The Chief Commandments of the Gospel

St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite

 

 

1. Every Christian must love God.

You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment (Matt. 22:37).

If you love Me, keep My commandments (John 14:15).

He who has received My commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him also, and will mystically reveal Myself within him (John 14:21).

He who does not love Me does not keep My commandments (John 14:24).

Love Christ, although you have not known Him (1 Pet. 1:8).

He who loves the Father loves also the Son, who was begotten of the Father (1 John 5:1).

2. Every Christian must love his brother, that is, his fellow man.

The second commandment, like the first, is to love your fellow man as you love yourself (Matt. 22:39).

I give you a new commandment: that you love one another. As I have loved you, so also you should love one another (John 13:34).

By this mark all unbelievers will know that you are My disciples: if, that is, you have love among yourselves (John 13:35).

Leave no other debt to anyone, except the love which you owe one another. For he who loves his brother has fulfilled the whole law of God. And this is because “you shall not commit adultery,” “you shall not murder,” “you shall not steal,” [“you shall not bear false witness”], “you shall not covet,” and all the other commandments are summed up and included in this commandment: to love your fellow man as yourself (Rom. 13:8–9).

Love one another with a pure heart (1 Pet. 1:22).

Love your brothers (1 Pet. 2:17).

If God loved us so greatly, we also ought to love one another (1 John 4:11).

He who does not love his brother is in a state of spiritual death (1 John 3:14).

This is how we have learned what love is: Just as Christ offered His life unto death for our sake, so we also ought to offer even our lives for our brothers (1 John 3:16).

My children, let us not love only with words and with the tongue, but in deed and in truth (1 John 3:18).

He who loves God also loves his brother (1 John 4:21).

3. Christians must not have quarrels, nor feel resentment and hatred toward their brothers; but even if they have misunderstandings among themselves, they must quickly be reconciled.

Any Christian who is angry with his brother without reasonable cause is liable to the local court. And whoever says to his brother “raca,” that is, “foolish one,” is liable to the highest court. And whoever says to his brother “idiot,” he shall be condemned to the fire of Gehenna (Matt. 5:22).

If you go to church to offer some gift, and there remember that your brother is grieved with you, leave your gift there before the Church, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift (Matt. 5:23–24).

Take care to be reconciled quickly with your brother with whom you are in dispute, while you are still on the road of this present life (Matt. 5:25).

If anyone thinks that he may be contentious, let him know that neither I nor the Churches of God have such a custom, that is, to be contentious (1 Cor. 11:16).

The servant of God must not quarrel, but must be gentle toward all, able to teach, patient under evil (2 Tim. 2:24).

Let the setting of the sun never find you angry (Eph. 4:26).

He who hates his brother is in darkness, and walks in darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes (1 John 2:11).

Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer. And you know that no murderer has a share in eternal life (1 John 3:15).

4. Christians must not look with curiosity and desire.

I say to you that every man who looks at a woman with evil desire has already almost committed adultery with her in his heart (Matt. 5:28).

All that belongs to the world—the sinful egotistical desires, the longing to acquire whatever our eyes see, and the arrogance that comes from the possession of wealth—does not come from God the Father, but from the sinful world. Yet the world passes away and is lost. And together with it are lost all the things which men desire to possess. But he who does the will of God shall live eternally (1 John 2:16–17).

5. Christians must not swear oaths, either truthfully or falsely.

I say to you not to swear at all: neither by heaven, because it is the throne of God; nor by the earth, because it is the footstool where His feet rest; nor by Jerusalem, because it is the city of God, the great King. Nor should you swear by your head, because you cannot make even one hair of it white or black. Let your word simply be “yes” and “no.” Whatever more you say than “yes” and “no” comes from the evil devil (Matt. 5:34–37).

Above all, my brothers, do not swear either by heaven or by earth or by anything else. But let your “yes” be a real “yes,” and your “no” a real “no,” so that you may not be found accused at the final judgment, or so that you may not fall into hypocrisy and falsehood (James 5:12).

6. Christians must not be vengeful, nor repay evil for evil.

I say to you not to resist an evil man. But if someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also, so that he may strike that one too (Matt. 5:39).

If someone wishes to compel you to go one kilometer, go with him two (Matt. 5:41).

Pray for those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and entreat God for those who trouble you and persecute you (Matt. 5:44).

If someone does evil to you, do not repay him for it (Rom. 12:17).

Do not seek, brothers, to defend yourselves by acts of vengeance, but give place to the wrath of God, which will come and take vengeance at the hour of judgment (Rom. 12:19).

If your enemy is hungry, give him something to eat. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink (Rom. 12:20).

Do not allow yourself to be overcome by evil, but overcome evil by your good conduct (Rom. 12:21).

Do not respond to evil with evil, nor to insult with insult, but rather the opposite: respond to insults with blessings (1 Pet. 3:9).

Beloved, do not take evil as your model, but good. He who does good is a child of God. He who does evil has not known God (3 John 11).

7. Christians must not go to courts at all for the resolution of their disputes. But if such a need should ever arise, let them prefer to appoint as judge in their dispute a man of the Church, rather than resort to secular courts.

If someone wants to take you to court in order to take your coat, let him have your cloak also (Matt. 5:40).

And the very fact alone, brothers, that you have lawsuits among yourselves already constitutes a complete failure on your part. Prefer rather to be wronged and defrauded than to wrong and defraud others, and especially your Christian brothers. Or do you not know that unjust men will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not deceive yourselves: in the kingdom of God there is no place for fornicators, nor lovers of money, nor adulterers, nor effeminate men, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous men, nor drunkards, nor accusers, nor extortioners (1 Cor. 6:7–9).

When someone has a dispute with another Christian, how does he dare to resort to the judgment of unjust secular judges, and not to the judgment and arbitration of the members of our ecclesiastical community? (1 Cor. 6:1).

8. Christians must not condemn.

Do not condemn others, so that you too may not be condemned by God. With the judgment by which you judge, you shall be judged; and with the measure by which you measure, it shall be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the whole beam that is in your own eye? (Matt. 7:1–3).

You are guilty and without defense, O man, you who become a judge of others. For in judging another, you condemn your very own self, since you too do the same evils that he does (Rom. 2:1).

Do not make any judgment, brothers, before the time of the Second Coming of the Lord. He will then cast light upon all the works that are now hidden in darkness, and will reveal the hidden thoughts of men’s hearts (1 Cor. 4:5).

Do not speak evil of and accuse one another, brothers. He who accuses or condemns his brother accuses and condemns the law of God itself. And when you judge the law of God, you are not a keeper and one subject to the law, but its judge and superior. There is one Lawgiver and Judge, Christ, who has the power to save man or to punish him. But who are you who judge another? (James 4:11–12).

9. If Christians do not forgive the faults of their brothers, neither will God forgive their own faults.

If you forgive the faults of other men, your heavenly Father will also forgive your own faults. But if you do not forgive the faults of others, neither will your heavenly Father forgive your own faults (Matt. 6:14–15).

Heavenly Father, forgive us the debts of our sins, as we also forgive our own debtors, that is, those who have wronged us (Matt. 6:12).

“Evil servant, I forgave you all your debt, ten thousand talents, an enormous sum, because you entreated me. Should you not also have had compassion on your fellow servant, as I had compassion on you, and forgiven him the hundred denarii, an insignificant sum, which he owed you?” And his lord was angered and delivered that servant to the tormentors, until he should repay all his debt. So also will My heavenly Father do to you, if you do not forgive from all your heart the faults of your brothers (Matt. 18:32–35).

When you stand to pray, forgive whatever complaint or grief you have against any brother of yours, so that your heavenly Father may also forgive your own faults (Mark 11:25).

If your brother does you wrong, rebuke him. And if he repents, forgive him. But even if he wrongs you seven times in the day, and comes back as many times and says to you, “I repent,” forgive him (Luke 17:3–4).

