St. Chrysostomos of Florina: The Relationship Between the Calendar Issue and Ecumenism

The Former Metropolitan of Florina, Chrysostomos, on the Relationship Between the Calendar Issue and Ecumenism 

(Excerpts from His Works)

EDITOR'S NOTE OF "ΚΡΥΦΟ ΣΧΟΛΕΙΟ": At the time when Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina was in office, the term "Ecumenism" did not yet officially exist, but its main elements were included in words and phrases such as "modernism," "innovation," "rapprochement of the churches," "union of the churches."

This Ecclesiastical Congress [editor's note: referring to the 'Pan-Orthodox' Congress of 1923], in which only the Orthodox Churches of Greece, Serbia, and Romania were represented, initially decided on the introduction of the Gregorian calendar also into the Orthodox Eastern Church, but only for the immovable feasts, while reserving, for the near future, the adjustment of the Paschal Canon based on the Gregorian calendar. This was aimed, as stated by the President, at bringing the Eastern Churches closer to the Western Churches in the celebration of the Queen of Feasts, Pascha, and the other Lord's feasts determined by it.

- Letter to Patriarch Nicholas V of Alexandria, Jerusalem, April 10, 1935.

The issue of the Ecclesiastical calendar has deeper causes and motives. Its inspirers and pioneers, such as Patriarch Meletios of Alexandria and Archbishop Chrysostomos of Athens, unfortunately lacking a deep Orthodox spirit, knowingly or unknowingly became instruments of foreign desires and aims, through which the division of the unity of the Orthodox Churches and the separation of Greek ideology from Orthodoxy is sought. These two leaders of the Orthodox Churches, of the Patriarchate of Alexandria and of Greece, competing for the glory of being reformers and modernized clergy, with a light conscience, raised the flag of Ecclesiastical reforms, beginning with the change of the Ecclesiastical calendar, which constitutes one of the unifying links of the Orthodox Churches and the compass of divine worship and the works of the ancestral faith and piety.

...What makes the convocation of this Ecclesiastical Congress [editor's note: the so-called 'Pan-Orthodox' Synod] suspicious is that two clergymen from a heterodox Church also participated in it, according to extrajudicial information we have, as well as the unorthodox and Protestant-leaning decision it made, which stated that the acceptance of the Gregorian calendar by certain Churches should not be considered a cause of Schism by others that adhere to the traditional Julian calendar [editor's note: that is, it did not make its decisions binding on all Local Churches, an unprecedented event for a so-called Pan-Orthodox Synod—another proof that, in reality, it was anti-Orthodox].

...Behold where lies the Achilles' foreign heel of Patriarch Meletios and Archbishop Chrysostomos, who, by introducing a Protestant principle into the Orthodox Church, lead it onto the path of Protestantism, which grants full freedom to its adherents not only in the simple regulations of worship but also in faith itself and the understanding of the Dogmas, lacking any ecclesiastical criterion for their interpretation. Such indeed were the audacities of Patriarch Meletios Metaxakis and Archbishop Chrysostomos Papadopoulos, these two Luthers of the Orthodox Church, who, under the pretext of modernism, did not hesitate or tremble to trample upon the decisions of Pan-Orthodox Synods and Apostolic and Synodal Canons, in order to approach the Western Churches through the calendar innovation, causing the division of Orthodoxy and violating the centuries-old practice of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

...It is well known in Ecclesiastical circles the ecclesiastical activities of the pioneers of the calendar innovation, such as Meletios Metaxakis and Chrysostomos Papadopoulos, leaders, by reasons known only to the Lord, of the Church of Alexandria and the Church of Greece, respectively. Having been expelled from the Church of Jerusalem, which bore and nurtured them, they took seats on the thrones of the Greek Churches with the unmasked purpose of leading them into modernism, that is, into Catholicism and Protestantism. For what other goal do the ecclesiastical reforms they proposed at the wrongly named Pan-Orthodox Congress of Constantinople serve, these two reformers, regarding the attire of the clergy, the celibacy of bishops, the prohibition of second marriages for widowed priests, the modification of fasts, the shortening of services, the adjustment of the Paschal Canon, the adaptation of the Julian calendar to the Gregorian, and the revision of the entire ecclesiastical legislation to conform to the contemporary needs of Orthodox Christian society? What do all these signify, if not the modernist spirit of these two ecclesiastical men, who in their superficial understanding of their ecclesiastical mission thought that they could move the eternal boundaries that our Holy and God-bearing Fathers have set?

