Cessation of commemoration on Mt Athos?

[Christophoros]

[Note: This letter was composed and signed by monastics who commemorated the Ecumenical Patriarchate (not members of the "non-commemorator" zealot community which has existed for several decades on Mt Athos) up until the recent events involving Pope Benedict XVI and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I.]

An Open Letter
December, 2006

To the Holy Abbots and the Holy Representatives of the Sacred Twenty Monasteries in the Sacred Community of the Holy Mount Athos
Holy Abbots and Holy Fathers,

Bless!

We desire at the present time to express our deepest concern and sadness for all that is taking place for years now, in our Holy Orthodoxy, the deconstruction of the teaching of the Holy Apostles and of the Holy Fathers and the antithesis to all the sacred canons enacted by the ecumenical and local synods. We wonder if some ecumenical synod has been assembled and abolished the canons which forbid the joint prayer with heretics, or if the Pope repented and renounced the heresies of the Filioque, of primacy, of infallibility, of unleavened bread, of the purifying fire [purgatory], of created grace, of the immaculate conception of the Most Holy Theotokos, and so many others, most of which he has been condemned and anathematized numerous times by Orthodox Synods and by the entirety of the Holy Fathers.

Heaven was angered and the Holy Fathers exceedingly saddened by the spectacle and by hearing about all that took place at the Phanar during the feast of the Holy Apostle Andrew on the 30th of November of the current year.

Unprecedented and unheard of things in the two thousand year history of the Church. “The scornful marginalization of the dogmas of the Fathers, the annihilation of the Apostolic traditions, the introduction of novelties into the churches by contemporary personalities,” as St. Basil the Great says, regarding comparable events during his own time.

Everything happened literally upside-down.

Instead of the heretical Pope being cast down, as we see the heretics depicted in the Icons of the Holy Synods, and being ejected from the Divine Liturgy, as required by the liturgical command, “the doors, the doors, in wisdom let us attend,” we placed him on a high throne, where he sat and along with others, he too, wore an omophorion, the Orthodox deacons censed him, the Patriarch exchanged the Liturgical Kiss with him at the “let us love one another,” and he recited as though being the one in charge, the proestos, the “Our Father…,” and the chorus of the sacred cantors chanted to him the “Many Years,” and a specially composed hymn from an Athonite hymnographer – Lord, have mercy! – if, of course, the journalistic communications are true.

And he was permitted to give the congregation his blessing, rather, his madness according to the sacred canons.

We allowed the Church militant on earth to be divided from the Church triumphant of the Saints in heaven and to be united to churches and assemblies of evil heretics.

We insulted all of the holy martyrs and confessors who struggled to the point of blood against the heresies, because we present their struggles, their martyrdoms and their confessions as unbeneficial and useless.
Will not the blessed Holy Mountain Fathers who were martyred by [Ecumenical Patriarch John] Bekkos because they refused to receive him and to commemorate the Pope, be sorry, seeing us not only to reject their example with our silence, but to do the opposite?

Why then did all of the previous martyrs undergo martyrdom and why did the confessors stand fast in their profession of the Faith?
You know, Reverend Fathers, better than we do, of all the anti-Orthodox and blasphemous actions, statements, and decisions of the Ecumenical Patriarch and other heads of institutions, Abbots and Bishops who loudly and overtly advise – bareheadedly – the acceptance and teaching of the panheresy of Ecumenism.

It is the greatest ecclesiological heresy of all ages.

It rejects the uniqueness of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and, equates it to the heresies, by accepting their Mysteries as having and communicating, sanctifying and saving grace.

Besides recognition of the baptism of Papists and Lutherans, we also have participation in the common chalice with Monophysites and in many instances with the Papists in the Cyclades and in the Diaspora.

We have now realized with greater sadness, that the spiritual leadership of the Holy Mountain of the last years has not confronted with fortitude and confessional courage, these manifest appearances of apostasy, as the Athonite Fathers of bygone times did.

The Patriarch has gauged our responses and because they have been half-hearted, and many times non-existent, he proceeds without any obstacles into union with the Pope, who is unrepentant and remains in heresies.
He gauged us and was exceedingly glad also at his last visit to the Holy Mountain to make it appear that he came to receive the consent and blessing of the Athonites for all the things that he had already planned to do with the Pope a few days later.

We, the humble priestmonks and monks, in the form of confession disclose to you that we have been scandalized by the silence and inaction of our spiritual authorities on Mount Athos, and together with us, all the people of Greece and all Orthodox around the globe, as well as those who are sympathetic to monastics.

They all are waiting to hear the voice of Mount Athos.

From you, the wisest and most sage, we have learned that when the faith is endangered, we are all accountable if we are silent and shrink back, as St. Theodore the Studite says. Particularly, a monk must not allow the slightest innovation in matters of the faith, according to the same holy Father and great monastic leader and organizer of monastic life and the Elder of us all. He did not fear the threats and the persecutions of the iconoclastic, Emperors and Patriarchs, but even within the environs of Constantinople, within the enclosure of the Great Sacred Monastery of Studion, he organized a procession with a thousand torch bearing monks, who held the forbidden holy icons in their hands.

Ten thousand monks in Palestine, under leadership of Saints Savvas the Sanctified and Theodosios the Cenobite, these great monastic leaders, assembled together long before in Jerusalem, and saved Orthodoxy from the heresy of Monothelitism.

Who is going to save the Church today from the panheresy of Ecumenism and the deceit of Papism?

