St. Justin Popović of Ćelije: A Response to the Holy Synod - "On Common Prayer for Unity"

Submitted to Bishop Jovan Velimirović of Šabac and Valjevo

And to the Holy Hierarchical Synod of the Serbian Orthodox Church

Belgrade, November 13/26, 1974

 

 

Most Reverend Fathers,

The stance of the Church of Christ in relation to heretics – to all who are not Orthodox – was established once and for all time by the Holy Apostles and the Holy Fathers, by Holy Divine-Human Tradition, uniform and unchangeable.

In accordance with this stance, Orthodox are forbidden to participate in any form of common prayer or liturgical services with heretics. For, “What fellowship has righteousness with unrighteousness? And what communion has light with darkness? And what concord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has he who believes with an infidel?” (2 Corinthians 6:14–15).

The Forty-fifth Canon of the Holy Apostles decrees: “Let a Bishop, Presbyter, or Deacon, who has merely prayed with heretics be excommunicated; but if he has permitted them to perform any clerical function, let him be deposed.”

This sacred Canon of the Holy Apostles does not specify precisely what kind of prayer or service is prohibited, but it does prohibit any common prayer with heretics, even in private (“has prayed with...”). In the case of ecumenical joint prayers, do things not occur that are both more explicit and on a broader scale than these?

The Thirty-second Canon of the Council of Laodicea decrees: “It is unlawful to receive the blessings of heretics, for they are absurdities rather than blessings.” And do heretics not give blessings at those ecumenical gatherings and joint services? – Roman Catholic bishops and priests, Protestant ministers, and even female clergy!

These and all of the other pertinent Canons of the Holy Apostles and the Holy Fathers were not valid only in the ancient period, but continue to be completely valid today, as well, for all of us contemporary Orthodox Christians.

They are unconditionally binding in our stance toward Roman Catholics and Protestants. For Roman Catholicism is a many-sided heresy and the heresies of Protestantism are too many to mention.

Did not Saint Sava – already in his time, seven and half centuries ago – call Roman Catholicism “the Latin heresy”? And how many new dogmas has the pope invented since then and made them dogma with his “infallibility”?! It is absolutely certain that, through the dogma of papal infallibility, Roman Catholicism has become a pan-heresy. Even the much-celebrated Second Vatican Council did not change anything concerning this monstrous heresy, but, on the contrary, it made it even firmer.

Therefore, if we Orthodox wish to remain Orthodox, it is our duty to maintain the stance of Saint Sava, Saint Mark of Ephesus, Saint Cosmas of Aitolia, Saint John of Kronstadt, and the other Holy Confessors, Martyrs, and New Martyrs of the Orthodox Church toward Roman Catholics and Protestants, absolutely none of whom believe correctly and in an Orthodox manner in the two fundamental doctrines of Christianity: in the Holy Trinity and in the Church.

Your Eminence and Holy Fathers of the Synod,

How long will we continue desecrating our Holy Orthodox Church of Saint Sava by our pitiful and horrifying stance, which directly opposes Holy Tradition, towards ecumenism and the World Council of Churches?

Every true Orthodox Christian, who is instructed under the guidance of the Holy Fathers, is overcome with shame when he reads that the Orthodox members of the Fifth Pan-Orthodox Consultation in Geneva (July 8–16, 1968), with regard to the participation of Orthodox in the work of the World Council of Churches, decided, at that time, “to express the common recognition of the Orthodox Church that she is an organic member of the World Council of Churches” (see Glasnik S. P. Crkve [Belgrade], no. 8 [1968]: 168).

This decision is apocalyptically horrifying in its un-Orthodoxy and anti-Orthodoxy. Was it necessary for the Orthodox Church, the most pure Divine-Human Body and organism of the God-Man Christ, to be so debased to such a pitiful degree that its theological representatives, some of whom were Serbian bishops, should seek after “organic” participation and membership in the World Council of Churches, which will supposedly become a new “body” and a new “Church” above all the churches, in which the Orthodox Church and the non-Orthodox churches will appear only as parts – “organically” joined to each other? God forbid! Never before has there been such a betrayal and abandonment of our holy Faith!