...Only those among the Greek hierarchs who have superficially and hastily been initiated into the mystery of Orthodoxy and have been sprinkled with, but not baptized in, the life-giving and soul-nourishing waters of the Greek Castalia, only they can insist that they serve the national idea by bringing Orthodox confession closer to heretical false doctrines—not through the conversion of the latter to the former, but by sacrificing the free spirit of Orthodoxy to the cosmopolitan and absolutist or even to the excessively democratic [editor's note: libertarian, unrestrained] spirit of the Catholic and Protestant Churches.

...The calendar is directly related to divine worship because, apart from the confusion caused by its change in the order of divine worship and the Typikon of the Church, through the abolishment of sacred hymns and holy services, it divides the Orthodox Churches in the days of feasts and fasts, causing some of them to celebrate and fast not with the others but with the Western Churches of the heterodox and heretics, contrary to the tradition of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and the Holy Canons.

...That this is the secret desire [editor's note: referring to the previously mentioned goal 'to bring the Orthodox Church closer to the Western Churches at all costs'] and the aim of these two reformers [editor's note: Metaxakis and Papadopoulos] of the Orthodox Church is shown both by a question posed by the representative of the Most Blessed at the so-called Pan-Orthodox Congress of Constantinople, and by the response given by the presiding Ecumenical Patriarch Meletios Metaxakis. To confirm this, we present the question and answer verbatim.

Question: 'Is it necessary to also reform the Paschalion, or is it sufficient merely to align the immovable feasts with the corresponding dates of the civil calendar?'

Answer: 'After the Church's acceptance of the new calendar for secular needs, its adaptation to the festal calendar becomes inevitable, and indeed quickly. Another reason for the immediate adaptation of the Paschalion is the great moral significance and impression that this voluntary initiative will make on the entire civilized world, bringing closer the two Christian worlds of the East and the West in the celebration of the great Christian feasts' (Gregory Efstratiades, On the Calendar, p. 7).

We too undeniably desire and do not reject, nor do we in any way oppose, this rapprochement, even the union of the Churches, as our Orthodox Church prays for daily. However, this desire and prayer must never be pursued through the sacrifice and renunciation of Orthodoxy, with Orthodoxy joining the side of heresy. Rather, it must be pursued through the sacrifice of heresy joining Orthodoxy.

We sufficiently believe, and have shown through what we have set forth, that the goal of these two prominent Greek hierarchs is to bring the two Churches of the East and the West closer by sacrificing Orthodox institutions and centuries-old traditions, which were established by the Holy and God-bearing Fathers at the Seven Ecumenical Councils, which constitute the highest expression of Orthodoxy and the illustrious glory of our Church's hymnography and literature.

And when Orthodox divine worship is stripped of this divine treasure of ecclesiastical hymns, which breathe the fragrance of the Holy Spirit along with the sweet scent of Greek wisdom, then these reformers will more easily be able to make a concession also in the dogmatic sphere, for the union of the Churches.

- The Ecclesiastical Calendar as a Criterion of Orthodoxy, Holy Monastery of St. Dionysios of Olympus [editor's note: where the late hierarch was in exile], July 1/14, 1935.

