Greek source: Archive of the Sacred Struggle: A Periodical on the History of the Sacred Struggle of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece, Issue 7, 2018, pp. 7-36. Compiled under the responsibility of the Synodal Committee for the Historical Archive of the Church of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece and published with the blessing of His Beatitude Archbishop Kallinikos and the Holy Synod.
Written by
Bishop Klemes of Gardikion and Nikolaos Mannis
Introduction
In an article in a previous issue
concerning the relations of the Genuine Orthodox of Greece with the
Patriarchate of Alexandria, [1] the following was written by way of
introduction:
“One of the
slanders levelled by the Innovators against the Genuine Orthodox of Greece (Old
Calendarists) is that they supposedly broke ecclesiastical communion ‘with the
entire Church’ and thus became ‘schismatics’. This slander—like many others—is
refuted through the study of modern Church history, which demonstrates that the
Old Calendarists were in communion with all the official Local Churches that
did not accept the Calendar Innovation, even though these Churches did not
break communion with the New Calendar hierarchies, in anticipation of the
expected Great Council, which was supposedly going to resolve the Calendar
Question. It was only much later that this communion was broken, at the
initiative of the Old Calendarists, because of the ecumenist overtures of the
official Churches. Thus, the Genuine Orthodox demonstrated that they did not
believe in a barren ‘thirteen-dayism’, but that their Struggle was a Struggle
for all Orthodox Dogmas and Traditions.”
The article in this issue
examines the relationship of the Genuine Orthodox with the Patriarchate of
Jerusalem.
The Patriarchate
of Damianos (†1931)
From the outset, the Genuine
Orthodox of Greece based their Struggle and opposition on the refusal of the
Eastern Patriarchates—and especially the Patriarchate of Jerusalem—to accept
the Calendar Innovation. In 1924, the Patriarch of Jerusalem was Damianos, who
had resisted any suggestion of changing the Church Calendar, both in 1902
(following an approach by the then Patriarch of Constantinople, Joachim) and in
1924. [2]
Because of his stance, the Old
Calendarists regarded him as their Leader, especially after the death of
Photios of Alexandria (†1925). All the Old Calendarist organizations and
newspapers maintained relations with Patriarch Damianos, as the publications of
the period show.
In 1929, the Genuine Orthodox
welcomed yet another act of resistance by Patriarch Damianos: his rejection of
the proposal to change the Paschalion as well, which the Freemason
Patriarch of Constantinople, Basil, had requested in accordance with the
decisions of the Pseudo-Pan-Orthodox Congress held in Constantinople in 1923.
In 1931, in their obituary of Patriarch Damianos, they bade him farewell as
“one of the most precious—or rather, the sole—pillars” [3] of Orthodoxy.
The Patriarchate
of Timotheos (†1955)
As is well known, after bishops
assumed leadership of the Struggle of the Genuine Orthodox of Greece in 1935,
and following the repressive measures taken against them by the Innovating
Church and the Government, Saint Chrysostomos, former Metropolitan of Florina,
travelled to the Middle East in December 1935 to explain to the Patriarchates
of Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria the Calendar problem and the significance
of their action for the restoration of Orthodoxy. That visit lasted until May
1936. It is also well known that his return from the Holy Land, where he had
been “stranded” because of an order from Greece, came about through a miracle
of Saint George on the day of his feast according to the Church Calendar. [4]
About a month later, at the
“Panhellenic Congress of the Genuine Orthodox Christians at Saint Marina in
Piraeus,” on 15/28 June 1936, Saint Chrysostomos, former Metropolitan of
Florina, referred in his address to his meetings with the Patriarchs of Antioch
and Jerusalem. He said that, in response to his appeal for them to help settle
the Calendar question, which had shaken the Church and scandalized the
consciences of Christians, they had promised him that, at the appropriate time,
they would take the necessary steps to convene a Pan-Orthodox Council, so that
it might address and resolve the question in a valid and canonical manner. [5]
Saint Chrysostomos, former
Metropolitan of Florina, referred specifically to his meeting with Patriarch
Timotheos of Jerusalem in another text, [6] in which he writes that the
Patriarch of Jerusalem expressed his deep sorrow over the division among the
Orthodox in the observance of feasts at a time that was critical in every
respect. He promised that, once local problems with the indigenous flock had
been resolved and his election had been recognized by the British Government,
which then held the Mandate, he would approach the Ecumenical Patriarchate to
request the convocation of an Ecumenical Council or a Great Local Synod to resolve
the serious Calendar question.
Of course, despite these
assurances and the hopes they fostered, we know that no such thing took place.
Indeed, a later source informs us that Saint Chrysostomos, former Metropolitan
of Florina, was not received during that visit as he should have been, but in a
disparaging and even hostile manner. [7] Nevertheless, there is evidence
indicating that both the Saint, former Metropolitan of Florina, and other
clergy adhering to the traditional calendar maintained good relations with
bishops and, more generally, clergy of the Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre
belonging to the Patriarchate of Jerusalem who sympathized with our Sacred
Struggle. Some of them, such as the well-regarded Archimandrite Theodosios of
Bethany (†1991), had received their spiritual formation within
traditional-calendar circles.
The Patriarchate
of Benedict (†1980)
During the difficult period for
our Church following the repose of Saint Chrysostomos, former Metropolitan of
Florina (†1955), the Governing Ecclesiastical Committee of the Sacred Struggle,
consisting of twelve of our prominent clergy, made continual and persistent
efforts to find a solution: either through the return of the New Calendar
Church to the traditional calendar, to heal the division; through the
assumption of leadership of the Sacred Struggle by a bishop who would join
those adhering to the traditional calendar; or through the consecration of
candidates from among our clergy by an Orthodox ecclesiastical authority
abroad. In addition to these efforts, an approach was made to the Patriarchate
of Jerusalem, for which the Greek Old Calendarists had always maintained
respect and reverence. This turn towards Jerusalem was supported by the lay
theologian of blessed memory, Dionysios Batistatos (†1991).
