Moderator: Mark Templet
I know very little about them except what is on OrthodoxWiki, which is largely the same as the limited information on their own website. I wonder whether anybody here would be so kind as to share knowledge about their history, current practice and influence, and their relationships with other Orthodox jurisdictions.
If so, I should be grateful.
Ok, I've done some reading on Old Calendarist jurisdictions on OrthodoxWiki and now have a basic level of understanding of the history of the Florinites. I also understand that their current hierarchy comes from the Russian Church Abroad, and from what I have read, at least as recently as 1969, their hierarchy was fully recognised by ROCA. I also understand that what is now the Holy Synod of Milan was granted a tomos of autocephaly by Archbishop Auxentios in 1984.
In light of that, I have been able to narrow my questions down a little to the following:
How did relations develop between the Florinites and ROCA after 1969 and what were the affecting factors?
Did the Archbishop have canonical authority to grant autocephalous status to the Holy Synod of Milan in 1984 or did this properly require consent of the entire Synod of Bishops?
What are relations like between the Holy Synod of Milan and ROCA today?
Many thanks.
Michael Astley wrote:[*]How did relations develop between the Florinites and ROCA after 1969 and what were the affecting factors?
One of the points that help to the distancing between both parties was the consecration to the bishopric of the future Metropolitan Gabriel of Portugal (first leader of the called "Synod of Milan") a former defrocked ROCOR priest, this way Archbishop Auxentios fell in canonical violation to consecrate bishop to a priest that had been defrocked by a sister jurisdiction. For this reason ROCOR could never recognize to the "Synod of Milan"
Michael Astley wrote:[*]Did the Archbishop have canonical authority to grant autocephalous status to the Holy Synod of Milan in 1984 or did this properly require consent of the entire Synod of Bishops?
Most of the Old Calendarist doesn't recognize as legitimate this autonomy due it was only and unilaterally signed by Archbishop Auxentios and without Sinodal consent.
Michael Astley wrote:[*]What are relations like between the Holy Synod of Milan and ROCA today?
I think that there are not any relationship, in the same way with the other Old Calendarist. None recognizes as legitimate its Status for different reasons, first for that said in the two previous points, and also because Gabriel and the Portuguese faction put on in communion with the ecumenist Church of Poland and more eve when the Italians (called already "Synod of Milan") put in communion with the ecumenist and not recognized "Kiev Patriarchate".
Just a few minor corrections from my memory. i used to know a lot about this group, as one of their bishops is in my home town of Austin, and I used to attend there many, many years ago before they were taken in by the Milan synod.
First of all, I think the Portugese bishops were consecrated for Western Europe, and not as the "synod of Milan" proper. I think that designation came later when Bp.Evlogie formed his own synod, after the 2 Portuguese bishops moved to the Polish orthodox. When Evlogie was consecated by the Portugese bishops with the consent of Abp. Auxentios, there was an autocephaly granted by Abp. Auxentios, but it was not down with the consent of the entire Florinite synod. So, in essence Auxentios was acting alone. ( Archbishops are not popes.)
Later, Bp. Evlogie spent some time in communion with the Cyprianite GOC, and I think even co-consecrated Bp. Chrysostomos of Etna. However, this union later broke up for reasons I do not know of.
It is correct that they've been in communion with one of the autonomous Ukrainian Patriarchs, but I think that is no longer.
There have been several bishops from the Milan synod that have come and gone, again, for reasons I do not know of. Bishops John (New Jersey) and Hilarion (Austin, TX) apparently have been a stable part of the Synod. They were former New Catholics turned Old Catholics, turned "western rite Orthodox", turned Milan Synod.
I was told by the monks here that they are definitly more ecumenically interested in being involved with world Orthodoxy than the stricter Old Calendarists. I think the problem is that the other Orthodox are not interested in communion with them, as they are not recognized by anyone. (nothing new)
hope that helps.
in Christ,
nectarios
PS: I'm open to any corrections or additions on what I just wrote.
Many, many thanks to all of you for your very helpful contributions. The light begins to dawn.
I have been informed elsewhere that, in the 1990s, there was talk about possible restoration of good relations and communion with ROCOR but that it fell apart due to the unwillingness of the Milan Synod to have their hierarchy regularised. I presume this has something to do with App Auxentios's irregular activity.
Does anybody know more about this?
(Please forgive the "Michael's 40 questions" approach).
Michael Astley wrote:Ok, I've done some reading on Old Calendarist jurisdictions on OrthodoxWiki and now have a basic level of understanding of the history of the Florinites. I also understand that their current hierarchy comes from the Russian Church Abroad, and from what I have read, at least as recently as 1969, their hierarchy was fully recognised by ROCA. I also understand that what is now the Holy Synod of Milan was granted a tomos of autocephaly by Archbishop Auxentios in 1984.
In light of that, I have been able to narrow my questions down a little to the following:
How did relations develop between the Florinites and ROCA after 1969 and what were the affecting factors?
Many thanks.
Dear Michael,
ROCOR was Communion with entire Greek Orthodox Church until 1976 when the Matthewites broke with them over their Communing of New Calenderists (and Roman Catholics) in Western Europe by ArchBishop Anthony of Geneava. The Matthewites' action was only meant to be temporary and they sent a letter asking for clarification to the Synod in New York which was never answered.
ROCOR remained in Communion with the Florinites until 1980 (I think) breaking off Communion with us because of our acceptance of a derocked priest from ROCOR ( which was wrong of us). However in many places friendly relations continued between our two Churches ( such as in the USA and Australia where ROCOR was more True Orthodox than in Western Europe).
ROCOR in the UK recieves all Greek Old Calenderists by Baptism but this could be due to their strong dislike towards Reader Vladimir Moss.
Given the fact though that the ROCOR priests Fr Andrew Philips has taken part in an "ecumenical service" were the Koran was read by a Protestant clergy women, a ROCOR deacons has written in praise of the arch heretic Pelagius and they getting ready to join the World Council of Churches it is clear we dont have much in common with them.
Theophan.
GOCTheophan wrote:Given the fact though that the ROCOR priests Fr Andrew Philips has taken part in an "ecumenical service" were the Koran was read by a Protestant clergy women, a ROCOR deacons has written in praise of the arch heretic Pelagius and they getting ready to join the World Council of Churches it is clear we dont have much in common with them.
Dear Theophan:
You are right. But this current "ROCOR" is not that Old and Historical One. it would be good to call them "Lavrites" or "Markites" or even "Neo Sergianist".