That is to say, in light of the disintegration of the Milan Synod, Metropolitan John

had issued a tomos to the only Bishop in Italy that had not gone along with Metropolitan

Evloghius’ submission to the Moscow Patriarchate. This last remaining Bishop was

Metropolitan Onufrie (Pop). Coincidentally, Metropolitan Evloghius had signed over all

the legal titles and names of his Metropolia to Metropolitan Onufrie.

On August 24, 2012 (New Style), Metropolitan John recognized the rights of

Archbishop Onufrie of Bergamol, a Bishop of the Milan Synod who had separated from

the Milan Synod with four parishes in Italy and Spain, as the legitimate head of the Synod

in Italy and he was given the rank and title granted to Metropolitan Evloghios of Milan.

Due to internal issues within the existing communion, however, formal recognition was

never realized. In October 2013, Metropolitan Onufrie issued a Tomos to

Metropolitan Nicholas (Iuhos) of Cincinnati (formerly of the ROCOR-V) to self-

govern; this status was never recognized as valid by the Metropolia and estranged the two

Synods while communications from the Italian Church had ceased for a period of time. In

late 2016 both communication and recognition of the Metropolia of Metropolitan Onufrie

had been established. However, recognition has not been given to Metropolitan Nicholas

(Iuhos) of Cincinnati as of this writing.

51 | P a g e

Protocol No. 7, issued, signed, and stamped by Metropolitan John through which the High Priest Dr. Onufrie Pop is

appointed as Metropolitan of the New Orthodox Christian Autonomous Metropolis after the Old Calendar in Italy

52 | P a g e

In the Americas, “Sunday, February 12 (ns), Bishop Christodoulos of Miami

and Cuba was consecrated by Metropolitan John of New York and Bp Fanourius of

Lincoln, with the blessing of Archbishop Hilarion of Texas, at the Holy Archangels

Eastern Orthodox Church in Lincoln, Nebraska. The new Bishop was assigned to be the

Synod’s representative for Latin American Parishes.”li

Also, in 2012, the Episcopal Receptions of Bishop Sava of Caracas and

Venezuela, who has parishes throughout Argentina ranging from Buenos Aires,

Argentina to a seminary in Caracas, Venezuela. Out of the desire to be part of the True

Orthodox Church he has accepted regularization into True Orthodox Metropolia of the

Americas and British Isles.

In 2013, realizing the failure of their negotiations with, and their foolhardy prelest

regarding, the Moscow Patriarchate, and after having “destroyed the vast majority of any

work accomplished in Italy, the former Metropolitan Evloghius and former Bishop

Abundius, announced that they had ‘resumed’ the episcopate”. Unrepentantly, however,

“the ‘resumed Synod’ of the former Metropolitan Evloghius and Bishop Abundius,

instructed that all the former Synods they had been in communion with were to submit

to them or be ‘deposed’”. Don’t laugh! After what looked like an initial hope of

Metropolitan Evloghius reconciling with his Sister Synods, the hope was soon shattered.

At this point, there appeared no hope of re-establishing Communion.

“In the United States and Canada, the reaction was one of simple disbelief in such

a statement. As a result, a detailed canonical analysis and statement were issued on the

position of the former Metropolitan Evloghius and Bishop Abundius, stating that because

they had renounced their Orders in an attempt to join the Moscow Patriarchate, they had

committed blasphemy according to the Apostolic Canons and Canons of the Ecumenical

Councils, and thus, could not simply ‘resume’ their Orders. The report was issued by

Anglo-American TOC Metropolia’s Committee for Inter-Orthodox and External Church

Relations, on September 27 os / October 10 ns, 2013, chaired by Metropolitan John, with

Hieromonk Enoch (Fetter) and Deacon Finbarr Brandt-Sørheim amongst others, with the

approval of the Synod of Bishops”.

53 | P a g e

Later that year, on August 12 os / August 25 ns, a Synodal Synaxis of hierarchy and

clergy of our Anglo-American TOC Metropolia was held on Mt. Overlook, Woodstock, NY,

at the jurisdiction’s flagship parish church of Holy Transfiguration of Our Lord-on-the-

Mount. For a more detailed report of the discussion, see the “Report on the Meeting of

Bishops and Clergy”. On August 13 os / August 26 ns, Archbishop Joseph of

Edmonton, and Bishop Seraphim of Manhattan were received in the Metropolia

through the rite of Cherothesia.

Unity Sought but Not

at the Cost of Orthodoxy Since receiving its ‘autonomy’, the Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of North and

South America had entered into communion with a Russian jurisdiction under a certain

Metropolitan Raphael (Prokofiev). The impetus to enter into communion with this

jurisdiction derived from the Greek bishops under Metropolitan Angelos of Avlona.

The Synod in the United State and Canada, trusting in the research and work conducted

by Metropolitan Angelos and his Synod, entered into Communion in Summer of 2012

with the Russian jurisdiction of Metropolitan Raphael, which called its self the True

Orthodox Church of Russia (TOC-R). However, questions began to surface almost

immediately in the American Metropolia regarding the past of Metropolitan Raphael and

the accusation of his former connection to supposed occultic practices. Inquiries were

made, and an investigation had revealed that none of these seemed to arrive from sources

that could be considered credible (i.e. either Moscow Patriarchate accusers, or accusers

from True Orthodox jurisdictions none of these three synods had no communion with).