10. Christians must give alms, but also pray and fast; yet not hypocritically, that is, so that men may glorify and praise them, but only for God.

Take care not to do your almsgiving before men, so that they may see and admire you. Otherwise, do not expect a reward from your heavenly Father. Therefore, when you give alms, do it so secretly that your left hand does not know what your right hand is doing (Matt. 6:1, 3).

When you pray, Christian, do not be like the hypocrites, who like to stand and pray ostentatiously in the churches and at the crossroads, in order to show men that they are praying. I assure you that this is their whole reward. You, on the contrary, when you pray, enter into your most hidden place, that is, the heart; close the door, that is, the senses; and pray secretly to your hidden and invisible Father. And He, who sees hidden deeds, will reward you openly (Matt. 6:5–6).

When you fast, do not become gloomy, like the hypocrites, who suitably alter their appearance in order to show men that they are fasting. I assure you that they receive only their reward here, from the praise of men. You, on the contrary, when you fast, care for your hair and wash your face, so as not to show your fasting to men, but only to God your Father, who sees hidden deeds. And your Father, who sees hidden deeds, will repay you openly (Matt. 6:16–18).

11. Christians must care for the acquisition not of earthly treasures, but heavenly ones. And the rich must weep and mourn over their riches, rather than rely on them.

Do not gather riches upon the earth, where moth and rust destroy them, and where thieves break in and steal them. Gather heavenly treasures, which neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves cannot break in and steal them. For where your riches are, there your heart will also be attached (Matt. 6:19–21).

Woe to you who are rich, because you have your consolation in this world from your wealth, and for this reason there remains nothing for you to enjoy in life (Luke 6:24).

I assure you that a rich man will enter the Kingdom of Heaven with difficulty (Matt. 19:23).

Sell your possessions and give alms to the poor. Acquire purses that do not grow old, and riches in heaven that never fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys (Luke 12:33).

Each one of you who does not renounce whatever he has in this life cannot be My disciple (Luke 14:33).

Charge the rich of this present world not to be proud, nor to set their hopes on something uncertain, such as wealth, but on the living God, who richly gives us all good things to enjoy (1 Tim. 6:17).

Listen to me, you rich as well. Weep and mourn for the calamities that await you. Your wealth has rotted, and your garments have been eaten by moths. Your gold and silver have rusted away, and their rust will be a witness against you and will eat your flesh like fire. And while judgment is drawing near, you are gathering treasures (James 5:1–3).

Behold, the wages of the workers who harvested your fields cry out, and you have withheld them from them. And the cries of the wronged harvesters have reached the ears of the Almighty Lord (James 5:4).

12. Christians must not be anxious about the goods of the earth, nor love the world and worldly things, but must seek the eternal and heavenly goods.

Do not be anxious, and do not begin to say, “What shall we eat?” or “What shall we drink?” or “What shall we wear?” because only unbelievers are anxious about all these things (Matt. 6:31–32).

Seek first of all the Kingdom of God and the prevalence of His will, and all these things will be given to you by God as a gift, without your asking for them (Matt. 6:33).

This I say to you, brothers: that the time of earthly life is short, so that even those who have wives should live as though they had none, that is, not being attached to them. And those who weep and are afflicted over things of the present world should live as though nothing sorrowful had happened. And those who experience joys should live as though they had no reason to rejoice. And those who buy material things should regard the things bought as though they were not going to enjoy them. And those who are occupied with the goods of this world should avoid every excessive enjoyment of them and be content only with what is necessary. For the present form of this world will not last long, but is continually passing and going away (1 Cor. 7:29–31).

We Christians do not aim at the things that are seen, but at the things that are not seen with bodily eyes. For the things that are seen are temporary, while the things that are not seen are eternal (2 Cor. 4:18).

We are citizens of heaven, from where we also await our Lord Jesus Christ to come and redeem us (Phil. 3:20).

We Christians do not have our permanent homeland in this world, but long for the future heavenly homeland (Heb. 13:14).

Traitors to the love of God! Do you not know that love for the sinful world is enmity against God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God (James 4:4).

Beloved, do not love the world, nor the things that are of the world. If someone loves the world, he does not have within him love for the heavenly Father (1 John 2:15).

13. Christians must not be proud, but must be humble and love humble things.

Whoever humbles himself like this little child, he is the greatest of all in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt. 18:4).

Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled. And whoever humbles himself shall be exalted (Matt. 23:12).

Brothers, do not be conceited, but condescend to simple and humble Christians, and associate with them, sharing in their lowliness (Rom. 12:16).

With humility let each regard the other as superior to himself (Phil. 2:3).

Humble yourselves before the Lord, and He will exalt you (James 4:10).

Let the younger submit to the elders. And all of you together, submitting yourselves to one another, gird yourselves with humility. For God resists the proud, but gives His grace to the humble. Therefore humble yourselves under the power of God, so that He may exalt you at the hour of judgment (1 Pet. 5:5–6).

14. Christians must face with patience all the afflictions that befall them.

He who endures trials to the end, he alone shall be saved (Matt. 24:13).

By your patience you shall save your souls (Luke 21:19).

Affliction gradually brings about patience, patience brings steadfastness in virtue, and steadfastness in virtue brings hope in God (Rom. 5:3–4).

Have patience in trials (Rom. 12:11).

If we show patience in afflictions, we shall reign together with Christ in the life to come (2 Tim. 2:12).

Pursue patience (1 Tim. 6:11).

Brothers, endure with fortitude every chastening of God, knowing that God treats you as His children (Heb. 12:7).

You need patience, so that you may steadily do the will of God and receive the reward which He promised you (Heb. 10:36).

With patience let us run the contest that lies before us (Heb. 12:1).

Blessed is the Christian who bears trials with patience, because, after he has successfully undergone the trials, he will gain the prize of eternal life, which God promised to those who love Him (James 1:12).

Let your patience be unshaken and enduring, so that you may become perfect and complete and lack nothing (James 1:4).

Do whatever you can, brothers, to add patience to self-control, and to patience add piety (2 Pet. 1:6).

Here the patience of those who belong to the people of God will be revealed (Rev. 14:12).

15. Christians must not surrender themselves to worldly cares and material pleasures, nor live with negligence and spiritual sloth, but must always be in spiritual watchfulness and readiness, awaiting the hour of death and of God’s judgment.

Keep watch, because you do not know at what hour your Lord will come. And know this: if the owner of a house knew at what hour of the night the thief would come, he would have stayed awake and would not have allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also must always be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect Him (Matt. 24:42–44).

I say it to all of you: Keep watch! (Mark 13:37).

Watch and pray, so that temptation may not overcome you. Your spirit is willing, but your flesh is weak (Mark 14:38).

Let your waist be well girded, that is, be ready, and let your lamps always be burning, that is, let your mind and heart always be in attentiveness and watchfulness. Be like those servants who are waiting for their lord to return from the wedding celebration, so that, as soon as he comes and knocks at the door, they may immediately open to him. Blessed are those servants whom their lord, when he comes, will find keeping watch and waiting for him (Luke 12:35–37).

Take good heed to yourselves. Take care not to surrender yourselves to dissipation and drunkenness and anxiety over daily needs, because your hearts will become heavy and drowsy from these things, and the day of judgment will thus overtake you suddenly. For it will come like a snare upon all men who dwell on the earth. Therefore be watchful and attentive, entreating God at every hour and moment to count you worthy to escape all the fearful things that are about to happen, and to stand ready before the Son of Man (Luke 21:34–36).

The hour has now come for us to rise from the sleep of negligence, brothers. For now final salvation is nearer to us than when we first believed. The night of earthly life is already passing away, and the day of the future eternal life is drawing near (Rom. 13:11–12).

Rise up, you who sleep the sleep of sin, and arise from spiritual deadness, and Christ will enlighten you (Eph. 5:14).

Let us not sleep, as the others do, but let us be watchful and attentive. Those who sleep, sleep at night. And those who get drunk, get drunk at night. But we Christians, as people of the day, let us be attentive (1 Thess. 5:6–8).

Do not extinguish through negligence the gifts of the Holy Spirit which you have (1 Thess. 5:19).

Do not be slothful in whatever requires eagerness and zeal. Have fervent spiritual enthusiasm; serve the Lord with devotion (Rom. 12:11).

You have lived upon the earth with pleasures and extravagance. You have fattened your hearts like fattened animals that are being prepared for slaughter. So also for you the day of judgment will be a day of slaughter (James 5:5).

Be attentive and watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls about like a roaring lion, seeking to devour one of you who stand firm in the faith (1 Pet. 5:8).

Keep watch!… For if you do not keep watch, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come to judge you (Rev. 3:2–3).

16. Christians must repent continually from the depths of their soul.

At that time John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness of Judea, preaching and saying: “Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven has drawn near” (Matt. 3:1–2).

From that time Jesus began to preach and to say: “Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven has drawn near” (Matt. 4:17).

If you do not repent, you will all perish in the same way (Luke 13:3).

Repent, brothers, and return to God, so that your sins may be blotted out and you may find relief from the Lord (Acts 3:19).

Repent and do again the former good works which you used to do. Otherwise, if you do not repent, I am coming quickly against you, and I will remove your lampstand, that is, your Church, from its place (Rev. 2:5).

17. Christians, if they do not surpass the righteous of the Old Testament in good works, do not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. And if they sin, they will be punished more severely than unbelievers.

If your piety does not surpass the piety of the scribes and the Pharisees, you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt. 5:20).

That servant who knows what his lord’s will is, but does not prepare or do what he wants, will be punished severely. On the contrary, he who does not know his lord’s will and does something worthy of punishment will be punished more lightly. For to whom much was given, much will be required; and to whom more was given, more will be required (Luke 12:47–48).

Those who sinned without knowing the law of God will be condemned not according to the law as the criterion, that is, more lightly. But those who sinned while knowing the law will be judged according to the law as the criterion, that is, more severely (Rom. 2:12).

It would have been better for them not to have known the path of virtue and piety than, after coming to know it, to abandon the holy commandment that was delivered to them (2 Pet. 2:21).

 

Greek source: https://imlp.gr/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Kyrioteres.pdf

 

 

A Prayer for the Lapsed

 

O Lord God, Heavenly King, in Whom we all have our beginning and our end, we come to Thee with humble heart and contrite spirit, entreating mercy, salvation and help in time of need. In Thine infinite power, look Thou with mercy and compassion on the hearts of those held in a cruel spiritual captivity, our brethren who have erred, strayed, lapsed or estranged themselves from the full participation in the life of Thy Church. Restrain their captors, the evil ones, from bringing them further harm. Cause them to relent and release them. Restore our brethren to the full and saving participation in the life of Thy Church, that with them we may all lift up our voices in prayers of thanksgiving and praise to Thee, O Heavenly Father, our merciful Benefactor. For Thou are the King of Peace and the Giver of life, to Thee we send up glory together with Thine Only-Begotten Son, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Source: The Shepherd: An Orthodox Christian Pastoral Magazine, Vol. XLVI, No. 8, April 2026, p. 18.

Questioning the Calendar

By Monk John

Source: The Shepherd: An Orthodox Christian Pastoral Magazine, Vol. XLVI, No. 7, March 2026, pp. 6-12, and Vol. XLVI, No. 8, April 2026, pp. 6-11.

The German Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad under Metropolitan Mark publishes a bimonthly periodical in German and Russian. For over 45 years it has provided edifying spiritual reading along with diocesan news. Almost every issue includes an instalment of the commentary on the New Testament by St. Justin (Popovich) of Chelie, translated from Serbian. The first issue for 2025 includes St. Justin’s commentary on the Gospel of John 2:12-3:21 (pp. 12-17). In the same issue (pp. 21-29) we find a report delivered by Archimandrite Justin (Rauer) to a seminar held in Munich in December, 2024, under the title ‘About the Calendar Question’. This report raises a number of questions which require clarification. The following notes are offered here to the reader with this good intention.

1. The author writes: ‘According to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke the Mystical Supper was the Passover meal. But according to the Gospel of John, Jesus was crucified on the day of the feast of Pascha’ [p. 22b & 25b].

All of the New Testament references to the Mystical Supper state that our Lord took ‘ἄρτος’, that is leavened bread – not the unleavened azymes [ἄζυμα] prescribed by the Old Testament law for the Passover (Mt. 26:26; Mk, 14:22; Lk. 22:19, 24: 30; Jn. 13:18; I Cor. 11:23).

The Synoptic Gospels tell us the Mystical Supper was held on the day of unleavened bread [ἀζύμων] when the Passover [Πάσχα] was sacrificed (Mk. 14:1; Lk. 22:1; Mt. 26:17; Mk. 14:12; Lk. 22:7). On the day before the Passover meal all leavened food was removed, since only unleavened bread [ἄζυμα] was permitted for the seven days of the Passover; so it became known as the day or feast of unleavened bread.

The Biblical day begins in the evening. Good Friday began on the evening of Great Thursday, when our Lord and His disciples gathered in the upper room for the Mystical Supper. Our Saviour was betrayed, tried and convicted by the Sanhedrin during the night; in the morning He was brought before Pontius Pilate and condemned to crucifixion.

The Lamb of God Who taketh away the sins of the world gave Himself over to be sacrificed on the Cross when the Paschal lambs were being slain in the Temple. In the evening, He was laid to rest in the tomb, as the Jews gathered in their homes for the Passover meal. This is the Great Sabbath (Jn 19:31); ‘this is the blessed Sabbath, this is the day of rest, on which the Only-Begotten Son of God rested from all His works’ (Doxology at Praises, Matins, Great Saturday).

In the Synaxarion for Matins of Great Thursday in the Greek Triodion we read:

Since the Hebrew Pascha was to be sacrificed on Friday, and the typos [the foreshadowing of the Old Testament law] was to give way to the Truth, that is for our Pascha Christ to be sacrificed, our Lord Jesus Christ, acting in advance, as the divine Fathers say, celebrated it with the Disciples on the evening of Thursday. For this evening and all of Friday are viewed as one day by the Hebrews…Note, that this was not the Passover meal of the law; for it is a supper, with reclining and leavened bread and sauce, whereas there [for the Old Testament Passover] everything was roasted on fire and with unleavened bread…The persons who brought Him, it says, did not enter the Prætorium so as not to be defiled, so that they could eat the Passover. So one might conclude that perhaps the High Priests and Pharisees acted then contrary to the Law, postponing the Passover, as the divine Chrysostom says, which they were supposed to eat that night, but which they put off in order to put Christ to death. When they were supposed to eat it is shown by Christ by the supper, which He ate at night, revealing the Mystery of what is more perfect. For, as has been stated, the typos [the foreshadowing of the Old Testament law] was to be replaced by the Truth. Now John says that all this occurred on Thursday and Thursday night before the feast of the Passover. For this reason we celebrate, commemorating these fearsome and unspeakable works and deeds with fear and trembling.

The reference to St. John Chrysostom in the Synaxarion is somewhat misleading, so we add his commentary on the relevant verse [Jn. 18:28]:

But what is this, ‘That they might eat the Passover’? For He had done this on the first day of unleavened bread. Either he calls the whole feast ‘the Passover,’ or means, that they were then keeping the Passover, while He had delivered it to His followers one day sooner, reserving His own Sacrifice for the Preparation-day [Friday], when also of old the Passover was celebrated. But they, though they had taken up arms, which was unlawful, and were shedding blood, are scrupulous about the place, and bring forth Pilate to them (Homily 83 on the Gospel of John).

2. The author writes [p.29a]: ‘The day “of the victory of the sun over darkness” [the winter solstice], according to observations at that time, came on December 25. It is interesting, how the Emperor Constantine gradually comes to Christianity by identifying Sol Invictus with Christ.’

Perhaps it should be pointed out that St. Constantine’s vision of the Cross bore the message: ‘In this sign conquer.’ The Holy Cross became the standard carried before for his army; it was under the sign of the Cross that they won their stunning victories over the champions of idolatry.

The Orthodox Church reveres St. Constantine the Great as an equal to the Apostles; he declared Christianity a ‘religio licita’, granted the Church a privileged position in the Empire, laid the foundations of the Constantinian era and in order to bring peace and unity to the Church, summoned the First Holy OEcumenical Council in Nicæa in 325.

3. While the official Acts of this Council have been lost and much concerning the Council’s consideration of this question remains unclear, the author quotes [pp. 23b-24a] one of the sources preserved by early Church historians relating the Council’s decision concerning the celebration of Holy Pascha, the ‘Letter of the Emperor Constantine from Nicæa to the Bishops who were absent from the Council’:

The question relative to the day for the celebration of Pascha was also discussed, and it was universally decided that it is good for all Christians, in whatever land they may dwell, to celebrate the feast of salvation, the most holy Pascha on one and the same day [emphasis ours]. For what can be more beautiful and triumphant than when the feast, through which we receive the hope of immortality, is celebrated by all with one accord and in the same manner? … First of all, it was found to be particularly unworthy to celebrate this, the holiest of all festivals, by following the practice of the Jews.

After discussing other related matters, the author concludes: ‘Paschal Sunday is the first Sunday after the first full moon (more precisely, after the 14th day of the lunar month), after March 21. So, the earliest date for Pascha is March 22 and the latest date is April 25’ [p.27a].

Two points must be clarified for an accurate designation of the day for the celebration of Holy Pascha according to the Paschalion.

4. First, the question of astronomical phenomena.

The author writes: ‘The dates of the full moon and the March equinox used for the dating of Pascha are ecclesiastical dates, and not astronomical…Moreover, astronomical dates change with time, but the Church fixed this occasion on March 21 in its calendar’ [p.27a].

A specific calendar date, March 21 according to the Julian Calendar – not constantly changing astronomical phenomena – sets the dates between which the Sunday of Holy Pascha can occur and divides the successive years of the Paschalion.

The Old Testament Law sets the date of the Passover at the time of the barley harvest in Palestine, when a sheaf of the first fruits were offered, while at Pentecost, the first fruits of the wheat harvest were offered (Lev. 23:10-11, 15-17). There is no reference to the vernal equinox, for which no word exists in Biblical Hebrew.

In the fourteenth century it was already observed in Constantinople that March 21 was no longer the date of the vernal equinox. The question of ‘correcting’ the calendar met the reply that the purpose of the calendar is to provide for the celebration of the feasts by Christians everywhere ‘on one and the same day’.

Now there are Orthodox churches on all the continents. The Nativity of Christ is celebrated by the Aleuts in freezing darkness, awaiting the end of the long arctic night; in Antarctica, on the windswept ice in the middle of the antarctic day; in Congo, where there is virtually no difference in the length of days and nights throughout the year, the celebration comes in the steamy heat at the height of the rainy season.

Those who remain faithful to the Church calendar continue to celebrate everywhere ‘on one and the same day’.

5. Next and more important, according to the Paschalion, Holy Pascha is celebrated a) on the first Sunday, b) after March 21 according to the traditional [Julian] calendar, c) after the Nomikon Pascha.

The author devotes 2½ columns [pp. 27b-28b] to ‘The Jewish Calendar’, even though he has already quoted St. Constantine’s declaration rejecting: ‘the practice of the Jews...’ However, he omits St. Constantine’s explanation which follows:

For we have it in our power, by rejecting their custom, to prolong for the ages to come the observance of a more valid order, which we have observed from the very time of the [Lord’s] Passion to the present.

The Nomikon Pascha is not mentioned anywhere in the article, but this is exactly the ‘more valid order, which we have observed from the very time of the [Lord’s] Passion to the present’.

The Orthodox Church’s Eternal Paschalion, with the Great Indiction, developed by the Church of Alexandria, employs an ancient, traditional method to determine the date of the Nomikon Pascha, i.e. the Old Testament Passover. This involves both the solar calendar (dates of the month) and the lunar calendar (days of the week).

In his ‘Report’ to the Commission on the Question of the Calendar Reform, in St. Petersburg, May 1899, Prof. V.V. Bolotov of the Theological Academy explains that the day of Holy Pascha was designated by the Holy Fathers just as it had been designated in the days of Jesus Christ, without the errors which characterized Jewish practice in the third and fourth centuries. We might add that the Commission decided to retain the Julian Calendar in Russia.

This explains the date of Holy Pascha for the year 2026.

The astronomical full moon of March 20/April 2 comes on Thursday before Lazarus Saturday, the date of Pesach for contemporary Judaism.

For the Gregorian calendar, the date of the vernal equinox, March 8/21, divides the years; March 20/April 2 is the date of the first full moon, and the first Sunday is March 23/April 5, the Sunday before Holy Pascha.

According to the Orthodox Paschalion, Holy Pascha is to be celebrated a) on the first Sunday, b) after March 21, c) after the Nomikon Pascha, which in 2026 comes on March 24/April 6 (Great Monday). Holy Pascha is to be celebrated on March 30/April 12, the second Sunday after the astronomical full moon.

Someone might object that because of the discrepancy accumulated over the centuries between ecclesiastical dates and the phases of the moon, the ‘outdated’ Paschalion sets the date for Holy Pascha a week too late.

Without going into technical details, a spot check with the tables of the moon published by Apostolike Diakonia of the Church of Greece in the Mega Orologion, the astronomical dates appear to coincide with the ecclesiastical dates used in the Paschalion for setting the date of the Nomikon Pascha.

The astronomical tables were prepared by the Observatory in Athens, with the note that the indicated dates may be one day off. So it seems the discrepancy with the phases of the moon accumulated over seventeen centuries amounts to less than one day.

In the following year, 2027, Holy Pascha is to be celebrated on April 19/May 2, which is a) the first Sunday, b) after March 21, c) after the Nomikon Pascha, which in 2027 comes on April 12/25 (Palm Sunday). The Jewish Pesach, with the full moon, comes on April 9/22. The Gregorian calendar places the celebration on March 15/28, the first Sunday after the preceding full moon, well ahead of everybody.

6. The problems confronted for the adoption of the universal date of Holy Pascha in Syria are presented and reference is made to the First Canon of the Synod of Antioch in 341 [p.25], which severely condemns those ‘who presume to set aside the decree of the holy and great Synod which was assembled at Nicæa in the presence of the pious Emperor Constantine, beloved of God, concerning the holy and salutary feast of Pascha.’

To his discussion of the problems that arose with the Roman Church [p.26a], it might be added that the discrepancies were resolved when St. Leo the Great adopted the Alexandrian Paschalion in 454. The author notes that when confusing situations arose later, they were usually resolved by applying the Alexandrian Paschalion. It seems the Celts, out in the fog on the very edge of the world, were among the last to accept the common Paschalion.

The author concludes this discussion by noting: ‘However, the Church endeavoured “to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3)’, and adds: ‘choosing peace by making compromises, although without a complete agreement on the question’. With these words he glosses over the all of the following 7th point.

7. The common Paschalion continued to be observed by the Church of Rome after its separation from the Orthodox Church up until the calendar reform by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582. The Gregorian calendar was immediately recognized as a useless chronological device. It is to the credit of Vatican diplomats that it has not only been accepted by the Protestants but has also become the universal civil calendar.

The motives of the counter-reformation pontiff for reforming the calendar are open to question. He served a Te Deum in gratitude for the St. Bartholemew Day massacre in France and sponsored the Unia of Brest. The Uniates, incidentally, were permitted to retain the Orthodox calendar and Paschalion; submission to the Pope was more important than celebrating feasts on the same day with him.

A series of Orthodox Councils promptly condemned the Gregorian calendar. The Orthodox Churches remained faithful to ‘the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace’. In 1902-04, as innovationism began to make itself felt, all of the local Orthodox Churches replied to an inquiry from the Ecumenical Patriarchate unanimously rejecting any reform of the Church calendar.

In the aftermath of World War I worldly forces alien to the Church made their impact felt in the life of the Church: the Bolsheviks in Russia, Western politics and Attaturk in Constantinople. Protestant ideas underlying ecumenism are embraced by the Encyclical of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in 1920 To the Christian Churches of the Whole World, Orthodox and heterodox, which proposes the adoption of a common calendar as a first step towards a union of ‘churches’.

In 1923 Patriarch Meletios IV (Metaxakis), after his un-canonical election, presided over the openly innovationist and ecumenist Pan-Orthodox Congress, consisting of 6 bishops, one archimandrite and a layman. At the same time the council of the renovationist ‘Living Church’ in Soviet Russia deposed and defrocked the imprisoned Patriarch Saint Tikhon. Both gatherings proposed innovations in the life of the Church.

In 1924, the hierarchies of Constantinople, Cyprus, Greece and Romania arbitrarily imposed the ‘corrected’ calendar on their faithful.

All the conniving of the Bolsheviks and innovationists did not succeed in forcing the Orthodox Church of Russia to violate Patriarch Tikhon’s decree (November, 1923) which set aside changes in the Church’s calendar.

The innovationists of the Phanarion recognized the renovationist ‘Living Church’ as the official Russian Church, and urged Metropolitan Sergius and his Temporary Synod to join them. Only after World War II, when the ‘Living Church’, along with the Uniates in the Soviet Union, had been absorbed by the Moscow Patriarchate, did Constantinople, along with the other Eastern Orthodox Patriarchates, enter into communion with Patriarch Alexis I. Jerusalem, the Mother of Churches, and the Churches of Serbia and Georgia likewise have remained faithful to the traditional Orthodox Church calendar.

In 1948, Archbishop St. Seraphim (Sobolev) delivered an address to the Pan-Orthodox Conference in Moscow, boycotted by Constantinople. He presents the history of the calendar reform, its violations of traditional norms and consistent rejection by the Orthodox Church from the 16th to the 20th century. He also cites the astronomical charts and scientific data compiled by Prof. Bolotov and other Russian scholars which totally discredit the Gregorian calendar and demonstrate the validity of the traditional Church calendar and Paschalion.

We might add, that thirty years later the Academy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R. published A.N. Zelinsky’s exposition of the traditional Church calendar and Paschalion as an unsurpassed achievement of chronological science; he com-pares the Gregorian reform to an amateur smearing paint on a masterpiece of art. St. Seraphim concludes with the appeal:

We must remain firmly united with these Orthodox Churches, without any compromise, keeping the old calendar in the life of our church, following the terms of the Canons, which must remain unshaken, for they are one of the foundations for the existence of our Orthodox Church.

The purpose of the calendar, as noted above, is to provide for the celebration of the feasts by Orthodox Christians everywhere ‘on one and the same day’. The specifically stated purpose of the calendar reform uses this definition (ὅρος) of the OEcumenical Council in Nicæa to express exactly the opposite: celebrating the great feasts together with the those who have separated themselves from the Orthodox Church, and seeking reconciliation with them. This goal has been openly and consistently pursued by the ecumenists ever since.

The hierarchies of the local Churches compromised in order to preserve at least an appearance of unity. Persons with spiritual authority, who disagreed – and whose protests fell on deaf ears – by compromising keep the people in obedience to the hierarchy; this leaves the innovationists free to continue trying to reconciliate Light with darkness.

Among the faithful of the local Churches that adopted the calendar reform, however, there were those whose conscience did not permit them to make such compromises.

As in former periods of strife over heresy, those in high positions, after taking it upon themselves to introduce un-canonical innovations, also assumed the role of prosecutor, judge and executioner for those who resisted them. They offer a ‘unia’: continue observing the Church calendar but remain in communion with the new calendar hierarchy and leave them free to pursue the path they have chosen. Submission to their ‘canonical’ authority is more important than celebrating the feasts with them ‘on one and the same day’.

The ‘Old Calendarists’ were defrocked, excommunicated and declared ‘schismatics’, ‘outside the Church’. Wherever possible they were subjected to brutal suppression by the secular authorities. Their witness, officially ignored or dismissed as ignorant fanaticism, has been sealed with Martyrs’ blood.

Strengthened by the appearance of the Holy Cross on the Feast of its Exaltation in Athens, September 14/27, 1925, and many other miracles and signs, those who chose to remain faithful to the traditions of the Church endured. They were guided by the confessor Hierarchs St. Chrysostomos of Florina in Greece and St. Glykerios in Romania, the disciples of St. Seraphim (Sobolev) in Bulgaria, and many other confessor-pastors with charismatic gifts.

The extremist policies of the innovationists, however, made their mark, and those in resistance to innovationist ecumenism suffer from internal divisions. We see the same phenomenon in the past: e.g., the schism among those opposing Arianism in Antioch, dissension among those in the resistance to Iconoclasm recorded in the letters of St. Theodore the Studite and the life of St. Methodius of Constantinople.

The innovationist ecumenists, acting as representatives of the local Churches, continue to sign documents, participate in organisations, dialogues, demonstrations and “prayers” with the heterodox and other religions. Their official statements and actions give the impression that Orthodox Christianity is simply one of the many traditions in the Pantheon of world religions.

In the name of unity and peace, they made their spectacle in Kolymvari, Crete (June 2016), are preparing a ‘common Paschalion’ with the Papacy, and with increasing boldness claim the Ecumenical Patriarch is first without equal in Orthodoxy.

At the same time open breaches have opened between the hierarchies of the local Churches, and Metropolitan Onufry with his faithful in the Ukraine have been cut off and subjected to suppression. Already back in 1977, St. Justin (Popovich) of Chelie issued his appeal ‘to convoke a truly ecumenical council’, which could and should consider the ‘question of ecumenism’. He continues:

This, properly speaking, is an ecclesiological question concerning the Church as theandric unity and organism, a unity and organism that are placed in doubt by contemporary ecumenical syncretism. It is also related to the question of man, for whom the nihilism of contemporary, and especially atheistic, ideologies has dug a grave without hope of resurrection.

The New Martyr St. Cyril of Kazan replied to Metropolitan Sergius’ ‘canonical injunctions’ that the life of the Church in our days is not being guided by the Holy Canons. Situations arise in which the conscience of a faithful believer does not permit him to commune with a hierarchy he clearly sees going astray. He awaits the judgement of a competent Church council or other providential events to manifest God’s Will. There are many edifying examples in the lives of the Saints and Church history, and the Holy Canons provide for such situations.

For a thoroughly documented account of the above, see the book ‘One Hundred Years Since the Calendar Reform (1924- 2024)’ by Metropolitan Clement of the GOC of Larissa and Platamon. The English translation, however, does not include the notes for the sources quoted and the bibliography in the Greek original.

Now what are we poor, miserable sinners supposed to do? Because of our sins, the Light of Christ is not visible in our lives for others to see. Without passing judgement on anyone, striving to keep our conscience pure in harmony with the Gospels and Apostolic Tradition, with pain of heart and abundant tears, are we not called to beseech the Lord and Head of the Church to resolve the scandals which so sorely afflict Her?

8. ‘What to do?’ is the title of the concluding section of the article, in which a different solution is recommended.

We noted above the author’s affirmation that ‘the Church has always regarded the determination of the date of Pascha as a question of church discipline and not astronomical science’ [p.26b].

But now he points to the growing accumulation over past and future centuries of the discrepancy between the calendar and astronomical events and warns us:

It is easy to realize that one day we will celebrate Pascha in the summer, in the fall or even in the winter, although in the Northern hemisphere (that is Jerusalem) it must be a spring celebration.... So as not to let our calendar turn into total nonsense, at some point the calendar must be reformed. And if this is already clear, we must ask ourselves, why not do this as soon as possible?

He also points out that the ‘mixed calendar’ – that is the civil calendar with the Orthodox Paschalion – currently followed by some Orthodox communities faces the same prospect. Eventually their Pascha will come on the same day as Christmas.

Our author recommends eliminating February 29 in a series of leap years in order to keep the calendar in harmony with the seasons of the year [pp. 28-29]. By adopting the device used by the Gregorian Calendar every 400 years, the traditional Julian calendar and Paschalion would be retained without the shock of erasing a block of days.

His proposal gives rise to a number of important questions which are not easy to answer.

a. In keeping with the divine revelation given to the Prophet Moses the first Passover was celebrated in Egypt on the evening of the 14th day of the first month, when the Angel of death passed over the homes which were marked by the blood of the Paschal lamb (Ex. 12:1-2, 6 & 14). Was this the day of the full moon or the 14th day after the visible appearance of the new moon?

b. The solar year has more days than twelve lunar months. Epact, the number of days from the new moon to the first day of the first calendar month, is an essential factor used in the Paschalion for designating the date of the Nomikon Pascha. The arbitrary elimination of calendar days shortens the solar year, disrupts the consecutive flow of the cycles of solar and lunar years and changes epact. This is one of the major defects of the Gregorian calendar. This would disrupt the established formula for determining the date of the Nomikon Pascha, introducing confusion into the Paschalion, which now absorbs a variety of variables, including discrepancies that creep in over the centuries. The way in which the Holy Fathers ordained celebrating Holy Pascha has a validity that survives over the ages. Do we think we can do better?

c. In Jerusalem, at least for a few more centuries, Pascha will continue to be celebrated in the Spring, and we pray the Holy Fire will continue to appear at the Lord’s Sepulchre on Great Saturday. So, at this moment, how urgent is the need to solve problems foreseen by calculating hundreds of years in advance?

d. Moreover, in our endeavours ‘to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace’, is it really up to us to tamper with such matters?

e. Finally, a practical question: given the current situation in the Orthodox Church, where and how and by whom is any effective change in the traditional calendar to be undertaken?

This having been said, we can wait to see whether or not this proposal is inspired by God as a heavenly blessing to bring peace to a grievously troubled Church on earth.

Today’s lack of self-awareness in the Church

Adamantios Tsakiroglou, philologist and historian

 

 

It has been emphasized in writing and orally countless times that we are living in apocalyptic times, times in which madness reigns, along with the overturning/distortion of terms and institutions. In this oppressive madness and distortion, two principal elements/causes are dominant: ignorance and the renunciation of personal responsibility, together with the simultaneous attribution of responsibility only to others.

The source of all these things is the lack of self-awareness and its derivatives: arrogance, selfishness, the worldly spirit, the lack of a spirit of sacrifice for the prospering of the common good, indifference toward the other, the lack of love as it is taught by Christ and not by materialists, neoliberal activists, and Ecumenists, betrayal, not only toward one’s fellow man, but also toward the Truth. Thus Paul is confirmed when he prophesied that we people of today are “lovers of self, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, implacable, slanderers, without self-control, savage, despisers of what is good, traitors, headstrong, puffed up, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness, but denying its power” (II Tim. 3:2–5). And what does the Apostle advise us, as he advised Timothy? “And from such, turn away.” We, however, unlike Timothy, do not obey, even though we speak constantly about obedience.

Consequently, this diseased condition is perpetuated in a vicious circle, since no one assumes his responsibilities, but, while willfully shutting his eyes, attributes them to others, and so on. For example, we attribute responsibility to politicians, as though they had elected themselves, as though we were not the ones who believed them and voted for them, chiefly out of personal rather than national interest. And when we are asked why we do not react, then we present our ignorance as to the manner of reaction, but chiefly as to the role, and therefore the responsibility, that we have in political affairs. Thus politics as a term also loses its meaning, and its diseased condition is perpetuated ever more toward the worse.

Unfortunately, this diseased lack of self-knowledge and self-awareness, and indeed to a higher degree, now also exists in the Church.

Her character as a Theanthropic body, with Christ as the head and all the faithful as the body, has been forgotten, and She is regarded as a human organization in which the leaders, bishops and priests, make the decisions, and the laity follow, criticizing the decisions of the leaders, yet not assuming their own responsibilities as members of the same Theanthropic body.

Naturally, on the one hand, this is due to the lack of proper catechesis of the flock on the part of the clergy, and to the severing of theology from the people, since whatever theologians there are function and address themselves, with their often-incomprehensible language, only to a “high-level” group of “chosen/enlightened” people, and not to the people. On the other hand, however, it is due to our personal spiritual sloth, to our cowardice, and, most importantly, to the degradation of the Church from the highest prerequisite and priority for our salvation into an institution, like the many others, in which we function as we do in the others. That is, we expect others to do what is necessary for us, and when they do not do it, then only the others are responsible, since we gave them the responsibility and renounced our own.

Thus, while we see the betrayal against the Faith, while we see heresy, secularization, and unbelief plundering the Sacred and the Holy, we say: As a layman, what can I do? Am I to blame if they betray? I can only protest. There are many texts and talks that reveal the evils that exist. Yet consistency between words and deeds, meaning and application, threat and realization, is absent. Naturally, this does not appear for the first time in the Church. St. John Chrysostom writes: “The priests have become an evil example to the people, insulting, bearing grudges, showing enmity, plotting, looking at persons, not reproving and correcting those who stumble, but by their silence sharing in injustices, like that ancient Eli; the laypeople, abandoning their own affairs, each busies himself with scrutinizing the affairs of the priests, and becomes an unavoidable judge. Am I not speaking the truth? Is our city not full of these evils?” (PG 61, 723). Unfortunately, however, we have not learned from the conditions of the past and from the word of the Saints. And thus, the situation continues from bad to worse.

Consequently, it seems right that we should remember again what our role is as laypeople within the most pure body of the Church, and what our responsibilities are.

In the Church, all must act and participate, fight and defend, regardless of position or rank. It is the highest duty of every believer, whether rasso-wearing or not, and regardless of spiritual level and social position, not only to participate in Her liturgical and spiritual life, but also to defend the Faith as one body. “For just as baptism is one, and the table one, and the fountain and the calling one, and the Father one” (St. John Chrysostom, PG 61, 528). Despite the different hierarchical grades and positions among the people of God, all acts and actions are regarded and understood as actions of the one body: “All of you come together at the same place in prayer; let there be one common supplication, one mind, one hope, in love, in the blameless faith, which is in Christ Jesus, in Whom there is nothing better. All of you, as one, hasten together to the temple of God, as to one altar, to one Jesus Christ, the High Priest of the unbegotten God” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, To the Magnesians, 7:1–2).

The chief concern and highest responsibility of the layman, however, alongside his personal repentance, his struggle for salvation, and his service in the Church, must be the defense of the Orthodox Faith: “...it is made very clear that the laity are called not only to care for the affairs of the Church, but also to contribute to the administration of the Church in accordance with the canons. And it is characteristic that, at critical moments in the life of the Church, when unworthy clerics were overturning the laws of the Church, which they had been called precisely to protect and apply, the laity were the ones who saved the endangered ship of the Church... (note: for today’s shepherds this no longer applies, since the layman exists only to serve and follow). Nor, therefore, is it strange that the great Chrysostom, addressing his wonderful flock, declared: ‘Without you I will do nothing’” (K. Mouratidis, The Essence and Polity of the Church According to the Teaching of John Chrysostom, Athens 1958, p. 219).

