Matthewites and Chrysostomites

[GOCPriestMark]

Ioannis, are you really meaning to say that you believe that there is grace in the mysteries of those outside the Orthodox Church? Or perhaps you have a different understanding for the word "anathema".

[ioannis_theologos]

I think Vladimir Moss explained this better than I can. I'll repost the link I found earlier in the thread:

http://www.romanitas.ru/eng/Matthewites ... inites.htm

I'll sum up my position. The Matthewites are correct in holding the New Calendarists to be true schismatics and devoid of grace, but they are wrong in holding those with private opinions to the contrary to be heretics, since there is another view current (which I personally disagree with) that only a Pan-Orthodox Council, not a Local Council, has the authority to anathematize heretics and schismatics. This is along the same lines as other points of theological debate (Darwinian evolution, the soteriology of Romanides and Kalomiros, the controversy over the toll-houses) which I have definite opinions on, but I don't consider those with contrary opinions to be heretics, since in all of these cases, the Church has not yet spoken with an authoritative voice. So there it is.

In Christ

Jonathan

[Isaakos]

BUMP!

This thread has been moved into Intra-TOC Polemics due to the polemical content.
Maria
Administrator

[Maria]

I think it best if we avoid these pejorative terms.

[Justice]

I'm happy to say that after reading Fr. Stephen Fraser's book, I agree with the "Matthewite" position. However I agree with Maria we shouldn't call each other by these demeaning labels.

[Agios_Irineos]

I'm happy to say that after reading Fr. Stephen Fraser's book, I agree with the "Matthewite" position. However I agree with Maria we shouldn't call each other by these demeaning labels.

Do you? So nobody else is Orthodox?

[Maria]

I'm happy to say that after reading Fr. Stephen Fraser's book, I agree with the "Matthewite" position. However I agree with Maria we shouldn't call each other by these demeaning labels.

Yes, the use of labels with -kites, -mites, -nites, -wites is a not right nor godly. This insidious labeling focuses on man, not God.

For example, every time a leading hierarch either dies or retires in a True Orthodox Synod, and he is replaced with a new hierarch, the -ites in the synodal name change again. The derogatory name "Chrysostomites" changed to "Kallinikites" with the election of Archbishop Kallinikos of Athens, Greece. The Synod of Resistance who joined the Synod of Archbishop Kallinikos in 2014 were previously known as Cyprianites.

Those following the Greek Old Calendarist Archbishop Stephanos who traces his apostolic lineage directly to St. Matthew the New Confessor are not called Stephanites by their enemies, but Matthewites. Similarly, those who follow the deposed Monk Kirykos are not called Kirykites, but Matthewites, so this labeling leads to confusion. By the way, Monk Kyrikos was deposed because of his extreme rigidity, which led to heretical teachings that are not of God. He was deposed by the same synod now led by Archbishop Stephanos of Athens, Greece.

This reminds me of the Epistle of St. Paul, who did not like his followers to say, "We are of Paul, or Apollos, or Peter." Thus, St. Paul was glad that he had not baptized many of his followers. What really matters is, "Are you of Christ?"

The world orthodox have a much better system using their home country names: Antiochians, Georgians, Greeks, Romanians, Russians, Serbians.

Perhaps it is best to say, "We are Greek Orthodox Old Calendarists under Archbishop [fill in the blank]." There is a problem with the Russians because all Russians whether MP, ROCOR-MP, RTOC, ROAC, Met. Agafangel's ROCA, or even those Catacomb Russian Orthodox Churches under Archbishop Stephanos of Athens Greece, can claim to be Russian Old Calendarists. The Serbian and Romanians also follow the Old Calendar, but are known for their radical ecumenism.