In a letter dated 8/21 May 1956
from archimandrites who were members of the Ecclesiastical Committee governing
our Church, addressed “To the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Most Holy Church of
Jerusalem,” it was stated that Professor Panagiotis Panagiotakos, a canonist
and former Governor-General of Mount Athos, and the theologian Dionysios
Batistatos were being sent to Jerusalem, authorized to present to the Mother of
the Churches the canonical proposal for finding a canonical and spiritual means
of placing the Church of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece under the
Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre and the Patriarchate of Jerusalem. [8]
At that time, however, following
the death of Patriarch Timotheos the previous year, in 1955, complications had
prevented the election of a new Patriarch, making it impossible for any
position to be taken on that proposal from the Greek Old Calendarists. For this
reason, the mission of Professor P. Panagiotakos and Dionysios Batistatos did
not take place until the following year, 1957, in late May or early June, after
the election of Benedict as the new Patriarch of Jerusalem in January of that
year. [9]
The Brotherhood of the Holy
Sepulchre formally received the delegation and appointed Metropolitan Stephanos
of Gaza as its guide. Several meetings were held to discuss the purpose of the
mission’s visit, with even diplomatic figures in attendance. Professor P.
Panagiotakos also presented the question of bringing the Greek Old Calendarists
under the Patriarchate of Jerusalem as a matter of national importance,
strengthening the status of the Holy Sepulchre. Members of the Brotherhood of
the Holy Sepulchre were favorably impressed and moved to tears. In this sense,
it was written that the mission had secured—if nothing else—many helpful
friends for the Greek Old Calendarists among the members of the Patriarchate of
Jerusalem. [10]
Patriarch Benedict, for his part,
showed understanding and did not refuse in principle to discuss the matter,
although he raised the objection that he did not wish to oppose the official
Church of the state, despite Professor Panagiotakos’s efforts to persuade him
to exercise independent judgment, on the grounds that the Patriarchate’s
standing was far greater than that of the official Church of Greece. [11]
In the spring of 1958, a group of
Greek Old Calendarist pilgrims, led by the theologian Stavros Karamitsos,
travelled to the Holy Land. Upon their return to Greece, it was reported that
Stavros Karamitsos had shared his impressions with the Ecclesiastical Committee
and conveyed the blessings of Patriarch Benedict of Jerusalem and the members
of the Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre. [12]
In the middle of the following
year, 1959, Patriarchs Christophoros of Alexandria and Benedict of Jerusalem
were in Greece and received a visit from a three-member committee of the Church
of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece, consisting of Archimandrite
Akakios Pappas (the Elder), Mr. Pan. Kossaras of the Genuine Orthodox Christian
Community of Thessaloniki, and the theologian Mr. Stavros Karamitsos, to
exchange views on the Old Calendar question. The meeting lasted more than an
hour, and the Patriarchs showed understanding. [13] Indeed, Benedict of
Jerusalem is reported to have declared emphatically, “I am the leader of the
Old Calendarists”! [14]
However, the Genuine Orthodox at
that time voiced justified complaints and made sorrowful observations. For
although the Patriarchate of Jerusalem’s adherence to the centuries-old festal
calendar lends moral support to the position of the Old Calendarists in Greece,
that same Patriarchate’s attitude towards them is paradoxically cold and
indifferent. When representatives of the Patriarchate come to Athens, they
enter into ecclesiastical communion with the New Calendar Church, being afraid
to meet with the Old Calendarists (with certain exceptions, of course).
Nevertheless, an appeal was made to Benedict of Jerusalem to take a magnanimous
initiative, so that either a Pan-Orthodox Council might be convened or the
matter might be resolved within the Church of Zion, provided, of course, that
it ceased communion with the Innovators. [15]
Nevertheless, during those days Benedict
of Jerusalem concelebrated with the New Calendarists at the Metropolitan
Cathedral of Athens, prompting representatives of our Church to write that,
although his arrival had been seen as bringing with it the Church Traditions,
his conduct had contradicted what he professed, violated his duty, and grieved
and deeply scandalized the Old Calendarist faithful, who had been awaiting his
actions to restore the Old Calendar and unite the Church. Thus, it was aptly
written of him that “he is more concerned with the stones and buildings of the
Holy Land and less with the ideas that proceeded from them”! [16]
Following that disappointment, we
had no significant official information concerning relations with the
Patriarchate in question during the period under consideration, apart from the
cultivation of good relations on a personal level, [17] as well as the
reception into the Church of the Genuine Orthodox of Greece of clergy from the
Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre—receptions which, unfortunately, were not
always successful or free from the creation of serious problems for our Church.
Zealot monks also served in
Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and elsewhere, such as Elder Ioannis Papaleontiou from
Cyprus, who sent information about events there to our publications. [18] Other
fervent zealots for the traditional calendar ended their lives there, such as
the ascetic hieromonk of Chozeba, [St.] John Jacob from Romania (†1960), who,
as is well known, left behind incorrupt holy relics. [19]
We must, of course, emphasize
that the failure of our request to be placed under the Patriarchate of
Jerusalem at that time was a divine dispensation, safeguarding us from the far
greater and more serious danger of Ecumenism and from even indirect participation
in it through communion with those taking part in it, for the Calendar question
constitutes a significant aspect of Ecumenism and a practical application of
it.