Common, then, are the responsibilities of laity and clergy; common are the duties; common is the struggle against the enemies of the Church: “All Christians have one common obligation: not to oppose the will of Christ, but to order their life according to it and to keep His commandments with exactness. The commandments of the Savior are common to all the faithful, and without keeping them. it is not possible to be united with Christ” (see the entire passage: St. Nicholas Cabasilas, On the Life in Christ: Seven Discourses, Souroti, Thessaloniki, 2005, 302–307). And St. Chrysostom says: “For the teaching is common, and the wounds are common” (PG 50, 654).

Because not only the faith, but also the wounds are common, when the clergy betray instead of healing the wounds, then the responsibility belongs to the flock. Then obedience does not apply, as it would apply if it were a matter only of the personal passions of each cleric, as the sacred Chrysostom teaches us: “For if he has a distorted doctrine, even if he be an angel, do not obey him; but if he teaches rightly, pay attention not to his life, but to his words” (Commentary on the Second Epistle to Timothy, PG 62, 611).

Unfortunately, however, today it is not only the clergy who betray, but also we laypeople, even putting forward excuses analogous in hypocrisy to those of the betraying clergy. Let us look at a few:

A) Who am I to do anything?

This excuse is not in accordance with the Church’s Sacred Tradition. This Tradition is splendidly expressed in the well-known passages of St. Theodore the Studite:

“For it is a commandment of the Lord not to remain silent at a time when the faith is in danger... Therefore, when the matter concerns the faith, it is not possible to say, Who am I? A priest, a ruler, a soldier, a farmer, a poor man?... Woe! The stones will cry out, and will you remain silent and unconcerned?” (PG 99, 1321B).

“Not only if someone is preeminent in rank and knowledge is he obliged to contend by speaking and teaching the word of Orthodoxy. But even if one is merely a student, he is bound to speak the truth boldly and to speak freely” (PG 99, 1120).

Here we see that the Saint does not take into account, nor does he consider an obstacle, the conventional division into social classes when it comes to active participation in the struggles of the Faith. In the struggles of the Church, all must participate, regardless of position or rank. The defense of the Faith constitutes the highest duty of every believer, whether rasso-wearing or not, and regardless of spiritual level. Even if, through ignorance or excessive zeal, mistakes are made in this struggle, the fault does not belong to the lay strugglers, but to the clergy who refuse the leadership that has been given to them by the Lord Himself, namely, to stand at the head in the struggles of the Faith and to sacrifice themselves, giving the example as “good Shepherds” and not as “hirelings.” In the case where they lead the way in a God-loving manner, any “zealot” laypeople are easily admonished or isolated. But in the case where the Shepherds are absent from the struggles of the Faith, even the leadership of the laity is blessed, provided that they follow our ecclesiastical Tradition, some with their abilities, others with their deficiencies, but always for the defense of the Faith and selflessly.

B) If I react, I will be accused of being an enemy of the Church.

This excuse comes from the modernizing, clericalist teaching concerning the role of the laity. Naturally, many of us remain silent and do not react, as though these matters did not concern us, fearing that we might scandalize others, or judge, or fail to show obedience. No one disagrees. These things, however, apply in a healthy, Orthodox environment, where dogmatic truth, correct ecclesiology, true service, and love in Christ prevail. “The obligation of obedience toward the shepherds is self-evident, on the condition… that they also show obedience to the Gospel and the Tradition of the Church” (Fr. Arsenios Vliagkoftis, “The Disease of Secularization,” p. 22). Let us not forget that “Undoubtedly, just as then the Apostles ‘did not act according to their own opinion, but first gave an account to the multitude, so also now it ought to be done’ (John Chrysostom)” (Io. Karmiris, “The Position and Ministry of the Laity,” pp. 35–36).

Fr. V. Voloudakis wrote: “We presbyters do not act rightly when, referring to our ecclesiastical issues, we maintain in an un-Orthodox manner: ‘These are the bishops’ problems; let them solve them by themselves.’ The Church belongs to all of us, as do Her problems. Consequently, none of us is innocent through his indifference” (Fr. V. Voloudakis, The Manifestation of the Priesthood, p. 81). And: “It is not only despotocracy that is at fault; we too are all at fault, who nourish and foster it through our absence from ecclesiastical life” (ibid., p. 84).

Even the ecumenist-minded Fr. John Chryssavgis had admitted, without of course applying what he writes (Synaxi magazine, issue 38, p. 26): “The sense of contemporary man is that in the Church we have an establishment, consisting of those above and those below, those who govern and those who are governed. Certain individuals arrange things, while others are dependent on the imposed hierarchy. The former demand obedience, while the latter foster this situation in a space where the balance has already been overturned. The times, however, require that ecclesiastical authority be understood in terms of function, in relation to ‘ministry’ and dialogue, and not in terms of domination. For this to happen, the faithful must be regarded as subjects, not as subjects in the sense of subordinates or as ‘sheep’…”

Professor Ioannis Petrou emphasizes, regarding this excuse and the semiology hidden behind it: “the contemporary state of the Church shows that She avoids truly seeking what it means that the Church is the whole people of God, and how this is expressed in Her life. What is interesting is that even in the case where some raise such questions, they are accused of Protestant-type deviations or anti-ecclesiastical views. Behind these reactions is hidden the fear that the established situation might be disturbed, or that the achievement of power-seeking aims might be made more difficult. What is certain, however, is that Church and power are realities that are not theologically compatible” (“The Church and Her Work of Reconciliation in the Contemporary World,” journal Kath’ Odon, issue 10, Jan.–Apr. 1995, p. 18).

Such authority, as it is applied today, was also applied in other eras. And yet Christians reacted—the history of the Church is full of such brilliant examples—they did not remain silent. Some were persecuted, others were tortured, others were martyred, but they did not compromise with distortion, heresy, and unbelief.

C) I am a sinner; I am not worthy like those who wear cassocks. How can I resist?

This excuse too is rejected by our Saints. Once again St. John Chrysostom will admonish us (Homily Spoken to the Newly Illumined, SC 50, Catechesis III, 5): “Those who before yesterday were captives are now free and citizens of the Church; those formerly in the shame of sins are now in boldness and righteousness. For they are not only free, but also holy; not only holy, but also righteous; not only righteous, but also sons; not only sons, but also heirs; not only heirs, but also brothers of Christ; not only brothers of Christ, but also fellow heirs; not only fellow heirs, but also members; not only members, but also a temple; not only a temple, but also instruments of the Spirit.”

Therefore, as members of the body of the Church, having Christ as our head, and despite our sins, for no one is perfect, provided, of course, that we struggle to war against them, we are free, citizens of the Church, righteous, sons and heirs, brothers and fellow heirs of Christ, as well as a temple and instruments of the Holy Spirit. If we are conscious of what we truly are as baptized persons, can we put forward such excuses? Can we cooperate with or tolerate lawlessness? Can we, being free, submit to each successive antichristian plan?

Connected with the above excuse, and further with those who wish to avoid the Holy Patristic response to every heresy, namely the cessation of commemoration and of ecclesiastical communion with heretical bishops and priests and with those who commemorate them, is also the following beloved excuse:

D) I only want to attend the Liturgy. At the end of the day, the cleric ceases commemoration and communion as the one serving liturgically; I, the layman, have neither participation nor the right to do anything analogous. I only participate in order to receive Communion. The blame falls on the priest.

This excuse has been expressed many times and has influenced many faithful. Yet it is nothing other than yet another distortion of ecclesiastical teaching.