By this, we are renouncing the Orthodox Divine-Human Faith, this organic bond with the Lord Jesus, the God-Man, and His most pure Body – we are repudiating the Orthodox Church of the Holy Apostles, Fathers, and Ecumenical Councils – and we wish to become “organic members” of a heretical, humanistic, man-made and man-worshipping assembly, which is composed of 263 heresies, each one of which is spiritual death.

As Orthodox, we are “members of Christ.” “Shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of a harlot? God forbid!” (1 Corinthians 6:15). We are doing this by our “organic” union with the World Council of Churches, which is nothing other than the revival of atheistic man-worship and idolatry.

Most Reverend Fathers, our Orthodox Church of the Holy Fathers and Saint Sava, the Church of the Holy Apostles and the Holy Fathers, of the Holy Confessors, Martyrs, and New Martyrs, must now, at the eleventh hour, cease ecclesiastical, Hierarchical, and liturgical involvement with the so-called World Council of Churches and renounce for good any participation whatsoever in joint prayers and worship (for worship, in the Orthodox Church, is organically linked together in a totality and is consummated in the Divine Eucharist) and, in general, [renounce for good] participation in any ecclesiastical endeavors which are not self-contained and do not express the unique and unchangeable character of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, the Orthodox Church, forever one and unique.

If the Orthodox Church, faithful as she is in every respect to the Holy Apostles and the Holy Fathers, were to avoid ecclesiastical involvement with heretics, be they those of Geneva or those of Rome, she would not thereby be renouncing her Christian mission or her evangelical obligation: that she should humbly, but boldly, bear witness before the contemporary world, both non-Orthodox and non-Christian, to the Truth, to the All-Truth, to the living and true God-Man, and to the all-saving and all-transfiguring power of Orthodoxy.

Guided by Christ, our Church, through the Patristic spirit and character of her theologians, will always be ready “to give an answer to every man that asks us a reason for the hope that is in us” (cf. 1 Peter 3:15).

And our Hope, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages, and unto all eternity, is single and unique: the God-Man Jesus Christ in His Divine-Human Body, the Church of the Holy Apostles and the Fathers.

Orthodox theologians should participate not in “ecumenical joint prayers,” but in theological dialogues in the Truth and about the Truth, as the Holy and God-bearing Fathers have done throughout the ages.

The Truth of Orthodoxy and the right Faith is the “portion” only “of those who are being saved” (cf. the Seventh Canon of the Second Ecumenical Council).

Wholly-true is the proclamation of the Holy Apostle: “salvation through sanctification ... and belief in the Truth” (2 Thessalonians 2:13). Belief in the God-Man is “belief in the Truth.” The essence of this belief is the Truth, the only Whole-Truth, that is, the God-Man Christ. Love for the God-Man is “love of the truth” (2 Thessalonians 2:10). The essence of this love is the Whole-Truth, that is, the God-Man Christ. And this belief and this love are the heart and conscience of the Orthodox Church.

All of these things have been preserved intact and undistorted only in martyric, Patristic Orthodoxy, to which Orthodox Christians are called to witness fearlessly before the West and its false faith and false love.

Commemoration of Saint John Chrysostom

November 13/26, 1974

Holy Ćelije Monastery

 

The unworthy Archimandrite Justin

commends himself to the holy Apostolic

prayers of Your Eminence

and the holy Fathers and Hierarchs

of the Holy Synod

How Saint Nektarios Became a Saint

Father George Dorbarakis | November 6, 2025

 

 

"At forty-four years of age, God revealed to me that which would keep me steadfast until the end of my life on the narrow and afflicted path I had chosen:

The 'cleansing draught of dishonor'—[to be subjected to dishonor is a drink that cleanses you spiritually], as Saint John of Sinai says. From then until my last breath, not for a moment did slander, insult, and contempt abandon me. I do not wish to speak to you of incidents or persons. I might scandalize you, giving rise to thoughts of indignation and judgment. You would not be able, in that way, to understand that I came to love both the slander, and the insult, and the contempt.

