It was the Greek governmental atheistic and socialistic freemasons (worse than the masons) who imprisoned St. Matthew and many of his flock just after the GOC Encyclical of 1935. These Greek governmental freemasons tortured the GOC not only by imprisoning them and subjecting them to starvation, nakedness, lack of sleep, repeated druggings and beatings, but also by forceably pulling the facial hairs from the roots along with the roots and hunks of flesh, so that some of the faithful laity and clerics died from this alone. The drugs they used were psychoactive and mind-altering drugs containing fluoride, bromide, chlorine, and other dangerous halogens which prevent a person from thinking and praying, as it fossilizes the pineal gland of the brain. No doubt it was these drugs, which caused severe side effect on Met. Chrysostomos of Florina, an effect more severe on him than on the other faithful. Remember that drugs affect people differently, so the same drug that seemingly has no effect on one person can be a lethal dose for another. So perhaps Met. Chrysostomos in spite of his flip-flopping did die a saint in 1955 due to all the sufferings he endured especially the long lasting ones from those drugs, and perhaps this is why St. Matthew allowed the Metropolitan to visit him shortly before he died in 1950 as St. Matthew knew that something was amiss.
I think that the issues of schism, ecumenism, and freemasonry were so serious that each needed a separate document condemning them. Thus, St. Matthew and the Greeks first condemned schism as it was more clear cut. Creeping modernism and ecumenism were more subtle. Freemasonry was secretly practiced, thus, it was more difficult to condemn. Documents from defectors and leaked secrets would be needed. The Alta Vendita was one of the most insidious freemasonic documents to be released. This document revealed the plans of the freemasons to destroy Christianity by filtration of the hierarchy itself. Yes, infiltration has been done as there are freemasons in the leadership (lay and hierarchial) of the Orthodox Church, the Oriental churches, the Vatican, and in Protestantism. Indeed, there is evidence by their actions that even some Old Calendarist True Orthodox may have been or may still be freemasons.
With all the imprisonments, persecutions, and tremendous sufferings these True Orthodox Fathers had to endure, it is surprising that they were able to release even the few encyclicals which they did, and we should be grateful to God that we had such holy Fathers to guide us, for without them, would we still have the Holy Faith?
We are the Remnant Church of Christ, the Mystical Body of Christ, and Christ promised us that the Church would endure until He comes again, didn't He?
jdigrande wrote:Thank your for these documents.
But the incredible fact was that in both 1932 and 1933 Meletius Metaksis was Patriarch of Alexandria after being Patriarch of Constantinople. He was a known Mason and dressed in public as a Mason after he was accepted into the lodge (Harmony). He used to dress like this in Constantinople when he was not in Orthodox vestments, He liked to have his photo taken in such masonic garb and he paraded like this in front of the Greek School with its masonic symbols carved in stone above the front door.
This large Hellenic/Masonic school was built by Patriarch Joachim III in the 1880's when he was Patriarch of Constantinople. I am not sure but it logical that when Meletius Metaksis became Metropolitan of Kition (Cyprus) in 1910- he was blessed by Joachim III who was good friends with Met. Antony Krapovitsky at the time.
So this Mason who had destroyed one Patriarchate and now was working on number two (Alexandria) in the early 30's. Both the Turks who ratified all candidates for Patriarch of Constantinople and the English who ruled Egypt knew full well that both were Masons and supported him.
Why didn't Met. Antony Krapovitsky (in 1932), St Matthew and Chyrsostom (in 1935) declare Joachim III and Meletius heretics as a crucial part of their anathemas?
St. Matthew went to high school with Meletius in Jerusalem. He knew full well he was a Mason as did the three bishops who wrote the anathema of 1935. Perhaps someone has some insight and is very familiar with the Greek Church can explain why this did not happen?
Masons have no power to write encyclicals of 1920, convene Councils (of 1924), administer the sacraments, hold the cross, get vested or even enter an Orthodox Church. 1920 and 1924 did not exist much like St. Philaret and ROCOR maintains that 1667 did not exist in 1974 in their attempt to reconcile with the Old Believers. But in a much more radical way these events (1920 and 24) did not exist. Like all evil- Masonry simply has no existence and that is the real reason that their decision to change the calendar has no basis at all.
We have spent 100 years debating the New Calendar but the allowance of Masons to change it makes that decision (1924) null and void period. I read this anathema of the Greeks (1933) and was stunned: priests (1933) were banned from serving while being Masons while at the same time Meletius Metakasis was Patriarch of Alexandria. He is still in the diptychs of the EP and all of World Orthodoxy.
I feel that the Old Calendar Churches can unite on these personal anathemas 100 years removed from the time when it should have been done. It might help us see the Calendar change is a whole new way: it was never changed because the Masons who changed it had no power to change it.
It is the original sin of the Old Calendrists in my opinion. Masons are not potentially heretics. They are heretics. ROCOR and the Florinites considered Meletius and Athenagoras after him as valid hierarchs who made a mistake with the calendar. In 1935 the NC was termed schismatic when in fact it was heretical in that it was run by Masons.
