Elder Savvas Lavriotis
Greek source: Orthodoxos Typos,
issue no. 2237/November 30, 2018, pp. 1 and 5.
Shared by the G.O.C. Metropolis of Oropos
and Phyle: https://www.imoph.org/pdfs/2019/05/15/20190515aFylakesProdidoun.pdf
“Why
hast Thou led us astray, O Lord, from Thy way?
Thou hast hardened our hearts, that we should not fear Thee?”
(Isaiah 63:17)
“…the
shepherds acted impiously toward Me, and the prophets prophesied by Baal and
went after that which is profitless.”
(Jeremiah 2:8)
The word of the
Lord is light and a lamp in our life. The Readings of the Services, the Troparia,
and the Synaxaria are part of the daily life of the monk. The above
prophetic passages are read at Vespers of the Feast of the Holy Great-Martyr
Demetrios the Myrrh-streamer.
In our time we
live, hear, and see unbelievable things. One such unbelievable, and yet true,
event is also the following fact.
We
read in Orthodoxos Typos (October 26, 2018, issue no. 2232), that the
Metropolitans Paul of Drama and Barnabas of Neapolis, together with the Abbot
of the Holy Monastery of Dionysiou of the Holy Mountain, Peter, went on the
14th of October to a Muslim (Mohammedan) cemetery, where they offered joint
prayer with an Imam for a relative of a prominent businessman (a Turk).
It
also publishes a photograph in which, with hands raised, they pray for the
repose of the Turk. The photograph is taken from a video which has circulated
and which anyone may see, and which speaks for itself.
What, then, is
happening? Have Bishops and Athonite Abbots abandoned the Gospel and taken up
the Qur’an, abandoned Christianity and joined Mohammedanism? Have they, in
short, changed religion?
We do not wish to
believe such a thing. Might all this reveal the mystery of lawlessness,
something which for years has been at work through the pan-heresy of Ecumenism,
and which will be the final temptation of the Church?
Already a month has
passed, and we expected that the institutional Holy Mountain, the Holy
Community, would have taken action regarding so serious a matter. If the old
Athonite Fathers were living today, they would be weeping, as did the prophets
of the Old Testament:
“…the shepherds acted impiously toward Me, and the prophets prophesied
by Baal and went after that which is profitless”
(Jeremiah 2:8).
So many Abbots, so
many Hieromonks, Spiritual Fathers, and Monks in Monasteries, Kellia,
and Sketes—do they no longer concern themselves with matters of the Faith?
The Masonic funds
from Europe, with which the Monasteries “beautify” the Holy Mountain with
luxury and extravagance, in order to make it more attractive and touristic,
scandalizing the people who live in poverty and hunger—are these more beloved,
God-pleasing, and traditional?
Do financial
matters perhaps have greater value for our salvation?
But how can we
remain silent in the face of such impiety! Even the stones will rise up against
us.
As the least,
simple, and insignificant Athonite Monks, therefore, for reasons purely of
conscience and Orthodox Confession, just as we have already ecclesiologically
separated our position with regard to the heretical decisions of the
pseudo-synod of Kolymbari in Crete—during which the Papists, the Monophysites,
and the multitude of Protestants were synodically recognized as Churches,
something which is contrary to our Orthodox Faith and which we have analyzed in
a patristic and theological manner in the published text Confession of Faith—so
also, with the same sense of responsibility, we denounce the present event
before the institutional authority of our Sacred Place.
The Athonite Abbot
in question cannot be justified on the grounds of ignorance of the Orthodox
Faith and the Sacred Canons: He went to a purely religious place, to a
Mohammedan cemetery, and offered joint prayer with an Imam, praying for
repose—not merely of a heretic, but even of one of another religion; this is
unheard of. It is at the same time noteworthy, and very painful, that for the
first time in history Athonites dare to participate in joint prayers and even
proceed from inter-Christian Ecumenism to interreligious Ecumenism, since,
recently, there have also been joint prayers by other Athonite Monks with
heretical Papists inside churches, such as at the Phanar, in Smyrna, and
elsewhere; and all these, among other things, boast that they are also descendants
of great Neptic Elders…
For all these
things, we would like to set forth—not our own personal judgments—but, as we
always do, to present the Teaching of the Holy Fathers of the Church.
Let us first see
what is said to us concerning the religion of Mohammed and the Mohammedans,
with whom the Abbot in question and the Bishops so readily offered joint
prayer.
Saint Gregory
Palamas, the Athonite, one of the greatest Fathers and Theologians of the
Church, when in 1354 he was traveling by sea toward Constantinople in order to
mediate so that peace might be achieved in the civil conflict between the
imperial court and [John VI] Kantakouzenos, was captured prisoner by the Turks,
who had already occupied all of Asia Minor, on account of the apostasy from the
Faith and the sins of the people and the rulers.
While being a
prisoner, he was summoned three times to dialogue with the Emir of the
Achaemenid Turks (certainly not like the dialogues conducted by today’s
Ecumenists), as well as with the Chiones, that is, Islamized Christians; then,
at the risk of his life, he confessed with boldness:
a) That there is
one true God, the Holy Triune God — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
b) That Jesus
Christ is not a simple prophet, but the Son and Word of God, He who was
foretold through all the Prophets.
c) That the Cross
of Christ is the trophy and the banner of Christ (and he did not supposedly
remove it so as not to offend the Mohammedan invaders brought into our
homeland, as today’s Ecumenist Archbishops and others do).
And d) to the
question of Tasimanes (a ruler), “Why do you not accept our prophet and
do not believe in his book, which descended from heaven?” Saint Gregory Palamas
replied with courage, bringing testimonies even from the Qur’an itself, saying:
“That
Christ is testified to by Moses and by all the Prophets, and He alone is said
throughout the ages to be the Son and Word of God, and He alone was born of a
Virgin Mother. He alone ascended into the heavens and remains immortal, and in
Him alone we hope that He will come to judge the living and the dead. All these
things are also confessed by you Turks; for this reason, we believe in Christ
and in His Gospel. But Muhammad we do not find to be testified to by the
prophets, nor has he accomplished anything wondrous and noteworthy that leads
to faith; therefore, we do not believe in him nor in the book (the Qur’an)
which he delivered.” (See Philotheos Kokkinos, Life of Saint Gregory Palamas,
E.P.E., vol. 70, pp. 345–373).
And succinctly he
would say:
“Of
all the barbarians, the most barbarous is this impious, God-hated, and utterly
defiled race, who believe in a mere and mortal man — this Muhammad” (…).
All these things
are sufficiently capable of showing us how the Fathers of the Church spoke and
confessed their Faith before those of other religions and heretics.
Let us also
consider another Athonite Saint, the great Teacher of the Church and of
enslaved Romiosyne, Saint Nikodemos, who, living under the slavery of
the Turkish rule, not only did not practice diplomacy or politics with those of
another religion, but on the contrary, through his Spirit-inspired writings,
and by preparing many New Martyrs for Martyrdom, became the anointer of the New
Martyrs and handed down to us their moving Martyrologies, as he recorded them
in the New Martyrologion, writing:
“…many
of these New Martyrs, having shown mercy toward the perdition of those of
another faith, went for this very reason to martyrdom and proclaimed to them
the truth, teaching them to abandon the darkness in which they are found and to
hasten toward the light of the piety and faith of Christ, lest they be
condemned in the unquenchable fire of hell” (Discourse on the New Martyrs).
We see with what
boldness he writes concerning the uniqueness of the Christian Faith and of
Orthodoxy, and how he reproves those of another religion, so that Christians
might preserve their Faith.
But Saint Kosmas
the Aetolian also, himself an Athonite, with great missionary zeal, traveled
apostolically throughout all Romiosyne, over mountains and seas, and
through many villages, some of which had changed their faith and others their
language after unbearable pressures; he, by his evangelical and apostolic
preaching, brought them back to the Patristic Faith, and in the end he himself
was martyred by the Turko-Albanians.
And, as Saint
Nikodemos the Athonite also writes most poetically in the hymnographic Service:
“The
New Martyrs, having destroyed the ancient delusion, exalted the faith of the
Orthodox and struggled steadfastly…” (Apolytikion of the New Martyrs).
“Proclaiming
the glory of the Trinity, you fill the hearts of Christians with joy, and you
leave the tribe of Hagar in shame, O renowned New Martyrs, the glory of the
Orthodox…” (Apolytikion of the New Martyrs).
All these,
“the
steadfast in soul, having been armored by the power of Christ, entered into the
arena of contest, triumphing over the impiety of the Hagarenes, and proclaiming
with boldness the faith of Christ” (Oikos of the New Martyrs).