Are you surprised? Yet I learned to see them as the nails of my cross. This was the path of my resurrection. Blessed be they. They taught me to love, freed from the anxiety to please, to charm, to be honored. They taught me to turn my gaze to the humble and despised, the simple, everyday, and anonymous people, the gold of the earth."  (From a letter of Saint Nektarios, Bishop of Pentapolis the Wonderworker, to one of his spiritual children).

What is a Christian? “An imitation of Christ, as far as is possible for man” (Saint John Climacus). That is, a person whose thoughts, words, dispositions, and entire behavior reflect the life of Christ—who extends His life through their own personal life. As the Fathers of our Church habitually teach: the Christian is Christ “in another form.” You see the Christian—that is, the saint—and it is as if you are seeing the Gospel incarnate, the Lord Himself continuing to walk in this world—precisely as the Apostle Paul says of the believer: he is a “letter of Christ, known and read by all men.”

How is such a thing possible? It is not a capability that man acquires on his own. This possibility is given to him from the moment he responds to the call of God and is incorporated into Christ within the Church—becoming a member of Him through holy Baptism and holy Chrismation. That is, the grace of the Holy Spirit, by the good pleasure of God the Father, will make man one with the Lord Jesus Christ—the grace of the Triune God will “take up residence” in the depths of man’s heart, expelling the dominion of the Evil One, who will continue to act, by divine concession, on the “edges” of the heart. And is this enough? Certainly not. We are called at the same time to be “fellow workers with God,” and so the gift that was given and continues to be given to us requires the full, utmost activation of man’s will—man must demonstrate that he wants Christ in his life. And how does he demonstrate this—that is, how does he return the love of God toward him? Only in the way that the Lord Himself has determined: by keeping His holy commandments. “If ye love Me, keep My commandments.”

(Let it be permitted to remind what Scripture cries out from beginning to end: “As the Father hath loved Me,” said the Lord to His disciples, “so have I loved you: continue ye in My love. If ye keep My commandments, ye shall abide in My love.” I live in you and you in Me, says the Lord, for this is how the love of God operates. Therefore, I beseech you to remain steadfast in this love. And the only way? To keep My commandments. Thus, at the very moment when the Christian—that is, the one who has become a member of Christ through holy baptism—keeps His holy commandments, at that very moment he communes with Him, he is in Him and He in him. Saint John the Theologian, in his First Catholic Epistle, expresses it in another way: “He that saith he abideth in Him ought himself also so to walk, even as He walked”—he who claims to be united with Christ is obliged, just as He lived in this world, to live likewise himself.)

What life did the Lord live in this world, such that the believer likewise is to live the same life? Certainly not a life of wealth and “luxury,” not one paved with rose petals, as we say, but a life characterized by a single word: “Passion.” The entire life of the Lord, from beginning to end, was a Passion—His Sacrifice on the Cross was merely its culmination. Temptations, insults, slanders, persecutions, denials, murderous intents, even death itself in its most dreadful form—these were what He encountered at every moment of His life. And what did He promise His disciples in this way? That what I suffered, you too shall suffer. “If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you.” His narrow and afflicted path became and remains ever since the only path for every Christian. The Christian who is aware of this knows: from the moment he desires to follow Christ, countless passions, afflictions, and trials await him. As the Apostles expressed it in their preaching: “Through many tribulations must we enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.”

This is why the Christian constitutes a “paradox” for the world, fallen into sin. He overturns its criteria and expectations: instead of indulgence, he lives in self-restraint; instead of avarice, he lives in poverty and in offering to his fellow man; instead of ambition, he lives in humility—and thus, instead of egotism, he experiences true love—where he becomes attuned to God Himself, Who is Love. And this constitutes the logic of his so-called “irrationality.” For by transcending all that is worldly and sinfully human, he lives—already in this life—the presence of the Risen Jesus. It is simply a path that is not outwardly visible; one must live it in order for it to be revealed.