Consequently, a statement had been issued in which Metropolitan Raphael stated he

condemned any occultic activities and he was not engaged in it.

“In July of 2014, Bishop Seraphim of Manhattan asked to transfer to the

jurisdiction of the True Orthodox Church of the Patristic Calendar under Metropolitan

Anghelos of Avlona. The request was informally granted.”

54 | P a g e

In summer of 2014, a new critical situation emerged over the Russian jurisdiction

of Metropolitan Raphael. Metropolitan Raphael began to meet with the well-known,

infamous heretical writer Gregory Louriye [pronounced, lore’ ree] who had been a

member of the Russian Orthodox Autonomous Church (ROAC), the largest of the True

Orthodox Christian Churches in Russia. He had been deposed by the ROAC for the heresy

of Imiaslavism. Imiaslavism was, and is, a heresy condemned in 1912 and 1913 in

Constantinople, Mt. Athos, and Moscow. Imiaslvists taught that the Holy Name of Our

Lord Jesus Christ was itself Divine and Uncreated. The teaching was that the Name of

Jesus was to be given divine adoration like the Holy Trinity Itself. However, the teaching

was condemned by the Russian Orthodox Church and the Orthodox Patriarchate of

Constantinople in 1912 and 1913; this condemnation was even confirmed continuously in

the 1920s and 1930s by the great continuer of the Russian Orthodox tradition,

Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky), the First Hierarch of the original “pre-

union” Russian Orthodox Church outside Russia (ROCOR). ROCOR continued to affirm

the decisions of the pre-Revolutionary Russian Church on this doctrinal matter, although

heretical Imiaslvists would do all they could to deny this. This prompted Anglo-American

TOC Metropolia to issue a statement making clear its position at this dangerous time.

At their 2014 July Sobor of True Orthodox Church of Russia (Metropolitan

Raphael’s jurisdiction), a document was issued. For the most part the document was

Orthodox, EXCEPT, for its affirmation of the heretical Imiaslavist doctrine. This was a

cause of utmost concern for clergy in the Americas and Great Britain. Inquiries were

made through the intermediaries of the Greek Synod of Metropolitan Angelos. Initial

denials were made stating the document was not official; others said the ‘website of the

Russian Metropolia was not under Metropolitan Raphael’s control’. By late December

2014 letters had been exchanged with Metropolitan Raphael over this manner, with a

statement issued in early August.

Claims continued to surface from Greece that the letters were not written by

Metropolitan Raphael, or that they were ‘distorted’. In October of 2014, the Synod of

Bishops of the Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of North and South America, frustrated

at the attempts to establish with certainty what was transpiring, decided to adopt an

55 | P a g e

anathema against the Name-Worship, or Imiaslavist, doctrine. This quickly

provoked a reaction by the Russian jurisdiction of Metropolitan Raphael, and the

heretical Imiaslavists. They issued a statement after Holy Nativity stating they were not

in communion with our Synod. This Anathema can be read here:

Synodal Anathema Against Name-Worship (Imiaslavie) Heresy

December 18, 2014

To all who embrace the Truth of Orthodoxy we, the Bishops of the Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of

North and South America and the British Isles, address this message of great urgency:

In the past few years we here in North and South America have witnessed the beginning of an

ongoing campaign to re-introduce a heresy against the Orthodox Faith that was fully condemned a

century ago by Synodal decrees in the Synods of the Churches of both Greece and Russia.

Specifically, there have been individuals transversing these areas, some from foreign lands, and

others that reside here, that have tried to ignore the condemnation of the Name-worshipping heresy that

has been previously universally recognized as condemned by all Synods of the Holy Orthodox Church as

a part of the Creed of Faith in Holy Orthodoxy. As these individuals have attempted to mislead many

Orthodox Clergy and lay people by misquoting some of the Holy Fathers, or inventing false testimony to

favor their heresy, which is based on an esoteric desire to be able to control the actions of our Creator

(statements concerning which our Synodal headquarters has previously issued analytical documents

exposing the deceptions and misinterpretations that were being attempted); now, having recently been

informed by our brother, His Eminence Archbishop Porfyrios, that our sister Synod of Avlona under the

omophor of His Beatitude, Metropolitan Angellos, has formally ratified in Synod the condemnation of

Name-worshipping, our own Holy Synod, acting in formal session, has sadly felt it necessary to re-issue

the following condemnation as an Anathema against these heretics, and to call upon all True-Believing

Orthodox Christians to join with us in proclaiming with St. Photios the Great that we venerate the Name

of God “not because it is by nature acclaimed as God,” (To Amphilokios, #90) and thus we join together

to say:

To all them that teach that the Name of God is Uncreated, or to them that falsely claim that the Name of

God is God, whether in His Essence or His Energies, or further claim that His Name is worthy of Divine

56 | P a g e

Worship which should be Given to God alone, blurring the distinction between God and His creation

subject to Him, and in contradiction to the teaching of the Church that God creates His Name,

specifically, the heretical monk Ilarion, the monk Antony Bulatovich, the monk Gregory Lurie, and their

followers and successors,

Anathema.