Whoever, therefore,
studies both the hymnographic Service and the sublime festal Encomiastic Homily
of the Saint will taste something of that crucified sweetness of the love of
Christ which set the souls of the New Martyrs aflame. He will perceive what the
divine love of the Martyrs means, and what relation this can possibly have to
the tasteless and flaccid ecumenical talk of “love” of our present-day
“shepherds.”
After all these
things, as well as many others which one could cite, it is now entirely clear
and brighter than the sun that what is being carried out today is not at all
accidental. We are now living through a complete, methodical, and deliberate
apostasy from the Patristic Orthodox Faith, which is being engineered, indeed
as principal agents, by the shepherds themselves—patriarchs, bishops, abbots,
priests, and theologians; these too are among the signs of the times.
Patriarch
Bartholomew himself, let us not forget, distributes Qur’ans, takes part in
Ramadan meals, offers joint prayers with all religions, and clearly proclaims:
“We
religious leaders must bring to the forefront the spiritual principles of
Ecumenism, of brotherhood and of peace; but in order to achieve this, we must
be united in the spirit of the one God — Roman Catholics and Orthodox,
Protestants and Jews, Muslims and Hindus, Buddhists” (Episkepsis, no.
494, p. 23, Geneva 1994).
His name is
commemorated seven times a day on the Holy Mountain, “as one rightly dividing
the word of the truth—Orthodoxy”…
These are the false
shepherds about whom, for 2,000 years, Scripture, the Apostles, and the Holy
Fathers have warned us.
“But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there
shall be false teachers among you, who shall secretly bring in destructive
heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves
swift destruction” (2 Peter 2:1).
The great problem,
however, is no longer them, for they have already followed the path of
destruction and no longer worship Christ. The great problem is us—what are we
doing in the face of all these things? This is the question and the necessity
which should very seriously concern us. “He who has done and taught these
things, he shall be called great.”
The diagnosis of an
illness is of no benefit if we do not proceed also to its treatment; otherwise,
we are merely playing games.
That which today,
for most clergy, monks, and laypeople, remains incomprehensible is the matter
of communion with heretics.
The term ecclesiastical
communion, in the theological language of the Fathers, is weighty and
possesses soteriological significance. Concerning the matter of communion, the
Lord Himself speaks to us and commands us to flee far from the false
shepherds—the wolf-shepherds:
“…the hireling, and not being a shepherd, whose own the sheep are not,
sees the wolf coming and abandons the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches
them. The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care for the
sheep” (John 10:12–13).
Moreover, when the
Lord lived upon the earth, did He have any relationship, any spiritual
communion, with the religious authority of Judaism—the Scribes, the Pharisees,
and the Sadducees of His time?
And the Lord
continues:
“…but you do not believe, for you are not of My sheep (not all sheep belong to Christ), as I said to you; My sheep hear My
voice, and I know them” (John 10:26).
The sheep of Christ
know His voice and have the command to follow only the true shepherds and not
the false shepherds or wolf-shepherds.
And He continues:
“Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees… of
their teaching” (Matthew 16:6–12).
Communion with
heretics operates like leaven, which permeates the whole lump, whether for good
or for evil.
And the Apostle
says:
“O
Timothy, guard the deposit, turning away (fleeing far away, a cessation of
communion) from profane empty utterances and contradictions of the falsely
so-called knowledge (Ecumenism), which some, professing, have concerning
the faith suffered shipwreck (have been led to destruction)” (1 Timothy
6:20).
This teaching is
expressed succinctly also by the great Father of the Church, Photios:
“The
error of shepherds is the shipwreck of those in communion with them.” (P.G.
102, 698)
The Orthodox
dogmatic teaching of the Church has been confirmed in many ways and by many
means through the Ecumenical Councils. The Sacred Canons of the Church are of
obligatory acceptance by the members of the Church, just as are the
Commandments. There are no optional canons (that is, if one wishes he applies a
canon, and if he wishes he does not apply it), just as there are no optional
commandments.
Concerning joint
prayers, the Sacred Canons prescribe, for example, the 45th Canon of the Holy
Apostles:
“If
any Clergyman or layman enters into a synagogue of Jews or of heretics to pray,
let him be deposed and excommunicated.”
And commenting on
this, Zonaras says:
“The
Canon considers it a great sin… for what agreement has Christ with Belial? Or
what portion has a believer with an unbeliever, according to the great
Apostle?” (Pedalion, p. 84).