The Patriarchate
of Diodoros (1981–2000)
After the long tenures of
Patriarchs Timotheos (1935–1955) and Benedict (1957–1980), [20] with whom the Genuine
Orthodox maintained relations in the manner briefly described above, we come to
the tenure of Diodoros of blessed memory [21] (1980–2000) as Patriarch of
Jerusalem.
As the theologian Aristotle Delimbasis
[22] of blessed memory, known for his work against heresy, writes in an
unpublished work, “Patriarch Diodoros was Orthodox in his convictions,
disposition, and endeavors, and opposed to the ecumenist heresy and its
innovation in the festal calendar.”
Diodoros of Jerusalem maintained
friendly relations with bishops adhering to the traditional calendar, and it is
known that he visited prominent holy monasteries of our Church, chiefly in
Attica, where he was received with honour. He also maintained a friendship with
His Eminence Petros of Astoria, the bishop of our Church based in America,
partly because they both came from the island of Chios.
The year 1989 was a milestone in
the patriarchate of Diodoros of blessed memory for two reasons: first, because
the Patriarchal and Synodal Encyclical of 9/22 May 1989 decreed the
discontinuation of ecumenist dialogues with heretics:
Our Orthodox
Church firmly believes that she possesses the fullness of the truth, that she
is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and the Treasury of Grace and
truth. She is the secure Ark within which the Dogmas of our blameless Faith and
our Sacred Tradition are preserved in all their clarity and with their
distinctive salvific character. The participation of the Orthodox Church in the
Dialogues proves harmful and dangerous. The heterodox exploit the Theological
Dialogues to the detriment of our Orthodox Church. Particularly in the Holy
Land, they say that “together with the Orthodox, we are striving to find the
truth.” In this way, they succeed in proselytizing ever more Orthodox faithful
into their ranks. Furthermore, the heterodox show our faithful photographs and
videotapes in which our representatives—hierarchs, clergy, and laity—appear
embracing the heterodox, and say: “Look, union has taken place; come to our
churches for common prayer.” To these activities are added their enticing offers
of housing (since this problem greatly affects the majority of the Arab
population), employment, and financial assistance, if they convert to another
confession. Thus, the draining away of our Flock, but above all our desire to
preserve our Orthodox Faith and tradition unadulterated and free from the
dangerous activities of the heterodox, prompted us to discontinue the
Dialogues, not only with the Anglicans, who introduced the ordination of women
years ago, but also with the Papists, the Anti-Chalcedonians, the Lutherans,
and the Reformed Confessions, in the dialogue with which the Church of
Jerusalem had not participated from the outset.”
And second, because it was
chiefly from that year onwards that the Local Church of Jerusalem, officially
through her Primate, recognized not only the Orthodoxy but also the Apostolic
Succession of the Genuine Orthodox of Greece.
Following the aforementioned
Confessional Encyclical of Patriarch Diodoros, His Beatitude Chrysostomos
Kiousis (†2010) of blessed memory, Archbishop of our Church of the Genuine
Orthodox of Greece, also speaking on behalf of the Holy Synod of our Church,
sent him a congratulatory telegram. [23] The Patriarch replied in a letter
dated 26 July 1989, in which he addressed our First Hierarch as “His Beatitude
the Archbishop”. [24]
Telegram
To His Beatitude
Diodoros, Patriarch of Jerusalem
GREEK ORTHODOX PATRIARCHATE
P.O. BOX 19632 — 633
JERUSALEM - ISRAEL
We heartily
congratulate Your Beatitude on your courageous and historic decision to
discontinue dialogue with heretics.
Proceed, Your
Beatitude, undaunted by any ecumenist opposition, in the good fight of faith,
walling off Mother Zion from those who undermine Orthodoxy and reject the
Patristic Traditions.
In such a bold
decision, you will find us standing beside you and ready to make every
sacrifice.
On behalf of our
Holy Synod
ARCHBISHOP
CHRYSOSTOMOS II
* *
*
Protocol No. 532
To His Beatitude Archbishop
Chrysostomos,
Athens.
With brotherly
love, we have received the congratulatory letter of Your Beatitude, whom we
dearly love, concerning the decision of our Most Holy Church of Jerusalem,
taken by us and at the session of our Holy and Sacred Synod gathered around us,
to discontinue theological dialogue with all the heterodox in general.
Expressing our
warm thanks to Your Beatitude for the brotherly sentiments of support thus
shown towards the Mother of the Churches, who fulfils her saving mission amid
countless adversities, striving to preserve our Orthodox Faith and Sacred
Tradition intact and free from innovation, as she received it through the Holy
Apostles from her Divine Founder, our Lord Jesus Christ, we do not cease to
pray that both we and all our Orthodox brethren may be strengthened to rise
resolutely to this arduous struggle set before us, “looking to Jesus, the
author and perfecter of our Faith” (Heb. 12:2), who is “the same yesterday,
today, and forever” (Heb. 13:8).
Furthermore, we
wish once again to declare that our Patriarchate of Jerusalem, as the Mother of
the Churches, feels the pressing need to raise its voice, as the voice of the
Lord, proclaiming the undeniable reality that our Orthodox Church is the One,
Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church and possesses the fullness of the Truth.
Therefore, the joint search for truth with the heterodox in theological
dialogues diminishes her authority and scandalizes her faithful followers, who,
joining the Apostle to the Nations, Paul, exclaim: “Reject a heretical man
after a first and second admonition” (Titus 3:10).
Accordingly,
beseeching our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ to grant us His blessing
and strength in our sacred struggles for the Faith, and invoking these upon the
entire flock of our Holy Orthodox Church, we remain yours in brotherly love.
