American Metropolia Response to SiR Letter

Pope on Nativity: Wrong Year, No Animals, No Angels
November 24, 2012
MP and Finish Lutherans Hold Ecumenical Meeting
November 28, 2012

American Metropolia Response to SiR Letter

As previously reported, the reply by the Metropolia of the Americas and British Isles, and the Synod in Resistance response were noted. Also mentioned was the response to the last Synod in Resistance letter that was stated by the Metropolia’s website to be forthcoming.

According to the Metropolia website, paper and electronic copies of the response were sent to the Synod in Resistance’s dismissal.

It has been formally posted and may be found here.


  1. GOC Raleigh says:

    In my opinion, a good letter, although it seems to ramble in places. I probably would have shortened it a bit and just asked the question: if the Milan Synod is not a valid ecclesiastical body, at what point did it become invalid? Because as you rightly point out, Met. Evloghios was one of the consecrators of Arch. Chrysostomos of Etna, so at some point he was recognized by the SiR, and at some point he was not.

    I tried to ascertain from them when he was no longer considered a legitimate Orthodox bishop back in 2004 when I was doing research on the Old Calendar Church in preparation for my Master’s Thesis, but they declined to answer my request. I sympathize with the reasoning provided at the time–a desire to not enter the fray of ecclesiastical gossip–but upon reading responses such as what they wrote to you, I feel they open the door to such inquiry and (constructive) criticism.

    (Disclaimer: I am neither a supporter of the 1979 consecrations nor of the 1984 Tomos. But I believe in fairness above all else, and I believe that the authors of this letter make some good logical points that need to be addressed).

    • HmkEnoch says:

      Often you have to ‘ramble’ and make long. lugubrious points, so you can cover all the points.

      • GOC Raleigh says:

        The problem in so doing though is that you open yourself up to your correspondent picking off one of the points that may have been tangential or supportive but not the “main” point and then “running with it.” Recall the time that Patrick Barnes posted an introduction to Fr Basil’s article about Old Calendarism being anti-patristic; the SiR folks wrote a long critique of Patrick Barnes’s introduction instead of writing a refutation of Fr Basil’s article itself. Or recall the whole argument between them and the editors of which tended to go off topic.

        Believe me, I know the desire to get it all out at one time, but sometimes keeping it more focused and deliberately not covering all the points is a better tactic, because it prevents the correspondent from being able to deflect. I think that if the SiR would produce a statement explaining in their view *when* Met Evloghios stopped being a valid ecclesiastical hierarch that it would be a good step toward understanding their position in general in regards to “valid ecclesiastical bodies.” I would like to see your side press them to explain that point if nothing else.

        • HmkEnoch says:

          It may be an unanswerable questions from their own point of view; we will have to find out. After all, if they continue to view Patriarch Bartholomew, Patriarch Ignatius, and Patriarch Kirill as being valid ecclesiastical hierarchs, one then wonders what you have to do to be not a valid ecclesiastical body?

  2. Orthodox Inquiry says:

    An excellent letter. Your quote from Saint Basil was especially appropriate for this ‘sect’. You should consider yourself fortunate that you were not included in their “dialogue”. Their
    dialogue is only a way to use the TOC-Kallinikos Synod. The SiR is desperate.They fear that the Romanians will leave them. They boastfully proclaim Saints Theodore Studites, Photios, Gregory Palamas, Mark of Ephesus and others, but in reality they are imposters. Harsh words. Hardly. They will end up just as the Boston Synod. Stay away from them.

    • John Prodromou says:

      You are to the point. I would only add a verse from Proverbs 18:12:
      HONOUR. I only hope that the TOC-Kallinkos Synod will be able to see
      through this hypocritical ‘dialogue’ and not become a victim of the SiR
      “Synod” which is suffering from terminal cancer.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *