The term “Milan Synod” refers to the heretical “Autonomous Orthodox Metropolia of Milan, Western Europe, and the Americas,” a fragment of the short-lived West-European diocese of the Genuine Orthodox Church of Greece, which soon united itself to World Pseudo-Orthodoxy and fell into the heresy of Ecumenism.

The Milan Synod claims its origin from Bps. Gabriel, Tiago, and Teodoro of Portugal and the Autonomous Western-European Diocese created under them in 1984 by Archbishop Auxentios of Athens.

This Synod was created in 1978, given an official tomos only in 1984. It has never joined with world Orthodoxy, and is not a “fragment” of the western European diocese, but is the western European diocese of the True Orthodox Church in that it was explicitly created by +Auxentios to minister to converts from western countries and bring them into the True Church. We hold all that the Greek Old Calendar mission holds without exception.

The Portuguese bishops ordained two Italians and a Frenchman (Evlogios of Milan, Gregorios of Turin, and Vigile of Paris) that same year. In 1985, the Genuine Orthodox Church of Greece deposed Archbishop Auxentios for simony in the ordination of the homosexual Dorotheos Tsakos, and elected Chysostom Kiousis as Archbishop of Athens in Auxentios' place.

The charge of simony was never proven, and was later retracted. +Auxentios’ most bitter opponents praised his personal asceticism and sanctity, while remaining jealous of his position. There was never any “ordination” [he means consecration] of Dorotheos Tsakos, another charge later retracted. Attacks on +Auxentios, in the face of the retractions of the charges, well known to all those part of the Synod of +Chrysostom II, are based solely on jealously and personal arrogance. This synod came into existence on the foundation that the accusations against Auxentios were true. But in their own words, these accusations were false, but, even though it undercuts their very claim to existence, remained separate in Greece until the present day. All contemporaries praise +Auxentios' holiness, and that alone makes a mockery of the charges. The fact that there was never any evidence produced at the relevant council proves that the “deposition” was a farce. Personal attacks are common in these cases, as the lives of St. Seraphim of Sarov and St. John Maximovitch proves. To dredge up charges long since dropped and retracted is irrational and sinful.

It is unclear if the Autonomous West-European diocese recognized the deposition of Archbishop Auxentios or the elevation of Archbp. Chrysostom Kiousis, or continued with the deposed Archbp. Auxentios, or simply recognized no head (autocephalous) and lost contact.

Given that the charges against Auxentios were all dropped (conveniently after his death), this is an irrelevant statement. Milan always recognized +Auxentios, while recognizing his mistakes (as all bishops commit). Archbishop Gregory could have merely asked us what our stance on this was, thereby clearing it all up. The purpose of receiving recognition from the Kievan Patriarchate was to provide some institutional support after the death of Auxentios and the dissolution of his synod. Patriarch Volodymyr was and is a New Confessor and former GULAG inmate who rejected ecumenism.

Regardless, the West-Europeans soon departed the Faith into the bosom of World-Orthodoxy and Ecumenical heresy. In 1989, their Archbishop, Gabriel of Lisbon along with Bishops Tiago and Teodoro, apostatized and joined the ecumenist and uncanonical Orthodox Metropolia of Poland, a part of the heretical Ecumenical Patriarchate.

Very true. Though irrelevant, since they left the True Orthodox Church in so doing. And, as an aside, I am strongly of the opinion that the reason Milan is so ignored (despite our substantial size) is that it is not based on ethnically Greek or Russian (i.e. traditionally Orthodox ethnic) hierarchs. This is why Archbishop Gregory, a few paragraphs up, made mention of their ethnic background. It was common at the time to refer to these men as "Portuguese bishops" or "Italian," as if that itself was cause for alarm. Couple that with these groups' irrational condemnation of the western rites, and one sees that ethnicity does play a role here. The Synod of Milan never joined Poland, but some bishops do. This is very sloppy research that could have been cleared up had the Archbishop merely asked us.

So fell the Portuguese. Roughly at the same time, the Italian and Parisian bishops Evlogios, Gregorios, and Vigile established communion with the uncanonical, ecumenist Ukrainian Orthodox Church of America, also part of the heretical Ecumenical Patriarchate, followed by their establishment of canonical communion with the Ecumenist Patriarchate of Kiev in 1994.