With the blessing of the Holy Synod:

His Beatitude, Metropolitan †John,

First Hierarch,

Archbishop of New York

His Eminence, Archbishop †Hilarion

of Austin

His Eminence, Archbishop †Joseph

of Edmonton

His Excellency, Bishop †Fanourios

of Lincoln

His Excellency, Bishop †Christodoulos

of Miami and Santiago

Relations with the Greek Synod of Metropolitan Angelos, became strained; after

what initially looked like an agreement with our position, the Greek Synod, sadly, was led

to take the position that Imiaslavism was not a heresy. Shortly after Pascha 2015,

Archbishop Porphyrios, the Synodal Secretary and representative of Metropolitan

Angelos, stated that the Greek Synod no longer held communion with the Anglo-

American True Orthodox Metropolia. Later in the summer of 2015, Metropolitan Angelos

sent a letter to Metropolitan Raphael affirming that they accepted the Imiaslavist doctrine

(after previously stating they had not) and condemned the Anglo-American True

Orthodox Metropolia for refusing to assent to the Name-Worship heresy.

57 | P a g e

Even in the Struggle the Gospel is Preached

and the Church Growslii Despite the great controversies that have sadly cut off Sister Synods from American

Church, before this time, and during it, The Anglo-American TOC Metropolia continued

to experience growth. The Synod held another important Synodal meeting in October

2014, where Bishop Joseph of Edmonton was formally elevated to the rank of Archbishop.

This was preceded earlier that summer by the reception of several Orthodox Ukrainian

communities, and a priest, from the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

Archbishop Joseph’s work continued to grow and opened up traditional and True

Orthodoxy to the Ukrainian and other communities in Western Canada. Sadly, on

December 19, 2016, Archbishop Joseph of Edmonton fell asleep in the Lord. Pam'yatʹ

vichna! Memory eternal!

Metropolitan John also continued to encourage Orthodox Christian missionary

work, with many small missions experiencing growth in California, Texas, Alabama,

Florida, as well as eastern Canada and the British Isles. And with consent of the Synod,

on December 21st, 2014 o.s./ January 3rd, 2015 n.s., two additional Bishops were received

through Cherothesia. The two bishops received were the retired Archbishop Philip

(Cain) of Philadelphia, and the vicar Bishop Alexios (Blumer) of Hazleton and

Weatherly.

The Anglo-American TOC Metropolia being the only vanguard of an

authentic pre-Schism Orthodox Western Rite, the Chancery Office issued an “Open

Letter to the Clergy and Laity of the ROCOR Western Rite”, in July 2015. In this

Open Letter the Church called them to renounce Communion with the Moscow

Patriarchate, and the World Patriarchates in general, to receive the True Orthodox Faith

and Practice, rejecting ecumenism, theological syncretism, modernism, and Sergianism.

This also called upon these Clergy and Laity to unite with Anglo-American TOC

Metropolia, affirming a proper Orthodox Confession of Faith and a proper Orthodox

Western Rite. This once again set out the position of our Metropolia against the Three-

fold Heresies of Ecumenism, Modernism, and Sergianism, while also affirming the proper

use of an Orthodox Western Rite (as oppose to the false and heterodoxic versions

58 | P a g e

promoted in the churches of “Modernist Orthodoxy”). Anglo-American TOC Metropolia

affirms the propriety of any Orthodox Christian liturgical tradition in concord with the

statement of the 1895 Encyclical of the Ecumenical Patriarchate (and of St. Photius the

Great), which said:

In saying this we do not at all refer to the differences regarding the

ritual of the sacred services and the hymns, or the sacred vestments, and

the like, which matters, even though they still vary, as they did of old, do

not in the least injure the substance and unity of the faith; but we refer to

those essential differences which have reference to the divinely transmitted

doctrines of the faith, and the divinely instituted canonical constitution of

the administration of the Churches. ‘In cases where the thing disregarded

is not the faith (says also the holy Photius) and is no falling away from any

general and catholic decree, different rites and customs being observed

among different people, a man who knows how to judge rightly would

decide that neither do those who observe them act wrongly, nor do those

who have not received them break the law.’liii

Metropolitan John, in fact, remains currently the only Orthodox Hierarch who

lives according to the Orthodox Western Rite at the Abbey of the Holy Name, with the

monastics of the Abbey.

“The International Union of Genuine Orthodox Churches”. The longsuffering and unwavering Love of Christ is illustrated in Metropolitan

John’s persistence in, not only to put aside what is anathema to the Holy Church but also,

securing those who have fallen to the wiles of heresy their repentance and restoration to

the Holy Church, the Body of Christ Himself.

On June 16, 2018 the Synod published a “Statement on Communion with Sister

Synods”, citing its re-affirmation of full communion with Greece and Russia and

announcing establishment of The International Union of Genuine Orthodox

Churches.”liv

59 | P a g e

Chancery Office

of the

Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia

of the Americas & British Isles

PRESS RELEASE June 16, 2018

Our Synod has been, since last year, once again in contact with the Synod of Avlona in order to solve

the theological issue that caused a disruption of intercommunion between our Synod and that of our

brethren in Greece and Russia. This resulted in many positive developments with the most important

being that the First Hierarch of the Russian Church, Metropolitan Seraphim, gave up his tolerance of the

acceptability of accepting the ideas of the Imiaslavie heresy. With this move, there was no longer any

important theological issue that impeded resumption of full communion between our Churches.

Secondly, a statement was sent by our Synodal Chancery under Metropolitan John that confirmed the

basic tenet of our re-affirmation of full communion with the Greek and Russian Synods, and this

statement was received with acceptance before any visit was made to Greece. Thirdly, we had not

expected to be able to visit Greece so soon, but, an invitation was extended at the last moment, and,

despite numerous obstacles of convenience that would have otherwise postponed a visit by a few months,

with the consent of our Synod, Metropolitan John, accompanied by Father Hieromonk Enoch, went to

Greece. Once in Greece, private meetings were held by the First Hierarchs of the True Orthodox Synods

that were present, in which a re-affirmation of our principles was established. On the Sunday following,

that of the Second Sunday after Pascha (Myrrh-Bearers Sunday), we concelebrated and formally sealed

the re-union. Following the Liturgy and the Procession for the monastery’s patron, additional talks were

held, and it was decided that a formal designation should be adopted to identify our mutual communion

of canonical Orthodox Sister Churches, in order to distinguish it from other groupings of churches that

use the designation Orthodox. For this reason, the name for our Union of Churches was adopted as “The

International Union of Genuine Orthodox Churches”. Our common principles are our already accepted

principles of True Orthodoxy, and, thus, are against the heresies of Modernism, Ecumenism, Sergianism,

and any occult or Masonic teachings, and they also assert an affirmation of the exclusive usage of the

Patristic Orthodox (Julian) Calendar.

60 | P a g e

Some 20 Bishops were present for these meetings so that this new International Union comprises

Bishops of the canonical Synods of Greece, under Metropolitan Angelos of Avlona, Russia, under

Metropolitan Seraphim of Moscow and his successor, Metropolitan Tikhon, Ukrainia, under

Metropolitan Varsanuohy of Bukavinia, Georgia, under Metropolitan Christopher of Tiblisi and our own

Synod of North and South America and the British Isles, under Metropolitan John of New York. In this

Union, all of these Synods are equal members and in no way are subordinate to one another. We believe

that, because of the size of the various churches and peoples under these Synods, this new International

Union represents the largest grouping of truly canonical Orthodox Churches that are opposed to the

heresy of Ecumenism and which are therefore unwilling to be associated with the present claimant of the

Patriarchate of Constantinople, Bartholomew.

The International Union of Genuine Orthodox Churches consists of the

following jurisdictions of Holy Synods of the True Orthodox Christians:

1. True Orthodox Church of Russia (TOC-R) Metropolitan Tikhon, Chief

Hierarch.

2. Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of North and South America and

the British Isles (TOC-ABI), Metropolitan John, Chief Hierarch.

2.a under the spiritual protection of the American Synod is The

Autonomous Old Calendar Metropolia of Italy (TOC-It) Metropolitan

Onufrie of Bergamo.

3. Holy Metropolitan Synod of the Patristic Calendar of the Genuine

Orthodox Church of Greece (GOC-Avlona). Metropolitan Angelos of

Avlona and Beotias, Chief Hierarch.

3.a under the spiritual protection of the Avlona Synod the Autonomous

Orthodox Metropolia of Milan (Milan Synod). Metropolitan Evloghius of

Milan.

4. True Orthodox Church of Ukraine, (TOC-Ukr.) Metropolitan Varsanuphy

of Bukavinia, Chief Hierarch.

5. True Orthodox Church of Georgia, (TOC-G) Metropolitan Christopher of

Tiblisi, Chief Hierarch.

61 | P a g e

The Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia

of North and South America and the British Isles

This Orthodox Metropolia stands for the fullness of the Orthodox Christian Faith.

The Metropolia thus condemns the heresies of Ecumenism, Modernism, Sergianism and

every other heresy that seeks to denigrate God, His Incarnation and/or His Church., The

Metropolia likewise seeks the conversion of all peoples to the True Orthodox Christian

Faith and Praxis. The Metropolia is noticeable for allowing and promoting the usages of

the Orthodox Eastern and Western Rites within the Canonical and Dogmatic Traditions

of the Orthodox Christian Faith and is an open home for all those are seeking traditional

Orthodoxy, whether they come from a background that has recent ethnic ties to

Orthodoxy, or those whose ancestors were anciently Orthodox, or those who have no

Orthodox heritage. The Gospel is for all people, of whatever ancestry. The Anglo-

American True Orthodox Metropolia seeks the conversion of all to Orthodox Christianity.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Apostolic Teachings, are for all people who seek salvation

and obedience to God and His Church.

“The issue of the Orthodox Western Rite became an important part of the self-

identify of the American Bishops. Their former Metropolitan Evloghius, although later

having become mostly Byzantine rite, had in the early years made heavy usage of the

Gallican and Ambrosian rites. In 1971, Metropolitan Antony (Bloom) of the Moscow

Patriarchate ordained to the priesthood Hierodeacon Evloghius (Hessler) in a Western

Rite ordination service.

The distinct history of the successful liturgical work to restore Western Orthodox

heritage is often untold. Mainly because the ill-advised direction of those in Modernist

Orthodoxy who have taken in numerous disaffected Anglicans, Episcopalians and

disillusioned Roman Catholics and had chosen not to preserve the pristine nature of

Orthodoxy, even in its early millennium of the Western Church state. Due to their

numbers and their social media prowess, not to mention the false authority and

communion with other prominent communities of former “Orthodox” Churches --

62 | P a g e

referred too often as the mainstream—they have chosen the un-Orthodox, Heterodox

liturgical rites belonging and originating from the Protestant Anglicans and the Post-

Reformation Roman Catholics. None these so-called “western rites” can ever be

adequately “Corrected”, as has been attempted, and still be considered authentically

Orthodox as are the pre-Schism (of 1054) Western Church and that of the Eastern

(Byzantine) Church.

Many of the clergy who came to Orthodoxy via her Western rite, due to their former

backgrounds, had developed a heavily anti-ecumenist and anti-modernist bent, and thus,

they were easily able to agree with the struggle against ecumenism happening in the wider

Orthodox world. While many Roman Catholics, disaffected with Papal modernism,

ecumenism, and liberalism, would attempt to form Sedevacantist and other mini-papalist

organizations, others became Orthodox and sought the fullness of their historical

heritage.

Many attempts have been made in the early and latter parts of the last century to

produce a version of the Hours of the Monastic Office in the English Language that could

be easily used for prayer by those with little or no training in ancient languages or musical

theory. The need to put forwards another attempt comes from certain lacking in previous

versions that made the Editors feel that no previous version incorporated all the needs

present before them.lv

To understand the authenticity of the Western Rite, specifically, Anglo-Roman

Rite –also referred to as “Old Sarum” --from Orthodox England as translated by

Metropolitan John and his monks from between the 1970s through 1990s we look at the

preface of the voluminous Medieval Monastic Psalter:

First, by way of correction, was the need to present the ancient

Western usage of Monks and Nuns that followed the Rule [RSB] of St.

Benedict of Nursia in a manner that was completely Orthodox, i.e.,

completely in accordance with the doctrine, canons, and practices of the

Orthodox Church. This, of course, requires that the Hours be done in the

completely ancient manner that was practiced in the first millennial

63 | P a g e

Orthodox Churches of the West, which by the year 950 a.d. had spread

through the greater part of the civilized world,

from the Baffin Islands in what is now Canada,

to the island of Valaam in Lake Ladoga in the

present-day Russia, to the Western Rite

Monastery of Amalphon (called Morphonu by

the Greeks) on Mount Athos. This usage was the

singularly predominant prayer of the Monks and

Nuns of the present-day Italy, France, Ireland,

Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and

England. It has been considered most appropriate to look to the latter

country, whose Monks and Nuns were the source of conversion for the

aforementioned countries in the north of Europe, and which had received

the Monastic Office itself from St. Augustine of Canterbury, the Italian

monk that had been the Prior of St. Andrews Monastery on the Coelian Hill

in Rome where our Father among the the saints, St. Gregory Dialogus, Pope

of Old Rome, had been the Abbott. St. Bede the Venerable writes that St.

Gregory, after learning that St. Augustine had successfully begun the

mission among the Angles and relating his joy for this success in a letter to

St. Eulogius, Pope of Alexandria, sent all things needed in general for Divine

Worship and the services of the Church, sacred vessels, altar clothes,

furniture for Churches, vestments for the Clergy, relics, and also many

books. It is the latter books that served as the foundation for this life of

prayer in the Latin usage of the Monks and Nuns of medieval England that

these volumes of Monastic Office in the English language are meant to

continue.

Secondly, it was needed to produce these Office books using that

ancient and essential tool of assistance for prayer service in the Western

Rite that has come to be known as the Gregorian Chant. This was no small

matter of difficulty, since much that had existed in manuscript form from

the various monasteries of England had been destroyed during the

Protestant Revolt. Three main manuscripts were available, however, being

64 | P a g e

the Portiforium of St. Oswald of York, (also

known as the Portiforum Wulstani), the

Antiphonale Wigorniense of Worcester

Cathedral Priory where St. Oswald (died A.D.

992(was Bishop, and the Breviary of Abingdon Abbey

in Winchester (later called Hyde Abbey) where St.

Ethelwaold (died A.D. 984) was Bishop. These two

great monastic reformers of the 10th Century

Orthodox Church in England. They have left for us a wonderful treasure of

prayer for the entire Church year. Second only to the RSB which provides

the main structure and cycle of Psalms for the Psalter, the aforementioned

Antiphonale Witgorniense provided the main Antiphons and Responsories.

The Portiforium of St. Oswald which appears also to have been derived

from Winchester, provided the many Chapters and Collects that have been

used, and the Abingdon Breviary provided those items missing from the

first two manuscripts. Together, they provide us with a clear picture

showing how the Monks and Nuns of the Orthodox West conducted what

St. Benedict calls. the Work of God, Opus Dei.

Thirdly, the Editors needed a version of the Psalms from a

recognizable Orthodox source. This, of course, had to be the Septuagint, or

the Old Testament in Greek according to the Seventy. Translated from

Hebrew into Greek some 200 years before the Birth of Our Lord and

Saviour, these are the Psalms quoted in the New Testament Greek, and

which survived the rewriting and repointing of the Hebrew Psalms begun at

the Rabbinical Council of Jamnia after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70

A.D. Even here there were variant manuscripts available. We are most

grateful to Father Justin of Holy Transfiguration Monastery in Boston,

Mass. for extending to us the kind permission of Bishop Ephraim for using

their translation (1987) of the Psalter. This translation served well out

purposes in preserving ancient Orthodox worship, and in the rare places

(Psalm 13 and 94) where the ancient Western usage derived from the Latin

Vulgate translation of St. Jerome of Sidonium had made use of Septuagint

65 | P a g e

manuscripts with additional phrases, these phrases, taken from the

translation of the Septuagint by Sir Lancelot Brenton (1851), have been

included in our Psalter within parentheses. We are confident that this usage

has preserved the ancient meaning of the Psalms which were fulfilled in the

coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

This series is divided into many Volumes, for which Volume I is the

Psalter Outside of Paschaltide, Volume II is the Psalter in Paschaltide

(from Low Sunday through the Octave of Pentecost), and Volume III begins

the Proper Offices for Advent. The Offices of the week of Pascha, while

having a Monastic usage, are not technically part of the Monastic Psalter, as

the Cathedral Use like that of Old Sarum, not the RSB, has provided the

structure for these offices ever since the Monastic Council of Aachen (Aix-

la-Chapelle) in 817 A.D., and thus will be provided for in a separate Volume

of the Proper.

Finally, we apologize that our effort could not prove to be more

grand, since, in order to complete these Volumes in a suitable time frame,

we have neglected style and the multitudinous ornamentations that our holy

predecessors provided in their manuscripts.

May Heaven forgive us! And may all who use these volumes pray for

the souls of the unworthy workers who have put them together. O Lord

Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy upon us, the sinners.lvi

--Abbey of the Holy Name

66 | P a g e

Sources

______________ Batiststos, D., Proceedings and Decisions of the Pan-Orthodox Council in Constantinople, May 10 - June 8, 1923, Athens, 1982. Bishop Photius of Triaditsa, “The 70th Anniversary of the Pan-Orthodox Congress”, in 2 parts.: found August 2018 at http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/photii_1.aspx Buevsky, A., The Patriarch of Constantinople, Meletios IV, and the Russian Orthodox Church, 1953, No. 3. Delimpasis, A.D., Pascha of the Lord, Creation, Renewal, and Apostasy, Athens, 1985 Englezaki, Benedict, Studies on the History of the Church of Cyprus, 4th - 20th Centuries. Vaparoum, Ashgate Publishing Limited, Aldershot, Hampshire, Great Britain, 1995. Gatopoulos, D., Andreas Michalakopoulos, 1875 - 1938, Athens, Elevtheroudakis, 1947. Holy Trinity Monastery, Orthodox Life a periodical: Printing Press of St Job of Pochaev Brotherhood. Kitssikis, Dimitri, The Old Calendarists and the Rise of Religious Conservatism in Greece: St. Gregory Palamas Monastery, Etna, California. Thus Do We Believe, Thus Do We Speak, a pamphlet published by the Church of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece, Athens, 1974, pp.5 – 7. 30. Karamitsos, Stavros The Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane Lardas, George, The History Of The Old Calendar Movement an unpublished paper: Holy Trinity Seminary, Jordanville, NY, 1983. (LeBue), Metropolitan John, et al, Medieval Monastic Psalter, St Gregory Press: West Milford, NJ, 1993. Miletić, Presbyter Srboljub, “MELETIOS (Metaxakis) Metropolitan, Archbishop, Pope and Patriarch”: found August 2018 at https://svetosavlje.org/meletios-metaksakis/

NFTU (Notes from the Underground) News Service: https://nftu.info/ Official Website of the Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of North and South America & the British Isles: https://orthodoxmetropolia.org/ Official Website of the Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of North and South America & the British Isles: Archived Files at Archive.org.

67 | P a g e

Nun Martha, Papa Nicholas Planas, the Simple Shepherd of the Simple Sheep, Translated by Holy Transfiguration Monastery, Boston, 1981 Strangas, Archimandrite Theokletos A., History of the Church of Greece, from Reliable Sources, Vol. 2, Athens, 1970, (in Greek). Suaiden, Deacon Joseph, Western Orthodoxy Restored A Short History of the Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of North and South America and the British Isles. Deipara Press: ----------, Lux Veritatis: A History of the Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of Western Europe and the Americas. Deipara Press: 1st ed. 2008, 2nd ed. 2009, 3rd ed. 2010, 4th ed. 2011 Ta Patria, Vol. 1, 1976. The Church Herald, (in Bulgarian). Zervoudakis, Alexander I., "Famous Freemasons", Masonic Bulletin an official publication, Number 71, January - February, 1967. (Zissis), Monk Seraphim, “Some Preliminary Notes On The Influence Of Freemasonry On Early Greek Ecumenism”: found August 2018 at https://www.geopolitica.ru/en/article/influence-freemasonry-early-greek-ecumenism

