Met. Chrysostom of Florina

[Archimandrit Nilos]

We must discuss the false ecclesiology of Chrysostom of Florina without any restriction in this Forum to arrive at the truth.

[Maria]

Dear Arch. Nilos,

We can discuss the ecclesiology of Met. Chrysostom of Florina in a civil manner, but there must be some restrictions according to our rules, otherwise, we will have a free-for-all with ad hominems, etc.

I have edited the title and moved your post into this new thread to see if a civil discussion can occur using the biography of St. Matthew the New Confessor and the book on the GOC by Father Stephen Fraser as two references.

Maria
Administrator

Below is a pirated copy of the first edition of Fr. Stephen Fraser's book written and copyrighted in 2005.
Although Father Stephen did not authorize this copy to be scanned and placed online, he is allowing us to view it and will not take legal action.
http://www.svetosavskasrbija.com/sites/ ... ce_goc.pdf

To order an updated Second Edition published in 2013, please write to Father Stephen at

• Protopresbyter Stephen Fraser
  Holy Trinity Orthodox Church
  5814 W. Shangri La Road
  Glendale, Arizona (AZ) 85304

Linked below is the biography of St. Matthew the New Confessor (d. 1950):
http://genuineorthodoxchurch.com/The_Li ... fessor.pdf

[Maria]

The life of Met. Chrysostomos, formerly of Florina, was indeed troubling as he seemed to flip-flop regarding his ecclesiology. Met. Chrysostomos stayed within the EP after the 1924 imposition of the New Calendar hoping that the Old Calendar would be reinstated. However, after 11 years, he finally realized that the New Calendar was here to stay, left his Metropolis of Florina and the EP, who deposed him, and then in 1935 joined Hieromonk Matthew (the future St. Matthew the New Confessor in 1935) along with two other Bishops (Germanos of Demetrias and Germanos of Zakynthos) who also had left the New Calendarists.

Note that these three bishops proclaimed an oath of faith in forming the Synod of the Genuine Orthodox Church of Greece (GOC).

Here is part of their joint encyclical dated June 8/21,1935:

• In assuming the pastorship of the Orthodox Greek populace that follows
  the Orethodox 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
  cannot 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 resolution of the Fathers of the
  Seven Ecumenical Councils and all the Pan-Orthodox Councils that
  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
  import to others that which they have not?" (Fr. Fraser, 2nd Edition, p. 86).
  

Only two years later in June 1937, Met. Chrysostomos flip-flops:

• 1937: In June, a letter to Monk Mark (Chaniotis) is composed by
  Metropolitans Germanos of Demetrias and Chrysostom of Florina, in
  which they claim the calendar innovation is a curable error. And since it
  does not directly affect any dogma, 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. To be consistent, they both should have immediately
  returned to the new calendar church (Fr. Fraser, 2nd Edition, page 10).

Notice how the departed Met. Cyprian and others of the former SiR appeared to have held the same ecclesiology as did Met. Chrysostomos of Florina.

[jgress]

I moved this to the private forum since the ecclesiological views of Met Petros are a controversial topic.

[Barbara]

Hmm, you are quite right, Maria, about the flipflopping as precursor to Cyprianism. It's important to nail this point down clearly for all earnest True Orthodox.