Nothing here is true. The Patriarchate of Kiev (not the church in America which eventually came under Constantinople), to reiterate for the 9,000th time, was the creation of Metropolitan +Dionysii of Poland, who was consecrated by the Russian Church (with the canonical authority of Antioch) at the Kiev Lavra in 1913. Mstyslav had every right to be elected patriarch later, since Ukraine was an independent country. It was never under the ecumenical patriarchate. Nor was there a union with the "Ukrainian Church in America" (which Archbishop Gregory is confusing with the present jurisdiction in Pittsburgh under Constantine of the Phanar) since Mstyslav and Volodymyr were in Ukraine at the time. Nor was their jurisdiction ecumenist, as they maintained no communion with any innovating group, and the Archbishop Gregory neglects to mention that Volodymyr was a catacomb priest in the GULAGs of Ukraine. Mstyslav and his successor, Volodymyr would rather have died than give over their jurisdiction to the Phanar. Again, more sloppy research driven by anger and the desire for self-justification

The official documents of the Milan Synod, now under 'Metropolitan' Evlogios of Milan, since at least that time have recognized the ecumenist Patriarchates of World Orthodoxy as valid and sister-churches. Besides ecumenical activities with Roman Catholics and World Pseudo-Orthodox, the Milan Synod's ecumenism has lately reached beyond them even to the Monophysites. Archbishop Evlogios' 2005 "Fraternal Message to All Bishops of the Oriental [Monophysite] and Byzantine Churches" vigorously attacks the authority of the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th Ecumenical Councils as well as the Orthodoxy of St. Leo of Rome, completely recognizes unity with Monophysitism, and decries `the 15 centuries-long lack of unity in the Church of Christ', which it demands be restored by immediate union and capitulation to the Monophysites.

Again, none of this is true. There is no union with monophysites. There is no recognition of their sacraments, nor as their ever been. Archbishop Gregory invented these "vigorous attacks" on Synodal authority with zero evidence. The Milan Synod follows the teachings of our founder, Auxentios of Athens, that grace does not exist within the innovating churches, though it is true that our rhetoric is rather measured in this regard, which befits the office of bishop. There is no communion permitted with ecumenists under any circumstances.

It is true, however, that there was an investigation into the Syro-Jacobite church some years ago, on the rumor that they had officially abandoned monophysitism. The reality is that they had come to us, not the other way around. However, on further investigation, it was proved that they had traded one heresy for another, they had embraced monotheletism, or the heresy of the “one will.” Hence, the Milan Synod cancelled any further pursuit of the matter. The fallen “Antiochean Orthodox Church,” however, introduced communion with the Jacobites on the strength of the abandonment of monophysitism, but apparently, accepts monotheletism officially. This move cost them the communion of the Church of Georgia, but as it stands, the other brave fighters of “world Orthodoxy” have not uttered a peep in protest, and stand in full communion with the Syro-Jacobites, courtesy of the AOC.

In consequence of all this, and also its one time communion with the heretical group known as the Synod of Resistors [sic] under Metropolitan Cyprian of Fili, no one can rightly consider the Milan Synod an option for those seeking true Orthodoxy, and the Milan Synod rightly finds a place on this website with all its other `sister-church' heretics and schismatics.

Bishop Gregory could easily have contacted any of us for clarification of the admittedly complex series of events that the Greek Old Calendar movement has suffered. He has not. There was a brief communion with the Synod of Resisters, but the instability of that jurisdiction, and their irrational position on the western rites made that impossible. Milan remains the last canonical aspect of the Synod of Auxentios, itself created by Metropolitan St. Philaret and later, the Russian-based synod of Volodymyr of Kiev. It should be reiterated that there is no recognition of the fallen “Filaret of Kiev” since his fraudulent organization was uncovered, significantly, by the Milan Synod after Volodymyr’s death (likely by poisoning) in 1995. We maintain all that Orthodoxy teaches. We remain loyal to the memory of Auxentios, who was a beloved hierarch. We were given a full tomos of autonomy, and thus, even if one believes that Auxentios was actually deposed, it is irrelevant, since we were already an independent jurisdiction. But even if the reader rejects that, then there is still the recognition of the Kievan patriarchate (pre-Filaret), which is fully canonical, because it derives from Dionysii of Poland. Hence, the only rational conclusion is that the Milan Synod remains the last true canonical part of the Greek Old Calendar movement, and seek constructive dialogue with all other factions of that movement, which we firmly believe are holy and grace filled, despite the personal failings of the hierarchs involved.