ENDNOTES

i TOC an abbreviation for “True Orthodox Christians” (sometime Church). Alternatively, and more precisely, the reader will see GOC which abbreviates “Genuine Orthodox Christians” (or Church). The “True” and “Genuine” are translations of the Greek word, Gnísios, Γνήσιος. This usage was created to distinguish in both Greek corporate law and in Greek society from the ecumenist State Church of Greece. ii Bishop Photius of Triaditsa was consecrated to the episcopacy on January 4/17, 1993 by Metropolitan Cyprian of Fili, Abbot of the Monastery of Saints Cyprian and Justina. Bishop Photius is the sole hierarch of the Old Calendarists in Bulgaria. The True Orthodox Church of Bulgaria is in Eucharistic Communion with the Church of Genuine Orthodox Christians under the Chief Hierarch Archbishop Kallinikos of Athens. iii Presbyter in the Serbian Patriarchate. Cf., http://srboljubmiletic.com/ iv Wikipedia contributors. (2018, August 10). Pope Gregory XIII. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 22:50, August 28, 2018, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pope_Gregory_XIII&oldid=854357029 v (Zissis), Monk Seraphim, “Some Preliminary Notes On The Influence Of Freemasonry On Early Greek Ecumenism”.

68 | P a g e

D. Gatopoulos, Andreas Michalakopoulos, 1875 - 1938, Athens, Elevtheroudakis, 1947, pp. 90 - 93. In Greek and based exclusively on the private archives of the statesman who would subsequently become President of the Council. Quoted in The Old Calendarists and the Rise of Religious Conservatism in Greece, by Dimitri Kitssikis, pp. 9 - 11, St. Gregory Palamas Monastery, Etna, California. vi See "The 70th Anniversary of the Pan-Orthodox Congress in Constantinople," Orthodox Life, January - February, 1994. vii D. Gatopoulos, Andreas Michalakopoulos, 1875 - 1938, Athens, Elevtheroudakis, 1947, pp. 90 - 93. In Greek and based exclusively on the private archives of the statesman who would subsequently become President of the Council. Quoted in The Old Calendarists and the Rise of Religious Conservatism in Greece, by Dimitri Kitssikis, pp. 9 - 11, St. Gregory Palamas Monastery, Etna, California. viii See "The 70th Anniversary of the Pan-Orthodox Congress in Constantinople," Orthodox Life, January - February, 1994. ix Batiststos, D., Proceedings and Decisions of the Pan-Orthodox Council in Constantinople, May 10 - June 8, 1923, Athens, 1982. x "Famous Freemasons," by Alexander I. Zervoudakis, in the official publication Masonic Bulletin, Number 71, January - February, 1967. xi In Studies on the History of the Church of Cyprus, 4th - 20th Centuries, Benedict Englezakis describes how Metaxakis attempted, unsuccessfully, to assume the position of Archbishop of Cyprus in 1916, but a "decisive part in his failure was played by being suspected of modernism, his unconcealed admiration for Venizelos, and his authoritarian character" (Vaparoum, Ashgate Publishing Limited, Aldershot, Hampshire, Great Britain, 1995, p. 440). xii Delimpasis, A.D., Pascha of the Lord, Creation, Renewal, and Apostasy, Athens, 1985, p.661. xiii Ibid. xiv Ibid. xv Batistatos, D., op. cit., page d xvi See Delimpasis, A.D., op.cit., p. 662 xvii Ibid., p. 663. xviii The Orthodox Church Calendar: In Defence of the Julian Calendar Paperback – Illustrated, January 1, 1996 by Ludmila Perepiolkina (Author), Photius Triaditsa (Author) Can be purchased from Amazon at https://www.amazon.com/Orthodox-Church-Calendar-Defence-Julian/dp/0884650618 xix "The Julian Calendar," (Orthodox Life, No. 5 1995, p. 26).