The cause of this distortion, according to Fr. Alexander Schmemann, is the aforementioned deep deformation of ecclesiastical consciousness, the broad perception that has become fixed among the faithful, not only concerning the nature of the Divine Liturgy, but once again concerning the Church Herself. Whereas in the Church of the first centuries, “in the consciousness, experience, and practice of the ancient Church, the Eucharistic sacrifice was offered not only on behalf of all and for all, but by all,” today the Church is experienced by each believer, but also by clerics, as “the service of the laity by the clergy, as the satisfaction by the clergy of the ‘spiritual needs’ of the faithful. In precisely this perception,” he says, “we must seek the cause of these two chronic illnesses, which run like a muddy river through the whole history of Christianity: ‘clericalism’ and ‘laicism,’ which usually takes the form of ‘anticlericalism’” (see The Church at Prayer: An Introduction to Liturgical Theology, Akritas Publications, Athens 2003, pp. 147 and 156).

Consequently, many of us unfortunately believe that prayer in the Divine Liturgy is exclusively the work of the priest, while the faithful person has a passive role and posture. This perception too, however, is innovative. According to Archimandrite Nikodemos Skrettas (Noetic Prayer: Expression of True Worship of God, Mygdonia Publications, Thessaloniki 2006, p. 123): “The common prayer of the Church is rational worship of God, and those who participate constitute a living assembly, which in no case can be transformed into a passive recipient of distant and unfamiliar sounds and movements. The faithful perform a spiritual and creative work; they do not simply stand, insensibly, in the space of the church. They pray and participate actively, in the parish or the monastery. They do not watch as mere observers the things taking place in supplications, processions, festal celebrations, and divine mystagogies.”

Our Saints have assured us countless times that in the Divine Liturgy we all participate, and through common participation we express, as faithful, clergy and people, the common mind, the common faith. St. Chrysostom writes: “For when an entire people stands with hands uplifted, a priestly fullness, and the fearful sacrifice lies before us, how shall we not prevail upon God as we entreat Him on behalf of these?” (Commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians, PG 62, 204).

And more analytically, in the Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (PG 61, 527–528):

“There are occasions when the priest is not at all distinguished from the one under his authority; for example, when it is necessary to partake of the fearful Mysteries. For we are all alike deemed worthy of the same things; not as under the Old Covenant, where the priest ate some things, and the one under authority ate others, and it was not lawful for the people to partake of the things of which the priest partook. But not so now; rather, one Body is set before all, and one Cup. And in the prayers also one may see the people contributing greatly. For both on behalf of those possessed by evil spirits and on behalf of those in repentance, the prayers are common, both from the priest and from them; and all say one prayer, the prayer that is full of mercy. Again, after we have excluded from the sacred precincts those who cannot partake of the holy Table, another prayer must be made, and we all alike lie upon the ground, and we all alike rise up. When, again, it is necessary to receive and give peace, we all alike greet one another. Again, at the most awesome Mysteries themselves, the priest prays for the people, and the people also pray for the priest; for the phrase, ‘And with thy spirit,’ is nothing other than this. The things of thanksgiving are again common; for neither does he give thanks alone, but all the people also. For after first receiving their voice, and then their agreement that this is fitting and right, then he begins the thanksgiving. And why do you marvel that the people utter words together with the priest, when indeed they also send up those sacred hymns together with the Cherubim themselves and the powers above? All these things have been said by me so that each of those under authority also may be sober, so that we may learn that we are all one body, having such difference toward one another as member has toward member, and so that we may not cast everything upon the priests, but that we ourselves also, as concerning a common body, should care for the whole Church. For this brings about both greater security and, for us, greater progress toward virtue. Listen, then, in the case of the Apostles, how elsewhere they took those under authority as sharers in their judgment. For when they ordained the seven, they first communicated the matter to the people; and when Peter appointed Matthias, he did so with all who were present at that time, both men and women. For the things here are not the arrogance of rulers, nor the servility of those under authority, but a spiritual rule, which has this special advantage: that it takes upon itself the greater part of the labors and of care on your behalf, and does not seek the greater honors. For the Church must be inhabited as one house, and all must be disposed as one body.”

And the ever-memorable I. Foundoulis reminds us of the above, presenting the contemporary tragedy with his own fearless word:

“Divine worship is the action of the whole mystical body of Christ, that is, of His Church, which, hierarchically ordered, is directed in the Holy Spirit toward God the Father and offers to Him its doxology, thanksgiving, and petitions. According to the will of the Lord and according to the special gift of the priesthood, the clergy preside over Her liturgical assemblies, serving the Mysteries and taking the lead in the sacred rites. Clergy and laity together constitute the holy people of God and, in the Holy Spirit, form the sacred community of those being saved through the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ and through the gifts of the Holy Spirit, which are granted to the faithful, clergy and people, through the Mysteries and the whole sanctifying function of the institutions of the Church, naturally also through Her worship. In this sense, the priesthood performs a ministry for the salvation of the whole body of the Church; it cooperates and journeys together with the whole people of God on the way toward the noetic land of promise. It does not ‘lord it over the portions allotted’ (I Pet. 5:3), but becomes the bearer of the graces of God and the one who presides over the festal assembly of the choir of the saints, who have found the fountain of life and the way to the gate of Paradise. With these presuppositions, the demand for the participation of the laity in the worship of the Church constitutes, in a certain sense, the expression and painful outcome of a spurious problem, though unfortunately one that exists. The worship of the Church, from its birth, was, and is, the expression and creation of the whole body of the Church. In it a divine drama is ‘played out’ with two or three protagonists: the priest, the deacon, and the people. Each has his distinct and crucial role in the performance of the sacred work of divine worship. The priest has his priestly parts, the deacon his diaconal parts, and the people their choral parts. The Triodion, the Pentecostarion, the Parakletike, the Menaia, and the Psalter are liturgical books that belong to them, to the people; an entire library belongs to the people. If, now, adverse circumstances have given the role of the people to the one who leads the choir alone, the chanter, and the choral parts have become a solo; if the people have remained voiceless listeners, enclosed within themselves in a sacred assembly; if they do not understand the things said and chanted; if they do not offer their bread and wine, the precious gifts of their labor, and do not sit at the soul-nourishing table, and do not enjoy the Master’s hospitality; if they do not know what God they worship, and how and why they worship Him, and many other such things, these are matters that require study, discussion, self-criticism, repentance, and above all serious decisions and actions, with consistency and fear of God, within the holy and ever-living body of the Church”

(Excerpt from “The Participation of the Laity in Worship,” a lecture at the Academy for Theological Studies on 2-26-2005; see also p. 359 at

http://ikee.lib.auth.gr/record/128193/files/GRI-2011-7722.pdf)

The words of the ever-memorable professor are a rebuke to our conscience. The prevalence of the pan-heresy of Ecumenism, of secularization, of clerical/despotocratic rule, of submission to an atheist state mechanism in reality, is due to the fact that the greater part of the flock does not know what God it worships, and how and why it worships Him. If we knew this, we would not find every kind of excuse pleasing to the ear, which lulls consciences to sleep and prevents self-knowledge. We would not obey spiritual fathers who tell us to look only to our own soul and to leave the other matters of the Faith to the supposedly knowledgeable guardians. We would know that since in the Divine Liturgy everything is common and held in common, then the commemoration of heretical/heresy-professing unrepentant clerics is also common and held in common. We would know that participation in the insult against the Holy Mysteries and the sanctity of the Holy Temple, which is taking place today with the permission, exhortation, and dictation of betraying clerics, is common and held in common. We would know that our walking together with any cleric who confesses would also mean a confession common and held in common. And likewise, our participation in the denial of God means a denial common and held in common.

 

Greek source: https://eugenikos.blogspot.com/2026/04/blog-post_55.html