Bp Auxentios GOC-K: 1-19-2015 OS - Debate

[Barbara]

That's amazing how many ecclesiastical stages St Ambrose of Milan went through at such a rapid clip !
I remember the part about the child selecting him. But I didn't realize what that entailed.

Maria, you are doing a remarkable job of defending your jurisdiction against some tough questioning !
I am interested that there would be a pirated version of Fr Stephen Fraser's book online.
Who did that, and WHY ?

[Lydia]

Auxentius was in fact chosen as a candidate for episcopacy by the florinite clergy and laymen, along with Akakios.

However, he withheld vital information that he had been defrocked to the ROCOR bishops.

Candidates for Priesthood or Bishopric are supposed to make a confession and not withhold anything.

And Akakios was also uncanonically ordained.

He was deposed by his own synod in 1985, long after he went into communion with ROCOR.
If you mean that he was defrocked as a priest by Bishop Matthew, Archbishop Auxentios contended that Bishop Matthew was himself deposed by his own uncanonical actions. Archbishops Auxentios and Akakios state they left Bishop Matthew for canonical reasons. They did not consider that Bishop Matthew had the authority to defrock them.
Do you have evidence that the ROCOR Bishops were unaware of canonical position of Archbishop Auxentios?
The fact that he, as an archimandrite, was not in communion with the Matthewite synod and was ordained by a ROCOR bishop seems to discount your assertion.

[Maria]

Auxentius was in fact chosen as a candidate for episcopacy by the florinite clergy and laymen, along with Akakios.

However, he withheld vital information that he had been defrocked to the ROCOR bishops.

Candidates for Priesthood or Bishopric are supposed to make a confession and not withhold anything.

And Akakios was also uncanonically ordained.

He was deposed by his own synod in 1985, long after he went into communion with ROCOR.
If you mean that he was defrocked as a priest by Bishop Matthew, Archbishop Auxentios contended that Bishop Matthew was himself deposed by his own uncanonical actions. Archbishops Auxentios and Akakios state they left Bishop Matthew for canonical reasons. They did not consider that Bishop Matthew had the authority to defrock them.
Do you have evidence that the ROCOR Bishops were unaware of canonical position of Archbishop Auxentios?
The fact that he, as an archimandrite, was not in communion with the Matthewite synod and was ordained by a ROCOR bishop seems to discount your assertion.

A man being ordained to the Bishopric must confess and disclose any impediments. Both Auxentios and Akakios were defrocked by the GOC. Neither revealed that to the ROCOR bishops who consecrated them. That was fraud.

Thus, both Auxentios and Akakios were fraudulently and uncanonically consecrated as Bishops.

Since Auxentios was denied the bishopric by both the Clergy-Laity Conference of the GOC in 1948, by St. Matthew also in 1948 and 1949, and then by Met. Chrysostomos of Flornia from 1949 to 1955, and then later Auxentios was deposed by his own synod for simony and other canonical reasons, it is obvious that he had problems dating way back to 1948 that were obvious to the people, clergy and bishops.

[Isaakos]

Lydia, the canons cannot depose anyone, and there is no such thing as self-excommunication in Orthodoxy. Archbishop Matthew of blessed memory exercised economia in the performance of a single-handed ordination. Until a synod were to convene against him and depose his bishops, they remain as bishops. There is no such thing as self-deposition for canonical "infraction."

[Isaakos]

Auxentius was in fact chosen as a candidate for episcopacy by the florinite clergy and laymen, along with Akakios.

A schismatic election of schismatic priests by schismatics. lol.

[Maria]

There is also this very interesting account given by another break-away schismatic group, the Genuine Orthodox Church under Metropolitan Christopher of Mesogaias and the Islands.

http://www.omologitis.org/?page_id=523
Website of the Genuine Orthodox Church (GOC) - Metropolitan Christopher of Mesogaias and the Islands

This brief history, for the most part, presents a fair account of what happened from 1924 to the current time. It is only five pages long with a little additional information not presented in the currently edited book by Father Stephen Fraser, who never intended to produce a large manuscript but a "brief history and commentary."

For example, this brief history by Met. Christopher jurisdiction gives a hint as to why Met. Chryosostomos of Florina might have been misled from the beginning as he might have thought that the original GOC remained a movement of laity and monastics, which hoped to resist the New Calendarist State Church of Greece and possibly effect a change back to the Old Calendar if at all possible.

More likely, however, is the fact that Met. Chrysostomos was already elderly, had retired from the EP, and had possibly became confused during his time of incarceration. Realize that he was brutally imprisoned at the hands of the Freemasons and New Calendarists shortly after he and two other bishops had consecrated a new Synod of Bishops for the GOC. The New Calendarists used such tactics as yanking out the facial hair, striping off the clerical clothing, and the withholding of food, water, blankets, and sleep in an attempt to brainwash the hierarchs into returning to the State Church. In addition, there are accounts of these saintly men and women being forced to stand upright for days in a very tiny space in an attempt to get them to deny the Holy Faith and Holy Traditions. These inhumane conditions imposed by false clergymen of the State Church of Greece were enough to break some of the bishops, clergy, and laity who had suffered such imprisonment.

Remember that Met. Chrysostomos was a retired bishop under the EP, who had joined the GOC "movement" back in 1935 and had helped create the GOC Synod by co-consecrating four new bishops with the two other State Church of Greece Bishops who had come in repentance to the GOC. However, in 1937, Met. Chrysostomos of Florina and Germanos of Demetrias composed a letter which stated that the calendar innovation was a curable error (same heretical thinking the Cyprianites later had), and that "the State Church is not actually schismatic, but rather only "potentially schismatic" until a Pan Orthodox Synod decides her fate. And until she is judged by such a Synod, her mysteries retain sanctifying grace. This belief goes counter to their encyclical of 1935" (p. 10, Genuine Orthodox Church of Greece (GOC), by Father Stephen Fraser, 2013).

[Isaakos]

If he had the presence of mind to try and refute bishop Matthew strict claims (which are now the normative claims of the GOC fragments) then I doubt there was any confusion. More likely he put too much faith in his New Calendar buddies who were chiefly trying to destroy Bishop Matthew and the Convent at Keratea.