The letters of protest, which the Sacred Community has sent from time to time to the Ecumenical Patriarch did not bring about any results.

There is no more time for words. It is time for action.

We, unlearned and wretched sinners, do not want to teach you, nor do we want to present ourselves as confessors.

We just want to set at ease our Orthodox monastic conscience; We want to especially honor the holy martyrs and confessors, particularly those ones martyred by Bekkos.

We want to honor and follow their conduct.

To not shrink back and place the monasteries and our brotherhoods above the purity of the faith, above God, and the truth.

We believe that after so many oral and written protests and pleas, after so many retractions, retreats, and compromises, the only thing which will gladden the Orthodox and shame the heretic, is a cessation of the commemoration of the Patriarch's name in the services and not only that, but the cessation of commemoration of the names in all the services, of all the bishops agreeing with him wherever they may be around the World who remain silent.

Gather together, holy Fathers, the monks of all the Monasteries, of the Sketes, of the Kellia, in a militant all monastic assembly, either within or outside the Holy Mountain and knock down the towers of heresy, of Papism, of Ecumenism.

Take on the good fight of the Faith.

We, if you remain inactive, will prefer doing things pleasing to God and not things pleasing to man.

May God enlighten us all, and may the Most Holy Theotokos cover and bless Her Garden and protect the Orthodox Church from those warring against Her and from those heretics warring against the Saints, as well as from cowardly shepherds who leave the flock unprotected from attacks of the wolves.

Finally, asking for your blessings, we conclude with respect,

Hieromonk Ephraim, former abbot, Elder of the Skete of Apostle Andrew and the brotherhood with me, of the Holy Monastery of Vatopedi.

Elder Hieromonk Eustratios, Great Laura Monastery.
Elder Hieromonk Poimen, Holy Monastery of Zographou
Elder Hieromonk Basileios, Holy Monastery of Zographou
Elder Hieromonk Bessarion, Holy Monastery of Zographou
Monk Nikodemos (Bilalis, Sacred Cell "of the Presentation" from Kapsala
Monk Artemios, Great Laura Monastery
Priestmonk Hilarion, Great Laura Monastery
Paisios Monk, Great Laura Monastery
Savvas Monk, Great Laura Monastery
Sacred Deacon Chariton, Great Laura Monastery
Chariton Monk, Karoulia, Great Laura Monastery
Athanasios Monk, Karoulia, Great Laura Monastery
Elder Vlasios Monk,Kserokalyvo Viglas, Great Laura Monastery
Akakios Monk Sacred Place of Holy Trinity (Kyr Isaiah) Great Laura Monastery
Elder Isaiah Monk, Kellion of the Birth of the Mother of God, Great Laura Monastery
Cherubim Monk, Sacred place of the Archangels, Great Laura Monastery
Hieromonk Damaskinos, Kellion of Holy Trinity at Karyes, Great Laura Monastery
Elder Nektarios Monk, Kellion of Holy Trinity at Karyes, Great Laura Monastery
Elder Theolyptos Monk and the fathers with him; Kellion of the Sacred Forerunner,St.Anne's Skete, Great Laura Monastery
Hieromonk Gabriel, Sacred Kellion of St. George(Kartsounaion) Sacred Skete of St. Anne, Great Laura Monastery
Hieromonk Chrysostomos Kartsonas, Great Laura Monastery
Elder Kosmas Monk,Sacred Hut of St. Demetrios, Skete of Saint Anne, Great Laura Monastery
Elder Panteleimon Monk, Sacred Kellion of St. Panteleimon, Sacred Skete of Holy Trinity, Great Laura Monastery
Elder Sophronios Monk, Sacred Hut of Entrance of the Theotokos, Sacred Skete of Holy Trinity, Great Laura Monastery
Parthenios Monk, Sacred Hut Entrance of Theotokos, Sacred Skete of Holy Trinity Great Laura Monastery
Athanasios Monk at Vouleutiria, Great Laura Monastery
Elder Hieromonk Serapheim, Kellion of All Saints, Skete of Saint Anne, Great Laura Monastery
Elder Daniel Monk, Saint Anne's, Great Laura Monastery
Elder Gerasimos Monk Sacred Hut of St. George, Katounakia, Great Laura Monastery
Elder Hieromonk Benediktos, Kellion of Ss Konstantine and Eleni, Vatopedi Monastery
Paisios Monk, Kellion of Archangels (Savvaion) Karyes, Hilandari Monastery
Silouanos Monk Sacred Hut of St. Nicholas, Nea Skete, St. Paul Monastery
Gabriel Monk Kellion of Koutloumousiou of Saint Christodoulos
Dositheos Monk, Koutloumousiou Monastery Place
Elder Nektarios Monk, Sacred Hut of Holy Trinity, Skete of Koutloumousiou Monastery
Paisios Monk, Kellion of Saint Barbara, Koutloumousiou Monastery
Elder Moses Monk, Kellion St. John Chrysostomos, Skete of St. Panteleimonos, Koutloumousiou Monastery
Elder Hieromonk Abraaham, Sacred Hut of St Gerasimos Kefalinias, Skete of St. Panteleimonos, Koutloumousiou Monastery
Elder Spyridon Monk, Kellion of St. Nicholas, Koutloumousiou Monastery
Theodoulos Monk, formerly of Koutloumousiou Monastery
Elder Hieromonk Chrysostom, Kellion of St. Spyridon of Kerkyra, Koutloumousiou Monastery
Hilarion Monk, Sacred Place of Doheiariou Monastery ( Platon area)
Elder Nikodemos Monk, Kellion of St. Nektarios Kapsala, Pantokratoros Monastery
Hieromonk Gabriel, Kellion of Quick to Hear Mother of GOD, Pantokratoros Monastery
Isaac Monk, Kellion of Birth of Mother of GOD, Kapsala, Pantokratoros Monastery
Elder Athanasios Monk, Kellion of St . Athanasios, Pantokratoros Monastery
Elder Meletios Monk, Birth of Theotokos, Kapsala, Pantokratoros Monastery
Elder Gregory Monk Kellion of St. Nicholas, Kapsala, Pantokratoros Monastery
Elder Onoufrios Monk, Kellion Dormition of Theotokos, Karyes
Elder Nicholas Monk, Kellion of St. Demetrios, Karyes
Hieromonk Gabriel, Kellion of Holy Archangels (Kombologas) Karyes

[Andrew]

wow... may the Lord bless them and the Ecumenical Patriarch.

[Paul Cowan]

Is this a call to arms for the Church militant? What are we to do? We are we not to do? Who am I to do anything? Who do we (I) look to for guidance on a bigger scale if I am not under this jusridiction? But am Orthodox. DO I sit back like these monks are accusing others of doing by keeping silent or do I say or do something to express my opinion? Am I even allowed to have an opinion on this topic?

Paul

[Christophoros]

In 1981, the Synod of Bishops of the ROCOR wrote the following words regarding "hasty conclusions" drawn by laymen and "even some clergymen" who question the Orthodoxy of their hierarchs. While monastics are truly the guardians of Orthodoxy, we laymen in particular must recognize our place in the Church and not become overwhelmed by zeal "not according to knowledge," and become un-Christian in spirit, even while acknowledging the role everyone in the Church has in combating heresy.

-------------

Mutual love and concern for Church unity, which is especially necessary in times of heresy and schism, require from each of us great caution in what we say. If no one is supposed to condemn his neighbor in haste, even more care is demanded where our own primate is concerned. Rash implications about his allegedly unorthodox preaching as well as open criticism in sermons reveal a tendency towards condemnation and division which is unseemly in Christians. The Apostle said, "Who art thou that judgest another man's servant?" How much more appropriate might it be to say. "Who art thou that judgest thy metropolitan?" Such an attitude, which can easily develop into schism, is strongly censured by the canons of the Church, for it shows willful appropriation by clerics of the "Judgment belonging to metropolitans" (Canon XIII of the First-and-Second Council). Everyone must be very careful in his criticism, particularly when expressing it publicly, remembering that "Judgment and justice take hold on thee" (Job 36:17). If, contrary to the apostolic teaching about hierarchical distribution of duties and responsibilities all the clerics and laymen were to supervise their hierarchs (I Cor. 12:28-30), then instead of being a hierarchical Body of Christ, our Church would turn into a kind of democratic anarchy where the sheep assume the function of the shepherd. A special grace is bestowed upon bishops to help them in their work. Those who seek to control their bishop should be reminded of Canon LXIV of the Sixth Ecumenical Council which quotes the words of St. Gregory the Theologian:

Learning in docility and abounding in cheerfulness, and ministering with alacrity, we shall not all be the tongue which is the more active member, not all of us apostles, not all prophets, nor shall we all interpret.

And again:

Why dost thou make thyself a shepherd when thou art a sheep? Why become a head when thou art a foot? Why dost thou try to be a commander when thou art enrolled in the number of the soldiers?

The canon ends with the following words:

But if anyone be found weakening the present canon, he is to be cut off for forty days.

-------------------

Another interesting quote, particularly for sinful laypeople such as myself, from the life of St. John the Prophet (6th c.):

Someone asked St. John the Prophet if he should enter into discussions
about the faith with people who we thought were not thinking correctly.

St. John replied: "Never take part in conversations about faith; for God
will not demand this of you.

"God will only ask whether you believe correctly what you have received
from the holy Church at the time of your baptism and whether you keep the
commandments.

"Therefore, maintain these things, and you shall be saved. Furthermore, it
is not necessary to talk about doctrines; for this is beyond you. Rather
pray to God for all your sins. If you are asked, simply say: 'These things are
beyond me; forgive me...' "

[Peter Farrington]

There are times when this approach is a wise course, but it would not be wise to make an absolute position out of the words of one spiritual Father speaking into a particular context with a particular person.

The NewTestament has a great many instructions about how we should be able to present our faith when asked, and how we should seek to win those who have fallen.

There is a time to be silent, especially in the face of argumentation, but I do not see anywhere that the Bible teaches us not to explain our faith when asked.

Peter

[Christophoros]

To put it into context, St. John is speaking of interactions between fellow Christians that lead to animosity, as opposed to speaking with inquirers of the Orthodox faith or heretics and schismatics.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

This letter has been quoted many times now on different lists and forums as speaking with an authoritative voice since it comes from the Holy Mt.

Since it appeared however I have questioned the accuracy of its description & interpretation of what actually happened between the Patriarch & Pope. I don't know many at all who have described me as being very liberal on these questions, but really as I tried to follow this meeting on various church websites and in the media I could see nothing or little that involved an intentional compromise of the Faith. I think it's also important to keep in mind that in our interaction with other Christians we do at times need to go close to the line for charity's sake. Or because nowadays many opportunities for these meetings come out of circumstances that truly do call for something more proactive than in previous more stable times.

There is also something in the tone of this letter that seems not quite sober & if I can say it, not quite Athonite. The letter is written with the intention of being a genuine witness in defense of Orthodoxy but yet its presentation is an extreme interpretation of the meeting between the Patriarch & Pope.

Indeed the letter itself leads one to ask who exactly wrote it. It may on the face of it appear as 'Athonite' but yet the signatures, except for one, are not those of any of the abbots of the main monasteries on the Holy Mt. Surely this raises alarm bells for anyone who has been on the Mt where obedience is described as the highest virtue. Also notice the following sentence from the letter which raises questions along this same line:


We have now realized with greater sadness, that the spiritual leadership of the Holy Mountain of the last years has not confronted with fortitude and confessional courage, these manifest appearances of apostasy, as the Athonite Fathers of bygone times did.

In other words we need to ask if the letter was written as being one in spirit with the actual spiritual fathers of Athos or not. If in some sense it is actually written in protest against these 'spiritual leaders' then the whole letter assumes a different tone.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear friends,

I, too, have seen this letter in a few environments of late, and share Fr Raphael's concerns over its precise origin and content, and particularly the way it is being interpreted as a kind of official statement from the Holy Mountain.

A couple of clarifications and expansions on Fr Raphael's points above:

Firstly, none of the signatories of the letter is the head of any of the ruling houses (i.e. the main monasteries) on the Mountain, nor a member of the holy koinotia, the ruling council of Athos as a whole. The most significant signatory, to whom I think Fr Raphael was referring, is Hieromonk Ephraim, at one time abbot of Vatopaidiou, but who is no longer at this monastery.

Secondly, with the exception of Hieromonk Ephraim's skete of the Apostle Andrew near Karyes, which is a large skete of some 20 or so fathers, all of the other signatories of the letter are single hut-dwellers or kelliotes of cells or sketes of individuals. The association of the names of the large houses on the listing (e.g. the fact that 'Great Lavra' appears many times) is fairly misleading: all sketes on the Mountain belong to one of the twenty ruling monasteries, and thus in that technical sense are 'of' a monastery; but they are essentially entirely independent.

Thirdly, far from being a statement of the Athonite community overall, which as a body speaks through its Holy Community (again, the ruling council of the Mountain), this is clearly a letter of certain sketes, cells and hut-dwellers -- who are obviously zealots -- written to chastise (i.e. admonish, correct) the Holy Community of Athos. This is most clear from one phrase toward the end of the letter: 'We, if you remain inactive, will prefer doing things pleasing to God and not things pleasing to man'; but is also clear from the tone of other passages (such as that quoted by Fr Raphael: 'We have now realized with greater sadness, that the spiritual leadership of the Holy Mountain of the last years has not confronted with fortitude and confessional courage, these manifest appearances of apostasy, as the Athonite Fathers of bygone times did'). So this is not itself a letter from Athos to the world, proclaiming an Athonite position on matters; rather, it is a letter from certain individuals and groups on Athos, written to the community of their own leadership, demanding a different view than that being taken by Athos as a whole.

One needs to be very careful. I've seen too many people, rash and quick to rush to judgement, condemning this 'statement of the Athonites', which is in fact implicitly proclaiming that this is not the position of the Holy Mountain as an ecclesiastical body.

INXC, Matthew

[Christophoros]

Holy Community, Holy Mountian Athos Karyes, 30 December 2006

Protocol Number 2/7/2310

The recent visit of Pope Benedict XVI to the Ecumenical Patriarchate on the occasion of that Throne’s feast-day celebration of Saint Andrew (30th November 2006) and thereafter the visit by His Beatitude the Archbishop of Athens Mr. Christodoulos to the Vatican on (14th December 2006) provoked a variety of impressions, evaluations and reactions. We shall skip those things that the secular Press had evaluated as positive or negative, to focus on those things that pertain to our salvation, for whose sake we came out from the world to live in the wilderness of the Holy Mountain.

As Monks of the Holy Mountain, we respect the Ecumenical Patriarchate, under whose canonical jurisdiction we belong. We honor and venerate His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Mr. Mr. Bartholomew and we rejoice in all that he has achieved and so labored for, in a Godly manner, for the Church. We especially commemorate his solid and untiring defense of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, amid the many unfavorable conditions that exist, as well as his support for impoverished local Orthodox Churches and the care that is taken to spread the message of the Orthodox Church throughout the world. Furthermore, we the Monks of the Holy Mountain honor the Most Holy Church of Greece, from which most of us grew up in, and we respect His Beatitude the Primate.

However, the events that took place during the recent visits of the Pope to Patriarchate and of His Beatitude the Archbishop to the Vatican evoked deep sorrow in our hearts.

