Maria wrote:The single-handed consecration of Bishop Spyridon took place on Sept. 6/19, 1948, and then the other three bishops were consecrated by both Met. Matthew and Bishop Spyridon in the next three weeks (one per week). I too do not have the date, but Hieromonk Auxentios left sometime in late 1948 or early 1949 after these consecrations had taken place, and the new GOC Synod had formed.
Hieromonk Auxentios had asked St. Matthew, in fact, he had signed a petition begging St. Matthew to consecrate a bishop for the GOC, hoping that he would be elected. When he was not chosen, he left the GOC and accused it of uncanonically consecrating a bishop single-handedly. If Auxentios had begged in a signed petition for a single-handed consecration, why oppose it after the fact?
Auxentios changed his mind because he did not get elected. Look at his record following his departure from the GOC. He shunned the GOC during the years 1971 - 1976, when in humility the GOC sought his reconciliation. Auxentios was reprimanded by Archbishop Seraphim of the ROCOR for his hardness of heart toward the GOC, but he did not repent. Then later, Auxentios was defrocked by his own synod for improprieties and uncanonical acts. Still later, he helped to form the vagante jurisdictions of HOCNA, Synod of Milan, and Met. John LoBue's jurisdiction. He had a history.
After Hieromonk Auxentios had left the GOC, then the Holy Synod of the GOC defrocked him for his schismatic act.
Can you show me a copy of the petition with Hieromonk Auxentios' signature?
Even so, perhaps he realized that the single-handed consecration was uncanonical and repented of asking for it. In 1948, the "Florinites" issued a letter denouncing the consecration:
Oct 29, 1948 - In a pastoral letter, the three Florinite bishops Metropolitan Chrysostom of Florina and Bishops Christopher of Megara and Polycarp of Diavala denounce Matthew’s ‘consecrations’ as an “indescribable impiety which makes Bishop Matthew guilty before God”. Matthew is labelled a “false teacher” who consecrated new bishops as “only in order to fulfil his own personal interests”. However, they also declare that the New-Calendarists have “separated themselves from the Unique Body of Orthodoxy. We consider and believe that the official Church of Greece is schismatic and that the services celebrated by its clergy are deprived of Divine grace.” http://www.gocamerica.org/history_canon ... line.shtml
Since Hieromonk Auxentios joined the Florinites, it is logical that he agreed with their assessments. You continue to impute the worst possible motivation to Archbishop Auxentios. You cannot possibly know what was in this man's heart or mind.
According to Anastasios Hudson, the letter of Archbishop Seraphim is a forgery. Who would benefit from this forgery? Matthewites who were dead set in destroying Archbishop Auxentios. Why such animus?
In 1971, the matthewite synod entered into full eucharistic union with ROCOR. They knew that ROCOR was in communion with ARCHBISHOP Auxentios. Therefore, they entered into communion with ARCHBISHOP Auxentios. The GOC was in communion with Archbishop Auxentios. Why would they enter into communion with a hieromonk they had defrocked? Shouldn't they have secured his repentance and restoration first? Did the Matthewites ever repent of entering into communion with a defrocked schismatic?