For about fifty
years now, anyone examining the course of the so-called Theological Dialogues
will ascertain that actions and choices were followed which had been
prearranged within predetermined frameworks in which they were required to
operate, and these frameworks were none other than the decisions of the Second
Vatican Council (1962–65). All these things are expressed chiefly through joint
prayers and bring about the greatest alteration in the Orthodox mindset of the
people.
After all these
things, the following questions arise:
a) What will be the
stance of the Brotherhood itself of the Holy Monastery of Dionysiou? For in the
person of the Abbot the entire Brotherhood is in communion, which means that
whatever the Abbot does is in agreement also with the whole Brotherhood; for this
reason, in all the documents of the Monastery they are signed “together with
the brethren with me in Christ”. They commemorate his name daily in the Divine
Liturgies, receive his blessing, commune from his hands, and concelebrate with
him.
All these are not
mere formalities; they are matters of essence, because they presuppose identity
of Faith—that is, the Brotherhood holds the same Faith as the Abbot, and
likewise the Abbot as the Brotherhood.
Patristic theology
defines that “he who is in communion with one excommunicated is himself also
excommunicated” (Theodore Balsamon); that is, those who commune with heretics
become defiled, through their communion with heretics, by the very heresy
itself.
The 2nd Canon of
the Council of Antioch states: “He who communes with those who are
excommunicated, let him also be excommunicated”, because
“from
of old the Orthodox Church of God has accepted that the commemoration of the
name of the bishop at the holy altar constitutes full communion with him”
(Athonite Fathers, Letter to Michael VIII Palaiologos).
Likewise, a serious
problem also arises for lay brethren who will be received as guests, since they
too will face the problem of defilement.
b) The other Abbots
and the rest of the fellow Athonite Monks in Christ who will visit the
Monastery—by maintaining ecclesiastical communion with them, they too will
indirectly be accepting his joint prayer.
And in general,
what stance will the Athonites take? Will they continue to tolerate this
ecumenical course of the Monastery, which many other Monasteries also follow?
c) Based on the
above, the question posed to the Holy Community is what it intends to do.
What is fitting
according to the sacred institutions of our Sacred Place is to convene an
extraordinary Assembly for the swift resolution of the matter, which is already
being widely discussed both within and outside the Holy Mountain.
We remind that
formerly the same Holy Community wrote:
“The Holy Mountain
has always preserved the self-awareness that it remains, by the Grace of
Christ, a faithful guardian of the holy Orthodox Faith, which the
God-proclaiming Apostles delivered to the Church and which our God-bearing
Fathers, through the holy Ecumenical Councils, preserved unaltered throughout
the ages” (Memorandum of the Holy Mountain, Orthodoxos Typos, no.
1801, October 9, 2009).
The Holy Mountain,
apart from Venerable Saints and Ascetics, has also brought forth a multitude of
Hieromartyrs and New Martyrs. The defense of the Orthodox Faith unto death
always accompanied their ascetical and neptic struggles, since “a life is of no
benefit when doctrines are corrupted” (Saint John Chrysostom).
We pray that our
Sacred Place, the Garden of the Panagia, which is so greatly honored by
the whole world, may preserve the Orthodox Faith as the apple of its eye, if we
wish to have the blessing, the grace, and the protection of the Lady
Theotokos—Who, we recall, in the time of the persecution by the unionist and
Latin-minded Patriarch Bekkos against the Athonites, who had ceased
commemorating him, spoke those fearful words:
“The enemies of
me and of my Son are coming.”
Therefore, as
Athonites, the feasts and celebrations in honor of Saint Kosmas the First and
the Hieromartyrs under Bekkos are of no benefit to us if we do not also imitate
them in the Confession of Orthodoxy. The time, therefore, is a time for
Confession.
One of the
contemporary virtuous Elders, Elder Savvas Kapsaliotis, a man who harmoniously
united Asceticism with Confession, used to say characteristically and
succinctly:
“I
have spent six decades in the Schema; I wish to be in agreement with the Holy
Hieromartyr Kosmas the First, because there are two paths. One leads to the
excommunicated and disgraced ones of the Lavra, and the other to the martyr’s
crown of Saint Kosmas the First.”
We pray for good
illumination and repentance for all of us.
A good Confession,
so that we may also have a good defense. Amen.
Athonite
Fathers
Additional Greek source:
https://www.agioritespateres.com/otan-oi-fylakes-prodidoun/