We desire and we struggle through our way of life to safeguard the trust willed to us by the Holy Fathers, which was bequeathed to us by the holy Founders of our Sacred Monasteries and the blessed reposed fathers who have gone before us. We strive to the best of our ability to live the mystery of the Church and the unblemished Orthodox Faith, according to what we are daily taught by the divine Services, the sacred readings, and the teachings in general of the Holy Fathers which are set out in their writings and in the decisions of the Ecumenical Synods. We safeguard our dogmatic conscience “like the apple of our eye”, and we build on it, by applying ourselves to God-pleasing labors and the meticulous study of the achievements of the holy Confessor Fathers when they struggled against the miscellaneous heresies, and especially of our father among the saints, Gregory of Palamas, the Holy Martyrs of the Holy Mountain and the Holy Martyr Kosmas the First, whose sacred relics we kiss with every honor and whose sacred memory we celebrate. We are afraid to remain silent, whenever issues arise that pertain to the trust that our Fathers left us. Our responsibility, towards the most venerable fathers and brothers of the overall brotherhood of the Holy Mountain and towards the pious faithful of the Church who regard Athonite Monasticism as their non-negotiable guardian of sacred Tradition, weighs heavily upon our conscience,

The visits of the Pope at the Patriarchate and the Archbishop’s visit at the Vatican may have secured certain benefits of a secular nature, however, during those visits, various other events took place which were not according to the lawful custom of Orthodox Ecclesiology, or agreed commitments were made that would neither benefit the Orthodox Church, nor any heterodox Christians.

First of all, the Pope was received as though he were a canonical (proper) bishop of Rome. During the service, the Pope wore an omophoron; he was addressed by the Ecumenical Patriarch with the greeting “blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord” as though it were Christ the Lord; he blessed the congregation and he was commemorated as “most holy” and “His Beatitude the Bishop of Rome”. Furthermore, the Pope’s presiding on the Bishop’s Throne while wearing an omophoron during the Orthodox Divine Liturgy; also, the reciting of the “Lord’s Prayer”, the liturgical kiss with the Patriarch, are displays which go beyond simple common prayer. And all of this, when the papist institution has not retreated at all on any of its heretical teachings and its policy; on the contrary, the Pope is in fact visibly promoting and trying to reinforce Uniates along with the Papist dogmas on primacy and infallibility, and is going even further, with inter-faith common prayers and the pan-religious hegemony of the Pope of Rome that is discerned therein.

As regards with the reception of the Pope at the Patriarchate, we are especially grieved by the fact that all of the Media kept repeating the same, incorrect information, that the hymns that were (unduly) sung at the time had been composed by Monks of the Holy Mountain. We take this opportunity to responsibly inform all pious Christians that their composer was not, and could never be, a monk of the Holy Mountain.

Then there is the matter of the attempt by His Beatitude the Archbishop of Athens to commence relations with the Vatican on social, cultural and bio-ethical issues, as well as the objective to mutually defend the Christian roots of Europe (positions which are also found in the Common Declaration of the Pope and the Patriarch of Istanbul), both of which may seem innocuous or even positive, given that their aim is to cultivate peaceful human relations. Nevertheless, it is important that all these do not give the impression that the West and Orthodoxy continue to have the same bases, or lead one into forgetting the distance that separates the Orthodox Tradition from that which is usually presented as the “European spirit”. (Western) Europe is burdened with a series of anti-Christian institutions and acts, such as the Crusades, the “Holy” Inquisition, slave trading and colonization. It is burdened with the tragic division which took on the form of the schism of Protestantism; the devastating world wars, also the man-centered humanism and its atheist view. All of these are the consequence of Rome’s theological deviations from Orthodoxy. One after the other, the Papist and the Protestant heresies gradually removed the humble Christ of Orthodoxy and in His place, they enthroned haughty Man. The holy bishop Nicholas of Ochrid and Zitsa wrote the following from Dahau: «What, then, is Europe? The Pope and Luther.... This is what Europe is, at its core, ontologically and historically». The blessed Elder Justin Popovitch supplements the above: «The 2nd Vatican Synod comprises the rebirth of every kind of European humanism.... because the Synod persistently adhered to the dogma on the Pope’s infallibility» and he surmises: «Undoubtedly, the authorities and the powers of (western) European culture and civilization are Christ-expellers». This is why it is so important to project the humble morality of Orthodoxy and to support the truly Christian roots of the united Europe; the roots that Europe had during the first Christian centuries, during the time of the catacombs and of the seven holy Ecumenical Synods. It is advisable for Orthodoxy to not saddle itself with foreign sins, and furthermore, the impression should not be given to those who became de-Christianized in reaction to the sidetracking of Western-style Christianity, that Orthodoxy is related to it, thus failing to testify that it is the only authentic Faith in Christ, and the only hope of the peoples of Europe.

The Roman Catholics are obviously attempting to disengage themselves from the decisions of their pursuant (and according to them, Ecumenical) Synods, which had legitimized the Filioque, the Primacy, the Infallibility, the secular authority of the Roman Pontiff, ‘created Grace’, the immaculate conception of the Holy Mother, and of the Uniates. Despite all these, we Orthodox continue the so-called traditional exchanges of visits, bestowing honors befitting an Orthodox Bishop on the Pope and totally disregarding a series of Sacred Canons which forbid common prayers, while the theological dialogue repeatedly flounders, and, after being dredged from the depths, it again sinks down.

All indications lead to the conclusion that the Vatican is not orienting itself to discard its heretical teachings, but only to “re-interpret” them – in other words, to veil them.

Roman Catholic ecclesiology varies, from one Encyclical to the next; from the so-called “open” ecclesiology of the Encyclical «Ut Unum Sint», to the ecclesiological exclusivity of the Encyclical «Dominus Jesus». It should be noted that both of the aforementioned views are contrary to Orthodox Ecclesiology. Our conscience duty bound declares the holy Orthodox Church as the only One, Holy, Catholic (=overall) and Apostolic Church, does not allow for the recognition of other, heterodox churches and confessions as “sister churches”. “Sister Churches” are only the local Orthodox Churches of the same faith. No other homonymous reference to “sister churches” other than the Orthodox one is theologically permissible.