...with all its strength, it [editor's note: referring to the Anglican Church] seeks by any means its rapprochement with the Orthodox Church... And if this effort by the Anglican Church aimed at serving justice and Orthodoxy, no one would have any objection to assisting in the rapprochement it seeks with our Church. But this rapprochement is pursued through the continuous concession of Orthodox ground to the demands and conquest-driven claims of the Anglican Church, which remains steadfast, with fanaticism, in its own doctrines and traditions. Proof of this is that through these union efforts, the Anglican Church succeeded in obtaining from the late Patriarch Meletios and the current Patriarch of Romania, Myron, the recognition of Anglican ordinations along with the acceptance of the Gregorian calendar, while in contrast, it made no concessions for Orthodoxy in its traditions and ecclesiastical doctrines.

- Report to the Governing Synod of Greece regarding the opinion of the Patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem in relation to the Ecclesiastical calendar, Athens, November 10, 1936.

...The two prominent clergymen and radical innovators, the late Patriarch Meletios Metaxakis and the surviving Archbishop Chrysostomos Papadopoulos, had and still have in mind to also adapt the Paschalion of the 318 Holy and God-bearing Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council to the Gregorian calendar, indifferent to whether this adaptation would violate the 7th Apostolic Canon and the divinely inspired authority of the Council, focusing solely on the great impression that their so-called grand gesture and initiative would supposedly make on the entire civilized world in the celebration of the great Christian feasts!!! Even at the cost of disregarding the Apostolic Commands. And this is because they do not feel the Orthodox pulse and because, as the Gospel saying goes, 'they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God' (John 12:43).

- Refutation of the "Rebuke" by Archbishop Chrysostomos Papadopoulos – 1937.

...[T]his war [editor's note: World War I], due to the alliances of the warring states, forced the Orthodox to pray together both on the battlefield and in the churches with the heterodox heretics and schismatics, which is strictly prohibited by the divine and holy Canons, according to the exact and rigorous understanding of Orthodoxy. This situation, which occurred out of necessity due to the war, encouraged the reformist and modernist spirit of certain radical ecclesiastical leaders and pushed them toward ecclesiastical reforms aimed at bringing the Orthodox Eastern Church closer to the Churches of the West by any means. Unfortunately, two Greek hierarchs took the initiative in these ecclesiastical reforms: the then Ecumenical Patriarch, later of Alexandria, known as Meletios Metaxakis, and the Archbishop of Athens, known as Chrysostomos Papadopoulos. These two ambitious clergymen, failing to properly appreciate the power of the deep Orthodox spirit and the great and divine mission of Orthodoxy within the Church of Christ, in their naive conscience and shallow judgment, believed they were offering a service to the Christian world by bringing the Orthodox Church closer to the Churches of the West by any means, even at the cost of sacrificing the pure treasure of Orthodoxy for the glittering brass of the Western Churches. Thus, Patriarch Meletios, in full cooperation and consultation with his advisor and collaborator, Archbishop of Athens, convened an ecclesiastical congress in May 1923 in Constantinople, which was wrongly called Pan-Orthodox, as only the Churches of Greece, Serbia, and Romania were represented, and the latter two were represented by lay delegates. The Orthodox Churches of Russia, Cyprus, the God-trodden Mount Sinai, Poland, and the three Patriarchates of the East—Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem—were conspicuously absent from this congress. At this congress, many ecclesiastical reforms were proposed by the Most Holy President, Meletios, with the aim of aligning the Orthodox Church with the modern and progressive social views, thus facilitating its rapprochement with the Churches of the West... Moreover, the stated goal of bringing the Churches closer by any means, as outlined in the reform agenda, immediately made the unifying zeal clear, but it jeopardized the purely Orthodox spirit of those leading the congress, who evidently intended, by this phrase, to expedite the rapprochement even at the cost of sacrificing the ancient and venerable institutions of Orthodoxy... This unification program, as we have already said, was initiated by Patriarch Meletios, with the counsel and collaboration of his former teacher and like-minded Archbishop of Athens, Mr. Chrysostomos, starting with the adaptation of the Orthodox ecclesiastical calendar to the Gregorian one...

- Memorandum of Defense in Support of the Restoration of the Traditional Ecclesiastical Calendar – 1945.

Greek source: https://krufo-sxoleio.blogspot.com/2013/09/blog-post.html