69 | P a g e

xx In The Church Herald, (in Bulgarian), No. 13, 1929, p. 152. xxi Buevsky, A., The Patriarch of Constantinople, Meletios IV, and the Russian Orthodox Church, 1953, No. 3, p. 36. xxii Quoted from Batistatos, D., op.cit., p.e. xxiii Perepiolkina, op.cit., p. 26 xxiv Here in part, is what Papadopoulos wrote: "The letter of Patriarch Jeremias II [1572-1584, 1586-1595] indicates in an excellent manner the position which the Orthodox Church immediately took against the Gregorian modification of the calendar. The Church considered it yet another of the many innovations of Old Rome, a universal scandal, and an arbitrary affront to the traditions of the Church. The reform of the calendar is not only a matter of astronomy but also pertains to the Church, because it is related to the celebration of the Feast of Pascha. Hence, the Pope had no right to reform the calendar, [but by doing so, he] proved that he esteems himself superior to the Ecumenical Councils. Consequently, The Orthodox Church has not been in favor of the reform of the calendar" (Archimandrite Chrysostom Papadopoulos, Church Herald #143, 1918). xxv From the unpublished paper on the history of the Old Calendar movement written by George Lardas, Holy Trinity Seminary, Jordanville, NY, 1983, pp. 15-16 xxvi Archimandrite Theokletos A. Strangas, History of the Church of Greece, from Reliable Sources, Vol. 2, Athens, 1970, p.1181 (in Greek), quoted in The Old Calendarists and the Rise of Religious Conservatism in Greece, p. 18. xxvii Lardas, op.cit., pp.16 - 17. xxviii This dichotomic situation of preference for non-Orthodox over the Traditionalists Orthodox by the Modernist “Orthodox” mainstream continues to persist in the 21st century. Murder is still manifest against the Genuine Orthodox Christians as displayed by the hate and vile words used in reference to them (Matthew 5:21 – 22) xxix Lardas, op.cit., p. 19. xxx See Papa Nicholas Planas, the Simple Shepherd of the Simple Sheep, by Nun Martha, Translated by Holy Transfiguration Monastery, Boston, 1981, pp. 113 -119. xxxi In his Report to the Committee of the Department of Religion, dated January 16, 1923, the then Archimandrite Chrysostom Papadopoulos wrote: "No Orthodox autocephalous Church can separate itself from the rest and accept the new calendar without becoming schismatic in the eyes of the others." xxxii In his Report to the Committee of the Department of Religion, dated January 16, 1923, the then Archimandrite Chrysostom Papadopoulos wrote: "No Orthodox autocephalous Church can separate itself from the rest and accept the new calendar without becoming schismatic in the eyes of the others." xxxiii The irony derives from the fact that when the Precious Cross appeared in the heavens on September 13-14, 1925, over the Chapel of Saint John the Theologian on Mount Hymettos, it was this same George

70 | P a g e

Kondylis who, as a government minister at the time, sent the police to arrest Father John Floros, the priest who was serving the Vigil when the Cross appeared. xxxiv The Synod of the Church of Romania, under the leadership of Patriarch Myron Cristea, a former Uniate, decided to change the Paschalion also. This immediately resulted in bloody riots in the streets; whereupon the Synod reversed its decree on the Paschalion and retained only the calendar change. The Church of Finland, which is under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, decided to change both the traditional calendar and the traditional Paschalion, thereby completely adopting the usage of the Protestant and Roman Catholic denominations in this matter. xxxv Lardas, op.cit., p. 22. xxxvi Metropolitan Germanos was buried with honors by the new calendar bishops, who claimed that he had submitted a petition shortly before his death, asking to be received again into the official State Church. In the book The Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane (p. 144), however, author Stavros Karamitsos states that many discounted this claim of the new Calendarists as spurious. However, under the circumstances of the Nazi Occupation, it was impossible to take any action to clarify the matter. xxxvii Thus, Do We Believe, Thus Do We Speak, a pamphlet published by the Church of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece, Athens, 1974, pp.5 - 7. xxxviii Lardas, op.cit., p. 24. xxxix Ibid., p. 25 xl Lardas, op.cit., p. 26. xli Reproduced photographically in Thus Do We Believe, Thus Do We Speak, p. 12. xlii The consecration of a bishop by two bishops is not uncanonical, provided there is synodal approval for it. The First Canon of the Holy Apostles, adopted and ratified by subsequent Ecumenical Councils, is explicit: "Let a bishop be ordained by two or three bishops" (provided — as later Councils stipulated — that the local Synod of Bishops has accepted and approved of the consecration). xliii Lardas, op.cit., p. 30. xliv Other GOC “unions” or mergers were among a variety of schismatic synods who originally turned their back on Archbishop Auxentius of Athens and other such separators who autogenicly created their own synods. xlv Relations With Other Jurisdictions at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Autonomous_Orthodox_Metropolia_of_North_and_South_America_and_the_British_Isles&oldid=849379016 xlvihttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Autonomous_Orthodox_Metropolia_of_North_and_South_America_and_the_British_Isles&oldid=849379016 xlvii From Notes from the Underground News Service last visited at http://nftu.net/american-metropolia-new-bishop-for-miami-and-cuba/

71 | P a g e

xlviii Quoted from the website of the Mitropolia Autonoma Crestin Ortodoxa de Bergamo si Europa – Arhidioceza de Bergamo: last visited September 2018 at http://octavianrodna.ro/istoric/ xlix Ibid l http://nftu.net/italy-bergamo-synod-granted-autonomy-replaces-milan-synod-in-united-communion/ li http://nftu.net/american-metropolia-new-bishop-for-miami-and-cuba/ lii This section was taken, then edited slightly, from the archived webpage of the TOC Metropolia of the America & British Isles. lii The Patriarchal Encyclical of 1895: A Reply to the Papal Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on Reunion ⁋ V. (1895) Viewed on September 2018 at https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/1895orthodoxencyclical.asp liihttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Autonomous_Orthodox_Metropolia_of_North_and_South_America_and_the_British_Isles&oldid=849379016 liii The Patriarchal Encyclical of 1895: A Reply to the Papal Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII on Reunion ⁋ V. (1895) Viewed on September 2018 at https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/1895orthodoxencyclical.asp livhttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Autonomous_Orthodox_Metropolia_of_North_and_South_America_and_the_British_Isles&oldid=849379016

lv Preface from the Medieval Monastic Psalter lvi Ibid.