The “Filioque” is promoted by the roman catholic side as yet another legal expression of the teaching regarding the procession of the Holy Spirit, and theologically equivalent to the Orthodox teaching that procession is “only from the Father” – a view that is unfortunately supported by some of our own theologians.

Besides, the Pontiff is maintaining the Primacy as an inalienable privilege, as one can tell from the recent deletion of the title “Patriarch of the West” by the current Pope Benedict XVI; also from his reference to the worldwide mission of the Apostle Peter and his successors during his homily in the Patriarchal Temple, as well as from his also recent speech, which included the following: «...within the society, with the Successors of the Apostles, whose visible unity is guaranteed by the Successor of the Apostle Peter, the Ukrainian Catholic Community managed to preserve the Sacred Tradition alive, in its integrity» (Catholic Newspaper, No.3046/18-4-2006).

The Uniates are being reinforced and reassured in many and various ways, despite the proclamations by the Pope to the contrary. This dishonest stance is witnessed, apart from other instances, by the provocative intervention of the previous Pope, John-Paul II, which led the Orthodox-roman catholic dialogue in Baltimore into a disaster, as well as by the letter sent by the current Pope to the Cardinal Ljubomir Husar, the Uniate Archbishop of Ukraine. In this letter dated 22/2/2006, the following is emphatically stressed: «It is imperative to secure the presence of the two great carriers of the only Tradition (the Latin and the Eastern).... The mission that the Greek Catholic Church has undertaken, being in full communion with the Successor of the Apostle Peter, is two-fold: on one side, it must visibly preserve the eastern Tradition inside the Catholic Church; on the other, it must favor the merging of the two traditions, testifying that they not only can coordinate between themselves, but that they also constitute a profound union amid their variety».

Seen in this light, polite exchanges such as the visits of the Pope to Patriarchate (in Istanbul) and the Archbishop of Athens to the Vatican, without the prerequisite of a unity in the Faith, may on the one hand create the false impressions of unity and thus turn away the heterodox who could have looked towards Orthodoxy as being the true Church, and on the other hand, blunt the dogmatic sensor of many Orthodox. Even more, they may push some of the faithful and pious Orthodox, who are deeply concerned over what is taking place inopportunely and against the Sacred Canons, to detach themselves from the corpus of the Church and create new schisms.

Thus, out of love for our Orthodoxy, but with pain as regards the unity of the Church, and with a view to preserve the Orthodox Faith free of all innovations, we proclaim in every direction that which was proclaimed by the Extraordinary, Double, Holy Assembly of our Sacred Community of the Holy Mountain on the 9th / 22nd of April 1980:

«We believe that our Holy Orthodox Church is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ, having the fullness of Grace and the Truth, and for this reason, an uninterrupted Apostolic Succession. On the contrary, the “churches” and the “confessions” of the West, having distorted the faith of the Gospel, the Apostles and the Fathers on many points, are deprived of the sanctifying Grace, the true Mysteries (Sacraments) and Apostolic Succession...

Dialogues with the heterodox - if they are intended to inform them about the Orthodox Faith so that when they become receptive of divine enlightenment and their eyes are opened they might return to the Orthodox Faith – are not condemned.

In no way should a theological dialogue be accompanied by common prayers, participation in liturgical and worship assemblies, by either side and any other activities that might give the impression that our Orthodox Church acknowledges the Roman Catholics (or any Protestant confessions) as a complete Church and the Pope as a canonical (proper) Bishop of Rome. Such acts mislead the Orthodox as well as the Roman Catholic (or Protestant) faithful, who are given a false impression of what Orthodoxy thinks of them....

With the Grace of God, the Holy Mountain remains faithful - as do the Orthodox people of the Lord - to the Faith of the Holy Apostles and the Holy Fathers, and also out of love for the heterodox, who are essentially helped, when the Orthodox with their steadfast Orthodox stance point out the extent of their spiritual ailment and the way they can be cured.

The failed attempts for union during the past teach us that for a permanent union, according to the will of God, within the Truth of the Church, the prerequisite is a different kind of preparation and course, than those which were followed in the past and appear to be followed to this day.»

By All the Representatives and Abbots of the common Assembly of the Twenty sacred monasteries of the Holy Mountain Athos

Monk Prodromos Gregoriates - Secretariat of the Sacred Community

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear Christopher,

Thank you for posting this (I thought someone else already had, elsewhere in the Community; but I could not find it).

Immediately there are distinct differences between the letter from the Athonite community proper and that of its dissenting voices. In the words of a colleague to whom I forwarded both notes, 'It is objective to the degree that it makes specific points, expresses disagreement, but does not threaten to cease commemorations or communion.'

INXC, Matthew

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Dear Christopher,

Thank you for posting this (I thought someone else already had, elsewhere in the Community; but I could not find it).

Immediately there are distinct differences between the letter from the Athonite community proper and that of its dissenting voices. In the words of a colleague to whom I forwarded both notes, 'It is objective to the degree that it makes specific points, expresses disagreement, but does not threaten to cease commemorations or communion.'

INXC, Matthew


It's so important to understand the context of each letter and who wrote it. Otherwise what has been happening is that both letters have been used almost interchangeably to legitimate a specific kind of anti-ecumenism.

A this point what is in great need of discussion is what sorts of meetings and kinds of praying together constitute a betrayal of Orthodoxy. Are any kinds of meetings or praying together acceptable?

