4. “Regarding the ‘heresy of Cyprianitism,’ the ecclesiology of the Synod in Resistance was not an invention of Metropolitan Cyprian, but was based on the Synod’s interpretation of the Conciliar, Patristic, and historical precepts of the Orthodox Church—an interpretation, in fact, expressed in many of the writings of the ‘Father’ of the Old Calendar movement, Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Phlorina.” Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina made some mistakes. Cyprian seized on the mistakes and built them up into a full-grown ecclesiology. Chrysostomos repented of his mistakes. Cyprian never repented. Metropolitan Chrysostomos never created a schism on the basis of his mistakes. Cyprian did. Metropolitan Chrysostomos was never condemned in a formal canonical trial. Cyprian was. The difference is great…
4 points need to be discussed here:
a. Cyprian used the writings of Met. Chrysostom of Florina who had renounced True Orthodoxy and who was persecuted, beaten, starved, deprived sleep and water, drugged, and imprisoned by the New Calendarists into doing so. However, St. Matthew suffered even more because he never gave into the New Calendarist, neither did he denounce True Orthodoxy.
b. Met. Chrysostom did not fully repent of his mistakes. Instead of asking St. Matthew and his successors to humbly receive him back, he wanted the Matthewites to join him. In true humility, Met. Chrysostom should have humbled himself and should have asked to be accepted as a lowly monk. Instead he wanted to become the head of the True Orthodox whom he had abandoned and renounced.
c. The Kallinikites and the SiR both said that Cyprian did repent and asked the SiR to join the GOC-K Synod. Can we trust their word? Nothing was written down or recorded for posterity.
d. Although Met. Chrysostom was never condemned in a formal canonical trial because the Matthewite Synod did not have the canonical number of bishops to do so, he was issued a stern letter by St. Matthew, which he ignored. St. Matthew repeatedly asked Met. Chrysostom to repent and to come back and consecrate a few bishops, but Met. Chrysostom refused. Instead he remained true to his word to the New Calendarists never to consecrate bishops, because he felt that the New Calendarist was the True Church. This shows his confusion because if he felt that the New Calendarists were the True Church, then why did he not join them? Instead Chrysostom remain in schism from the New Calendarists and the True Orthodox Old Calendarists until he died.
Chrysostom of Florina is the greatest traitor of faith, this is the truth. Kyprianos Koutsoumpas was going on the footsteps of this traitor and was taking out his false heretic ecclesiology. This is heresy, in no way a "mistake".
Chrysostom of Florina is the greatest traitor of faith, this is the truth. Kyprianos Koutsoumpas was going on the footsteps of this traitor and was taking out his false heretic ecclesiology. This is heresy, in no way a "mistake".
Can not traitors repent? Chrysostom of Florina despite his un-Orthodox views repented and told his flock to go under St, Matthew.
Chrysostom of Florina is the greatest traitor of faith, this is the truth. Kyprianos Koutsoumpas was going on the footsteps of this traitor and was taking out his false heretic ecclesiology. This is heresy, in no way a "mistake".
Can not traitors repent? Chrysostom of Florina despite his un-Orthodox views repented and told his flock to go under St, Matthew.
Let us hope that Chrysostom of Florina did repent. From what I have read on the Internet, the Kallinikites continue to attack St. Matthew. If Chrysostom of Florina did tell his flock to go back under St. Matthew, then why are the Florinites continuing to attack St. Matthew and not honoring him as a saint.
Chrysostom of Florina is the greatest traitor of faith, this is the truth. Kyprianos Koutsoumpas was going on the footsteps of this traitor and was taking out his false heretic ecclesiology. This is heresy, in no way a "mistake".
Can not traitors repent? Chrysostom of Florina despite his un-Orthodox views repented and told his flock to go under St, Matthew.
Let us hope that Chrysostom of Florina did repent. From what I have read on the Internet, the Kallinikites continue to attack St. Matthew. If Chrysostom of Florina did tell his flock to go back under St. Matthew, then why are the Florinites continuing to attack St. Matthew and not honoring him as a saint.
I don't know how long the slander of St. Matthew has gone on in the GOC-K or other Florinite jurisdictions. Though my best guess for the slander coming from the GOC-K is from the Cyprianite members who haven't renounced their heretical beliefs.
Can not traitors repent? Chrysostom of Florina despite his un-Orthodox views repented and told his flock to go under St, Matthew.
Let us hope that Chrysostom of Florina did repent. From what I have read on the Internet, the Kallinikites continue to attack St. Matthew. If Chrysostom of Florina did tell his flock to go back under St. Matthew, then why are the Florinites continuing to attack St. Matthew and not honoring him as a saint.
I don't know how long the slander of St. Matthew has gone on in the GOC-K or other Florinite jurisdictions. Though my best guess for the slander coming from the GOC-K is from the Cyprianite members who haven't renounced their heretical beliefs.
You are correct. The official biography written by the Cyprianites is very biased against St. Matthew.