In the Holy City
of Jerusalem, 26 July 1989.
With love in the
Lord,
DIODOROS I
Patriarch of Jerusalem.
A little later during that
period, Patriarch Diodoros came to Athens and visited the Holy Monastery of
Saints Cyprian and Justina in Phyle, Attica, on the afternoon of 2/15 October
1989, during the Vespers following its patronal feast. During his visit, he
delivered a significant address without a prepared text, excerpts from which we
quote here:
“…Hierarchs of
the Church, beloved children in the Lord, it is with particular joy and emotion
that I find myself at this moment in this sacred place, in the church
celebrating its feast in honor of Saint Cyprian. My joy and emotion are great,
for I am among bishops, priests, and strugglers who, over the past decade, have
carried the light of Orthodoxy to almost every continent… My beloved
Christians, I have been here in our beloved homeland for a few days, and today
I considered it my duty to join you, to rejoice together, to celebrate, and to
greet His Eminence Metropolitan Cyprian… Ecumenism (and the Dialogues, whose
sole purpose is to undermine the Church and which consider it easy to subject
Orthodoxy to the dictates of Papism and Ecumenism) has been working for years
to destroy Orthodoxy in those regions (the Holy Land). Yet God has preserved
the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, this Mother of the Churches, amid dangers for so
many centuries. He always illumines it through the grace of the Holy Sepulchre
and saves it from every danger… It was regrettable that for decades the
Patriarchate, supposedly to avoid disrupting the unity of Orthodoxy, followed
the other Churches in the matter of the Dialogues, without, of course, being
influenced or yielding. Yet its presence encouraged some and emboldened them to
say that the Patriarchate of Jerusalem was also participating… We reflected on
our responsibilities before God; before the Church; before our Orthodoxy;
before history and our national privileges in that region. And with God’s
illumination, we decided to discontinue every Dialogue between the Patriarchate
and the other heretical “churches.” For no positive result came from this
prolonged contact with them. We announced this to all the sister Churches, and
we are bound and determined to uphold this decision and to go still further, as
far as possible, until other Churches also reflect on their responsibilities
before God, history, and Orthodoxy, and cease all contact with the heterodox.
As you know, the Patriarchate follows the traditional, Old Calendar. It does
not change, nor can it ever change, even by a jot, the Canons and the Teaching
of the Church. It will preserve them at any cost. We shall all strive to
preserve them, even at the cost of sacrifices. The threats hurled daily and the
actions they take daily do not frighten us. We shall remain steadfast
guardians, faithful to the Dogmas and the Teaching of our Orthodoxy…” [25]
In December of that year (1989),
His Beatitude our Archbishop Chrysostomos sent a second letter, [26] once again
on behalf of the Holy Synod, to which Patriarch Diodoros of Jerusalem again
replied:
ATHENS, 19
December 1989
PROTOCOL NO. 254
To His Beatitude
Diodoros, Patriarch of Jerusalem
Jerusalem
Your Beatitude,
Master,
On the
world-saving feasts of Christmas and Theophany, graciously accept our sincere
sentiments of love and esteem, together with our warmest humble prayers for
your unfailing health and enduring pastoral leadership for many years to come,
for the good of the Church, and for divine assistance in fulfilling your lofty
mission throughout Orthodoxy, following the historic cessation of dialogue and
communion between the Church of Zion and the heretics who profess false
doctrines.
We pray also
that the dawning new year of the Lord’s goodness, 1990, may bring every
blessing and God-given peace on earth, and fulfil every pious desire.
On behalf of the
Holy Synod
CHRYSOSTOMOS
ARCHBISHOP OF ATHENS
PRESIDENT
* *
*
To His Beatitude
Chrysostomos, Archbishop of Athens of the Genuine Orthodox Christians,
greetings in the Lord, who was born supernaturally of the Virgin, and wishes
for health in both soul and body.
With great joy
we have received Your Beatitude’s brotherly wishes and greetings on the Divine
Incarnation of God the Word.
Wholeheartedly
reciprocating these, we beseech Christ, who was laid in the God-receiving Cave
of Holy Bethlehem, to bestow upon Your Beatitude every good gift and to grant
you a spiritually fruitful and peaceful New Year.
With these
sentiments, we remain yours with prayers and love in the Lord.
CHRISTMAS 1989
DIODOROS I
Patriarch of Jerusalem.
The correspondence continued in
1990, with the Patriarch receiving telegrams and letters and replying in
similar terms both to His Beatitude our Archbishop and to other hierarchs of
the Holy Synod of our Church:
To His Beatitude Diodoros I,
Patriarch of Jerusalem
GREEK ORTHODOX PATRIARCHATE
P.O. BOX 19632 - 633
JERUSALEM - ISRAEL.
We protest in
the strongest terms against the attack by Jewish anarchists upon the venerable
Patriarch of Jerusalem.
Such actions
justify suspicions of a planned attack by Zionism against Orthodox Hellenism.
We demand
effective protection of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem by the
Government of Israel; otherwise, we propose organizing a crusade to defend the
rights of the threatened Patriarchate in accordance with the spirit and
principles of international conventions.
The clergy and
faithful of the Church of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece stand ready
to struggle alongside the beleaguered Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre.
THE ARCHBISHOP OF THE CHURCH OF THE
GENUINE ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS OF GREECE
CHRYSOSTOMOS II
* * *
To His Beatitude Diodoros,
Patriarch of Jerusalem
GREEK ORTHODOX PATRIARCHATE
P.O. BOX 19632-633
JERUSALEM - ISRAEL
We condemn with
indignation the murderous attack upon your beloved and venerable person as a
leader of the Church, and rejoice with all our soul and heart at your
deliverance.
The Almighty
preserves you and the most venerable holy places of His Son from every danger
and distress, for the good of Orthodoxy unaltered by innovation and of
ancestral piety.
With Paschal
wishes in the Risen Christ.
GERONTIOS
Metropolitan of Piraeus and Salamis of the Genuine Orthodox Christians
* *
*
To His Beatitude Diodoros I,
Patriarch of Jerusalem and All the Holy Land
Jerusalem
Your Beatitude,
On the radiant
and world-saving Resurrection of Christ, we ask you, together with the
Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre gathered around you, to accept our reverent
Paschal greeting, with sentiments of love and esteem for the lofty mission you
are fulfilling in this age of general apostasy.
In particular,
the recent impious acts against the institution of the Patriarchate and your
venerable person have deeply grieved us and aroused the indignation of clergy
and faithful.
Your resolute
resistance and courageous defense of the rights of the Patriarchate, this pride
of Orthodox Hellenism, have moved us. We therefore congratulate Your Beatitude
and take this opportunity to declare our unreserved support for the beleaguered
Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre, which is waging a titanic struggle to
preserve the Greek Orthodox character of the holy places of pilgrimage. We
express these sentiments with the fervent prayer that the Lord God may preserve
you in health for many years and reward your labours and sacrifices, to His glory
and for the triumph of our Orthodox faith over every hostile design.
On behalf of the Holy Synod
ARCHBISHOP CHRYSOSTOMOS II
* *
*
Telegram:
TO HIS BEATITUDE
ARCHBISHOP CHRYSOSTOMOS
32 KANINGOS
STREET
ATHENS
WE DREW COMFORT
FROM READING YOUR TELEGRAM OF SUPPORT, FOR WHICH WE THANK YOU HEARTILY, AND ASK
YOU TO CONTINUE PRAYING FOR THE SUCCESS OF OUR NATIONAL AND RELIGIOUS STRUGGLE
DIODOROS,
PATRIARCH OF JERUSALEM
HOTEL GRANDE
BRETAGNE
* *
*
Protocol No. 337
To His Eminence
Gerontios, Metropolitan of Piraeus of the Genuine Orthodox Christians,
greetings in the Lord, who has risen gloriously from the dead.
We drew comfort
and strength from the telegram, filled with love and sympathy, which Your
Eminence, whom we dearly love, kindly sent us following the distressing events
that took place during Holy and Great Week to the detriment of the rights of
our Patriarchate of Jerusalem.
Our Most Holy
Mother of the Churches, contending in these days against the “principalities
and powers of the world of this age,” buffeted by the waves but not submerged,
courageously demands, on behalf of the entire Orthodox and Christian world,
respect for her privileges and rights in the Holy Land, certain of the ultimate
vindication of her struggle through the grace of the Risen Lord.
Expressing our
heartfelt thanks to Your Eminence for the support shown to our ancient
Patriarchate in its struggle, we ask you to continue praying for strength and
success in our arduous struggle, and remain yours.
In the Holy City
of Jerusalem, 15 April 1990.
DIODOROS I
Patriarch of Jerusalem.
(“The Voice of Orthodoxy” No. 834, June–July
1990)
We must, of course, emphasize
that this spontaneous expression of support from our Church for Diodoros of
Jerusalem was intended to assist him and his Church in pursuing a truly
Orthodox position and course. It also constituted a grateful expression of thanks
for the Patriarch’s courageous “overture” in publicly recognizing our ecclesial
character, at a time when we faced such intense opposition and challenges to
our standing from the New Calendarists of Greece and elsewhere. It did not,
however, under any circumstances signify full mutual recognition between us and
the members of the Church of Jerusalem as being in communion, nor did it
constitute direct or indirect permission for any form of Eucharistic communion
between our Churches.
For this deliberate
misrepresentation also occurred, and certain bishops of our Church in America
at that time (Paisios and Vikentios), known for their frivolity and their
desire to enter “official” and “recognized” Orthodoxy, proceeded on their own
initiative, without any relevant Synodal permission or decision, to commemorate
the name of Patriarch Diodoros and to spread the claim that they constituted a
part (or an exarchate?) of the Patriarchate in America or (also) in Greece.
This deviation was addressed [27] shortly afterwards, when the aforementioned
bishops, together with other disorderly and troublesome individuals, caused a
schism and fell away from our Church.
Nevertheless, to return to our
subject, according to the testimony of many of our Fathers and Brethren,
Patriarch Diodoros always supported and praised us. One of our clergy, the
Reverend Fr. Nikolaos Dimaras, relates that, while he was still following the
New Calendar, he visited the Patriarch together with other pilgrims from Aigio
and Germany and asked him whether the faithful could attend Old Calendarist
churches. He received the following answer from the Patriarch’s own lips: “The
Old Calendarists are the only Orthodox, my child.” He also discouraged the
faithful from attending churches where Ecumenists celebrated the services,
telling them: “Do not go there at all.” Another of our clergy, Hieromonk
Patapios Argyros, recalls that when our faithful met the Patriarch during
pilgrimages to the Holy Land and told him that they followed the Old Calendar,
he would say to them: “You are doubly blessed!”
The Ecumenists of the Phanar and
their associates sought, and largely succeeded, to curtail Patriarch Diodoros’s
activities, including through their so-called “Great and Supreme Synod” in
Constantinople in July 1993, ostensibly over the question of the Jerusalem metochia
in Australia, but in reality because of his resolute stance against the false
union then being contrived with the Anti-Chalcedonians, his vigorous opposition
in general to the advance of Ecumenism, and his open contacts with, acceptance
of, and praise for the Genuine Orthodox. [28] Moreover, following the so-called
“Pan-Orthodox Gathering of Primates” at the Phanar in March 1992, Patriarch
Diodoros had issued a separate statement in which he maintained his views in
support of the Genuine Orthodox.
Certain venerable Fathers of
Jerusalem, such as the Abbot of the Lavra of Saint Savvas, Archimandrite
Seraphim (†2002), were, as is well known, defenders of the traditional calendar
and fervent friends of the Genuine Orthodox of Greece.
Following the repose of Patriarch
Diodoros of blessed memory and the developments that followed, we come to the
present, when there are two Patriarchs of Jerusalem: one regarded as supposedly
“canonical,” Theophilos—if someone who is an Ecumenist can be considered
canonical—and one confined, Irenaios, who has expressed in writing his
opposition to Ecumenism and his friendly disposition towards the Genuine
Orthodox, although he has not openly aligned himself with them, despite the
opportunities afforded him to do so, especially in recent years. These two,
however, will be the subject of study for the Church historian of the future.
Here we shall confine ourselves to publishing Patriarch Irenaios’s Proclamation
against Ecumenism, with the prayer that he may put what he writes into practice
in his dealings with those who continually and persistently deviate, especially
after the Pseudo-Council of Kolymbari, Crete, in June 2016, so that he may be
numbered among the truly Orthodox in these evil days of apostasy through which
we are passing:
GREEK ORTHODOX PATRIARCHATE
JERUSALEM
Protocol No. 86
PROCLAMATION
Our Humility
addresses our flock and the entire Christ-bearing plenitude of Orthodoxy
throughout the world, our brethren the Primates of the Orthodox Churches, and
our brethren in Christ, the Fathers of the Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre.
On the grounds
that our forcible dethronement and removal from the throne of the Patriarchate
of Jerusalem in 2005 took place uncanonically and unlawfully, we declare that
we remain the sole valid and true Patriarch of Jerusalem.
Since our
Humility is accused of heresy, ecumenism, and schism, we consider it necessary
to point to an incident widely known in the Church. Venerable Agathon calmly
accepted every insult, but when they told him that he was a heretic, he
objected, saying: “I accepted those insults because they benefit my soul, but
being a heretic means separation from God, and for this reason I did not accept
it.” Thus did our Holy Fathers act, and thus does our Mother the Church teach
us to act.
We therefore
consider it our duty to declare the following:
1. Our Humility
has never been, nor is, a heretic or an ecumenist. Ecumenism is a mosaic
composed of heresies and schisms. Ecumenism is a heresy.
It is the
complete gathering of all heresies and distortions of the faith, since
ecumenism gathers and unites everyone in a single fold, from those who stand in
the truth to heretics, incorporating into itself schismatics who long ago fell
away and became perverted in their faith, and even adherents of other
religions. All this takes place without the question of repentance being
discussed; instead, all are recognized as having equal standing before God.
Where can truth be found in this impious parasynagogue? Can edible fruit and
poisonous fruit grow on the same tree? Sweet fruit and bitter fruit? The
Ecumenist church is not living but dead, since the falsehood within it kills
all truth.
2. Our Humility
did not reintroduce the Patriarchate of Jerusalem into the World Council of
Churches, which is an ecumenist parasynagogue.
I agree fully
with, and have supported and continue to support in every way, the decision of
the ever-memorable Patriarch Diodoros of Jerusalem, who withdrew the Church of
Jerusalem from the WCC in 1979.
The branch
theory, implanted and recognized by the World Council of Churches, is
unfounded, because the communities that have separated from the Church are not
living branches, but branches that have been torn off and are withering: “If
anyone does not remain in Me, he is cast out like a branch and withers; they
gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned” (John 15:6).
3. Concerning
the Pan-Orthodox Council being prepared for 2016.
His All-Holiness
the Patriarch of Constantinople, together with the Local Churches, is preparing
a Pan-Orthodox Council, so that supposedly unresolved questions of the Orthodox
Church may be brought before it.
However, first,
most of the questions being prepared for the agenda have already been resolved
by the Orthodox Church: ecumenism, relations with the heterodox, fasting, the
calendar, Orthodox baptism, marriage, and so forth. There is therefore a grave
danger that a treacherous revision of Orthodox theology and anthropology may
take place at this Council. Second, His All-Holiness the Patriarch of
Constantinople and the Primates of the Orthodox Churches completely disregard
the Ecumenical Crime committed against me in 2005. Or have they perhaps quieted
their consciences by supposing that I voluntarily “shut myself away,” demanding
and begging for my place on the throne?
The Patriarch of
Constantinople himself, “standing in the holy place,” ignited the Schism within
the bosom of the Mother of the Churches, Holy Zion, from which Truth and Light
shone forth into the world.
The Holy Spirit
works only with Orthodox Christians who stand in the truth. He cannot cooperate
in unjust deeds. Therefore, the disregard shown by the Primates of the Orthodox
Churches for the unresolved problem of our Humility’s uncanonical removal from
the throne renders divine inspiration of the forthcoming Council impossible,
and in that case it will be devoid of grace and displeasing to God.
Now more than
ever, at this fateful juncture, the Primates of the Churches and bishops,
appointed by God and called to safeguard the faith, must adopt the confessional
stance of the Holy Fathers, defending Orthodoxy against those who make
merchandise of her and draw her into a policy of pleasing this world, which
lies in wickedness.
One can be saved
only by returning to the God-Man through wholehearted and complete repentance
and by embracing the Orthodox faith of the Holy Apostles, the Holy Fathers, and
the Holy Ecumenical Councils.
Our paternal
heart can no longer bear to behold the Body of the Church of Christ bleeding
because of transgressors and apostates, and calls upon and implores all the
members of Zion, the Mother of the Churches, and of all Orthodoxy, as well as
all representatives of the competent authorities, to come and contribute, with
fear of God, faith, and love, to the restoration of canonical order in our
Patriarchate, so that, once Satan and his angels have departed from Christ’s
flock, we may enter into communion in Truth with the Mother of the Churches,
established as such by Christ, to the glory of the faith and to the glory of
the people of our God.
Bestowing our
blessing abundantly, we await all those in positions of authority, praying that
the Life-giving Lord may illumine everyone with the radiance of His unwaning
Light.
In the Holy City
of Jerusalem, 20 June 2015
YOUR CONFINED PATRIARCH OF
JERUSALEM
IRENAIOS I
Epilogue
The evidence presented above has
demonstrated that the relationship of the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece
with the Patriarchate of Jerusalem underwent various fluctuations. It began
with promising prospects, but disappointments arose along the way because of
the inconsistent stance of the members of the Church of Jerusalem. There was also
a remarkable anti-ecumenist initiative by Patriarch Diodoros of blessed memory,
which brought us considerably closer together and which the deposed Patriarch
Irenaios appears to share to some extent. May the grace of the Holy Sepulchre
bring forth from the Mother of the Churches an Orthodox stance and confession
upheld in practice, serving as a point of reference for all the Genuine
Orthodox in the good Struggle of Faith, for the triumph of the Truth!
NOTES
1. See the periodical “Archive of
the Sacred Struggle,” no. 5, 2017, pp. 5–31.
2. Although Patriarch Damianos
gave assurances that the Patriarchate of Jerusalem would not change the
Calendar, owing to its disadvantaged position at the All-Holy Places of
Pilgrimage in relation to the Latins and their proselytizing designs,
nevertheless, in a published letter to the Innovating Archbishop Chrysostomos
Papadopoulos of Athens, he unfortunately expressed his consent to the supposed
“correction” of the Calendar in the Church of Greece, ostensibly to prevent
confusion among the people arising from the simultaneous use of two calendars,
religious and civil! Consequently, the well-known Archimandrite Philotheos
Zervakos addressed a letter of rebuke to him on 6 November 1924, explaining the
terrible division in the Church of Greece caused by the Calendar Innovation and
its grievous consequences in general, and urging him to work for the
restoration of the traditional calendar among those who had abandoned it
because of the scandal-mongers and innovators (see its reprint in the
periodical “Archive of the Sacred Struggle,” no. 3 [Autumn/Winter 2015], pp.
61–64). Perhaps that letter, together with other events, helped Damianos of
Jerusalem adopt a more careful and traditional view of the matter, leading him
to look favourably upon the Old Calendarists of Greece and Romania, whom he had
assisted in practical ways through Hieromonk [and later Holy Hierarch]
Glicherie (see Bishop Klemes of Gardikion, The Godly Struggles and Wondrous
Contests of the Confessor Hierarch Saint Glicherie of Romania, 1891–1985,
Phyle, Attica, 2014, pp. 37–38).
3. Newspaper “Herald of the
Orthodox,” no. 17 [10/23 August 1931].
4. See the account of this in the
book by Ilias Angelopoulos and Dionysios Batistatos, Chrysostomos, Former
Metropolitan of Florina—A Champion of Orthodoxy and the Nation, Athens,
1981, pp. 22–25.
5. See the periodical “The Voice
of Orthodoxy,” no. 1 (Second Series), 22 June 1936, p. 2.
6. See Chrysostomos, Former
Metropolitan of Florina, “Report to the Governing Synod of Greece on the Views
of the Patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem concerning the
Church Calendar,” dated 10 November 1936, pp. 9–10, in the work: Memoranda,
Letters, and Defenses concerning the Julian Church Calendar, Athens, 1941.
7. See “To His Beatitude Benedict,
Patriarch of Jerusalem,” in the periodical “The Voice of Orthodoxy,” no. 321,
14 September 1959, p. 1.
8. See Nun Parthenia, Humble
Bishop Merkourios—In the Service of Orthodoxy and Love: A Tribute of Respect,
edited by D. M. Batistatos, published by the Merkourion Foundation, Piraeus,
1989, p. 54. In pursuing this initiative, there was evidently the hope, perhaps
even the condition, that placing the Old Calendarists of Greece under Jerusalem
would entail Jerusalem’s cessation of communion with the New Calendarists.
9. An article written in
preparation for that visit, entitled “Towards Jerusalem” (“The Voice of
Orthodoxy,” no. 258, 15 April 1957, pp. 1–2), extols the importance of the
Patriarchate as the Acropolis of Greek Orthodoxy because it did not accept the
Calendar Reform. Its mission is therefore regarded as being of the utmost
importance, with the prayer that the members of the Brotherhood of the Holy
Sepulchre may become not only guardians of the Holy Places of Pilgrimage but
also bearers of a spirit of struggle, and assume a pioneering role throughout
Orthodoxy. The Patriarchate of Jerusalem is also urged to give particular
attention to the problem of the Old Calendarists and examine it prudently,
since many members of the Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre at that time came
from Old Calendarist circles in central Greece.
10. See “The Patriarchate of
Jerusalem,” in the periodical “The Voice of Orthodoxy,” no. 307, 2 March 1959,
pp. 2–3. Although unsigned, the article, published approximately two years
after that visit (!), was evidently written by Dionysios Batistatos.
11. See “To His Beatitude Benedict,
Patriarch of Jerusalem,” in the periodical “The Voice of Orthodoxy,” cited
above, p. 2.
12. See “The Voice of Orthodoxy,”
no. 284, 21 April 1958, p. 8. It should be noted that it was during that visit
to the Holy Land that Stavros Karamitsos went to the Lavra of Saint Savvas and
contacted the Greek-speaking Russian ascetic monk Antonios of Saint Savvas, who
became the link with the Russian hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church
Abroad. In particular, he directed him to contact His Eminence Seraphim,
Archbishop of Chicago and Detroit, and also gave the Archbishop the appropriate
encouragement, with the result that the latter ultimately performed the
consecration of Bishop Akakios of Talantion in Detroit, USA, in December 1960
(see Stavros Karamitsos-Gamvroulias, The Consecrations of the Genuine
Orthodox Christians from a Canonical Perspective—A Response to an Abominable
Slander, Athens, 1997, pp. 19–20, and the correspondence on this matter on
pp. 24–37).
13. See the periodical “The Voice
of Orthodoxy,” no. 321, 14 July 1959, p. 8.
14. See the periodical “The Voice
of Orthodoxy,” no. 324, 26 October 1959, p. 1.
15. See “To His Beatitude
Benediktos, Patriarch of Jerusalem,” in the periodical “The Voice of
Orthodoxy,” cited above, pp. 1–2.
16. See “Caution and Vigilance,”
in the periodical “The Voice of Orthodoxy,” no. 327, 7 December 1959, p. 1.
17. See, for example, the
official ceremony at which an authentic fragment of the sacred rock of the
dread Golgotha was presented by a representative of the Patriarchate of
Jerusalem—specifically, the then Archimandrite and later Patriarch Irenaios—to
our Church’s Holy Monastery for Women of Venerable Irene Chrysovalantou in
Lykovrysi, Attica, on 16 January 1968 (for a description and photograph, see
Nun Paisia of Chrysovalantou, From the Monastery of Chrysovalantou to
Eternity, published by the Holy Monastery of Venerable Irene
Chrysovalantou, Lykovrysi, Attica, 2005, pp. 196–198).
18. See, for example, the
periodical “The Voice of Orthodoxy,” no. 411, 11 February 1963, p. 8, which
publishes a report by the aforementioned monk concerning the clashes on the eve
of the Feast of Christmas at the Basilica of the Nativity of Christ in Bethlehem
between 25 Greek Orthodox monks and their attackers, 100 Latins and 50
Armenians. After a fierce struggle, the 25 heroic Guardians succeeded in
putting the attackers—who outnumbered them six to one—to flight in disarray!
19. Much has been written about
the contemporary Venerable Ascetic John the Chozebite, even by New
Calendarists, but the fact that he was a great Zealot for the traditional
calendar is carefully concealed. A concise and truthful account of him was
written by his disciple and fellow ascetic, the monk Fr. Ioannikios: The
Life of Fr. John, a Contemporary Ascetic of the Holy Land, Athens, 1984, 40
pp. This booklet, with some additions, was republished in a third edition in
Athens in 1994, comprising 48 pages, in which the ascetic Fr. John is now recognized
as a Saint. Moreover, the first to write about him, through articles in
“Orthodoxos Typos” (no. 109, 10 October 1969, p. 2, and no. 110, 1 November
1969, p. 2), was the likewise well-known Zealot monk Fr. Paul the Cypriot, who
knew the Venerable personally, having been his “neighbour” near the Skete of
Saint Anna in the vicinity of the Monastery of Chozeba in the Holy Land.
We would say the same of Fr.
Philoumenos, who suffered a martyr’s death, being slaughtered at Jacob’s Well
in Samaria († 1979), concerning whom there is testimony that he would not even
eat at a table if a New Calendarist clergyman had blessed it! (See The Elder
of Saint Savvas, Archimandrite Seraphim of Kythera, Abbot and Spiritual
Father of the Holy Lavra of Saint Savvas the Sanctified, 2nd ed., Jerusalem,
December 2010 [edited by Monk Chrysanthos of Saint Savvas], pp. 604–605).
20. The See of Jerusalem was
vacant during the years 1931–1935 and 1955–1957.
21. In the world, Damianos
Karivalis of Chios (1923–2000).
22. He also served for a time
(possibly unofficially) as a legal and theological adviser to the Patriarchate
of Jerusalem.
23. See the periodical “The Voice
of Orthodoxy,” no. 828, August–September 1989, p. 24.
24. This carries particular
significance and weight in silencing those accusers of the clergy who dispute
the episcopal dignity of our bishops.
25. See the periodical “Agios
Kyprianos,” no. 232, September–October 1989, pp. 95–96.
26. See the periodical “The Voice
of Orthodoxy,” no. 831, January–February 1990, p. 17.
27. And, of course, it could not
have been otherwise, since even under different circumstances, in another era,
at least three decades earlier—namely, in the mid-1960s—when a prominent
clergyman of our Church ventured to officiate in the Patriarchate of Jerusalem,
claiming in justification that he was thereby “elevating” our Church, which was
persecuted in Greece, in the eyes of those plotting against her, our then
four-member Holy Synod (Bishops Auxentios of Gardikion, Chrysostomos of
Magnesia, Gerontios of Salamis, and Akakios of Diavleia) imposed upon him the
penalty of suspension from all priestly functions for a certain period.
28. See A. D. Delimbasis, Refutation
of an Uncanonical “Decision”—A Rebuttal of the Uncanonical “Decision” of the
Robber “Council” of the Phanar of 30–31 July 1993, Athens, 1993, 46 pp.