What I find most confusing as time goes on is the prevalence of two contradictory views one of which seems not careful enough while the other is perhaps too careful.

Can we not find a middle ground on this? Although I personally make a point of not attending ecumenical services I am not troubled by the recent meetings of our various hierarchs with those from various denominations.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Christophoros]

From: Conclusions of the Inter-Orthodox Theological Conference
"Ecumenism: Origins – Expectations – Disenchantment"
Translated by Fr. Peter Heers
http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/thess_conclusions.aspx?print=ok


B. Proposals
After these conclusions and assessments the "Inter-Orthodox Theological Conference" issued the following propositions:

1. In so far as it is now universally confessed, after more than a century of participation of the Church in the "World Council of Churches" and inter-christian and inter-religious dialogues, on terms which level inter-confessional differences and make all religions equal, that such participation is unbeneficial and detrimental, it is proposed that the remaining autocephalous churches also withdraw from the "World Council of Churches" and bring an end to these kinds of dialogues. Toward this end, a Pan-Orthodox decision is not necessary, since the original decision to participate was made separately. The only dialogue which can be justified on the basis of the Gospel and the Patristic Tradition is to answer the question asked by those heterodox and persons of other religions who voluntarily approach in order to find salvation: "What must I do to be saved?"[11] or "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?"[12]

2. The Orthodox Churches, and above all the Church of Constantinople—which is first in honor and initiative—review and revise their relations with Papism, which all of the Holy Fathers, from St. Photios the Great, St. Gregory Palamas, St. Mark of Ephesus, the Kollyvades Fathers (St. Nikodemos the Athonite, St. Athanasios of Paros, St. Makarios of Corinth) up to, and including, St. Nectarios of Aegina and Elder Justin Popovich, have considered to be heretical and not a "sister church."

3. The holy canons of the Church be observed which forbid joint prayer with the heterodox in general, in every circumstance, and not only in eucharistic prayer, as has been suggested as of late.

4. An appeal be sent to the Orthodox Churches which have not, to date, agreed to allow the pope to visit their countries, to remain firm in this decision. Can one imagine one of the Holy Fathers organizing receptions in order to honor and embrace Arius, Nestorius, Eutichius, etc.? Likewise, let the unacceptable entry in the Calendar of the Church of Greece be erased which records the visit of the pope as a great historic event; let every attempt at reciprocation or repetition of such a visit in the future be prevented.

5. The issue of sacramental inter-communion of the Patriarchate of Antioch with the Monophysites [Syrian Jacobites] be investigated, as well as the recognition of certain mysteries of these heretics [Coptic Monophysites] by the Patriarchate of Alexandria. Let the canonical principle be enforced in this case which says: "he who communes with the excommunicated is likewise excommunicated."

6. Let inner-ecclesial dialogue (among the Orthodox) be strengthened and encouraged in the spirit of conciliarity (synadikoteta), and not be limited only to the bishops. It is, at the very least, lamentable that dialogue with various heretics and non-Christians is pursued while the differing views of brothers in the faith, who are slandered as fanatics, are rejected.

7. That liturgical changes and innovations be discouraged and terminated, since they constitute an application of the principles of Ecumenism whose aims are the creation of non-dogmatic worship, so as to facilitate the acceptance of heresy. Furthermore, the liturgical wealth of the Orthodox Church does not belong to any one local church. It expresses the life of the Church through the ages, and must be guarded as the apple of one’s eye.

8. That it be made manifest to church leaders everywhere that, in the event that they continue to participate in, and lend support to, the pan-heresy of Ecumenism—both inter-christian and inter-religious—the obligatory salvific, canonical and patristic course for the faithful, clergy and laity, is excommunication: in other words, ceasing to commemorate bishops, who are co-responsible for, and co-communicants with, heresy and delusion. This is not a recourse to schism but rather to a God-pleasing confession, just as the ancient Fathers, and bishop-confessors in our own day have done, such as the esteemed and respected former Metropolitan of Florina, Augustinos, and the Fathers of the Holy Mountain (Athos).

9. It be declared with the sound of the trumpet that Ecumenism and unconditional dialogue with heterodox and non-Christians are not beneficial, but injurious, and thus not the work of love, but merely of a worldly way of thinking; these are conventional relationships, which aim not at spiritual ends but self-serving interests. They wear down and taint the Orthodox phronema through intermingling and obfuscation, and as a result bring harm to the faithful, since without purity of dogma, even in lesser matters, no one can be saved. To non-Christians and to the heterodox they close the gate of salvation, obstructing the former’s view of Christ as being the only path of salvation, and hindering the latter from seeing the Orthodox Church as the ark of salvation, as the only Church. God, in His infinite love for mankind and the world, desires the salvation of every man. On the contrary, the Devil, who is the enemy of salvation, wars against man in a diversity of ways out of envy and hatred

Consequently, out of love we reject Ecumenism, for we wish to offer to the heterodox and to non-Christians that which the Lord has so richly granted to all of us within His Holy Orthodox Church: namely, the possibility of becoming and of being members of His Body.

ACADEMIC COMMITTEE
Archpriest George Metallinos, Dean, School of Theology, University of Athens

Archpriest Theodore Zisis, Professor, School of Theology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

John Kornarakis, Prof. Em., School of Theology, University of Athens

Despo Lialiou, President, Dept. of Pastoral Theology, A.U.Th.

George Theodoroudis, Professor, School of Theology, A.U.Th.

ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITTEE
President: Archimandrite Joseph, Abbot, Holy Monastery of Xeropotamou, Mount Athos

Vice-President: Archimandrite Sarantis Sarantos, Professor, Rizareios Ecclesiastical School

Secretary: Monk Arsenios Vliangoftis Th.D., B.A.

Members: Archimandrite Timothy Sakkas, Abbot, Holy Monastery of Parakletos

Archimandrite Mark Manolis, Dir., "Pan-Hellenic Orthodox Union"

Archimandrite Lavrentios Gratsias, Homilist, Diocese of Florina, Prespae and Eordea

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos and St. Blasios

Metropolitan Amfilohije (Radovic) of Montenegro and Littoral

Metropolitan Nathanael of Nevrokop, Bulgaria

Metropolitan John of Velesson and Parabardario (F.Y.R.O.M.)

Bishop Panteleimon of Ghana, Patriarchate of Alexandria

Bishop Artemios of Raskas and Prizren, Orthodox Church of Serbia

Archimandrite Joseph, Abbot of the Holy Monastery of Xeropotamou, Mount Athos

Archimandrite Demetrios Vasiliadis, Secretary, Holy Synod of the Patriarchate of the Jerusalem

Archimandrite Maximos Kyritsis, Abbot of the Holy Monastery of St. Dionysios, Mt. Olympus
Archimandrite Christophoros Tsiakkas, M.A. Theology, U.K., Sec. of the Snyodal Cmte. on Heresies of the Church of Cyprus

Archimandrite Nikodemos Barousis, Abbot of the Monastery of Panagia Chrysopodaritissa Archimandrite Sarantis Sarantos, Professor, Rizareios Ecclesiastical School
Archimandrite Ioannikios Kotsonis

Hieromonk Alexy Karakallinos (Trader)
Hieromonk Neilos Vatopedinos, Professor, Law School, Univ. of Great Hellas, Calabria

Hieromonk Vessarion and Hierodeacon Leontios, Holy Archangels Monastery, Neamts, Romania

Archpriest George Metallinos, Dean, School of Theology, Univ. of Athens

Archpriest Theodore Zisis, Professor, School of Theology, A.U.Th.

Archpriest George Dragas, Professor, Holy Cross Theological School, Boston
Archpriest Constantine Coman, Professor, Theological School, University of Bucharest

Archpriest Valentin Asmus, Professor, Theological School of Moscow

Archpriest Zourab Antadze, Orthodox Church of Georgia
Archpriest Constantine Stratigopoulos
Archpriest Lambros Fotopoulos, B.D., LL.B.
Fr. Paraskevas Agathonos D.D.

Fr. John Reeves, Orthodox Church in America
Fr. Christos Philiotis, D. D.

Fr. Peter A. Heers, Holy Diocese of Kastoria, Church of Greece
Geron Moses the Athonite Monk Arsenios Vliangoftis D.D.
Geron Lukas of Philotheou
Geron Nikodemos Bilalis, Theologian—Philologist
Despo Ath. Lialiou, D.D., President, Department of Pastoral Theology, A.U.Th.

Demetrios Tselengidis, Professor, School of Theology, A.U.Th.

Anthony Papadopoulos, Prof. Em., Theological School, A.U.Th.

John Kornarakis, D.D., Prof. Em., School of Theology, Univ. of Athens

Jean- Claude Larcher, Professor of Philosophy

Theodore Yiangou, D.D. Associate Professor, Theological School, A.U.Th.

Nicholas Vasileadis, Theologian

Constantine Cavarnos, D.D.
Constantine Kotsiopoulos, D.D., Instructor, School of Theology, A.U.Th.

Anthony Mironovitch, Professor, Department of Orthodox Theology, University of Bialistok
Panagiotis Sotirchos, Author-Journalist
Nicholas Selishchef, Member of the Russian Historical Society and Orthodox Journalist
Andreas Papavasileiou, D.D. Educator
Gregorios Liantas, candidate for D. Div.
Ivan Diatsekno, Professor, Ecclesiastical School "Ladder", Dneperopetrovsk

George Metallidis, D.D.
Christos Livanos, Chairman, Orthodox Brotherhood of "Saint Athanasius", Toronto, Canada

Vasilios Koukousas, D.D. – Educator

Radu Preda, D.D. Instructor, School of Theology, Clouz-Napoka, Romania

Soultana D. Lambrou, D.D., Associate Instructor, School of Theology, A.U.Th.
Anna Karamanidou, D.D., Associate Instructor, School of Theology, A.U.Th.

Daphne Varvitsioti, Historian

[Thomas Carroll]

At this point what is in great need of discussion is what sorts of meetings and kinds of praying together constitute a betrayal of Orthodoxy. Are any kinds of meetings or praying together acceptable?

What I find most confusing as time goes on is the prevalence of two contradictory views one of which seems not careful enough while the other is perhaps too careful.

Can we not find a middle ground on this? Although I personally make a point of not attending ecumenical services I am not troubled by the recent meetings of our various hierarchs with those from various denominations.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Dear Father Raphael,

Your blessing. For my part, I would find such a discussion very helpful. I believe it is especially important for those of us who live in pluralistic societies, in which we are a minority, to understand the answer to these questions, so that we will be able to conduct ourselves in the world with confidence and without straying from the Royal Way either to the left or to the right. It seems to me that examples from the lives of the saints, ancient and contemporary, would give vivid and practical answers to these questions.

Thomas