The experience of the Apostle Paul uniquely illuminates this mystical reality: “I am crucified with Christ,” he testifies. “Nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.” I am one with Christ; my self no longer exists—He is my self-awareness, because I am a member of Him. But for this to be so, I am crucified with Him. And this co-crucifixion is precisely the believer’s decision—unto death—to live according to His commandments: sacrificial love, humility, obedience—everything that constitutes the mind of the Lord Jesus. “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus.”

But all these things reveal the world of every saint—the world also of the beloved Saint Nektarios the Wonderworker. What he writes about his life in his letter constitutes, in a natural and simple way, a commentary on the words of the Lord and the life and preaching of the Apostles. He too feels co-crucified with Christ, His follower, because he “bears” his own cross by enduring injustices, insults, humiliations, and contempt. “They are the nails of my cross,” he notes. But these also signify “the path of my resurrection,” and so “I love them”—another way of expressing “Christ liveth in me!” And thus we learn, too, from the great contemporary saint that the secret of life in Christ is not found in gazing upon our problems—bodily or spiritual—but in gazing upon Him, the Author of faith, Who through the midst of problems brings Resurrection and Life!

It is striking when one studies the martyrdoms of many holy martyrs of the faith. There is often the observation that the sufferings they endured were as if being experienced by someone else—“as though another were suffering in his body.” The same is true of Saint Nektarios: the defined torments he endured, both spiritual and bodily—though they were nails—did not break him, because he regarded them as a sweetness of resurrection. Through them, the Lord Himself was revealed in the highest possible way—“when I am weak, then am I strong,” according to the word of the Apostle. And the phrase he uses reveals his divine mindset: “blessed be they!”—a mindset of humility, with obedience as its chief characteristic, just as it was with Jesus Christ.

And this experience of humble obedience, which enables him to live already in this world a Paradise—because he has learned “to love”—transforms his criteria; he sees with the eyes of the Lord. And what does he see? Not what appears great and important and “golden” in the eyes of the world, but the true “gold of the earth”—none other than those people who attract the grace and light of God: the humble and the despised, the simple and anonymous people—a repetition of the words of the Apostle Paul, who spoke of the truly great people, those who do not appear, who do not “shine”: “the base things of the world, and the things which are despised,” “the things that are not,” who precisely because of the grace of God “put to shame the things that are mighty”—a continuation of the Cross of the Lord. (Unique and deeply moving in this regard is the comment of the late great Elder Vasileios of Iveron, in his homily on Saint Porphyrios of Kavsokalyvia, titled “Ode to the Nonexistent!”)

But there is yet another paradox: at forty-four years of age, Saint Nektarios—this greatest of saints—learns through a revelation from God that the Christian life is a sorrowful and narrow one. But this is the Alpha and the Omega of what one learns from the very beginning of the Gospel! What was it that the saint did not know and then came to learn? Certainly, it was something he already knew, preached, and partially lived. But God permitted this knowledge of his to be transformed through actual events into a continual, lived experience. Nektarios had from his youth oriented himself toward Christ and His crucified life. And this "inclination" of his heart—according to “My heart is ready, O God”—brought him the great grace to endure the continual and powerful waves of temptations, so that from then on he became steadfast in the cruciform elements that lead to a permanent resurrection of life. This recalls what the great contemporary saint Ephraim of Katounakia used to emphasize: “Tell me what temptations you are undergoing, and I will tell you what spiritual state you are in”—that is, how much grace of God you have! Saint Nektarios underwent great temptations in order to receive even greater grace. And we learn: the greater the grace a saint possesses—let us think of our All-Holy Lady here—the greater also are the temptations he has endured in his life. Or, put differently: when someone undergoes temptations, and even temptations considered great, God is preparing for him a great outpouring of grace; He is raising him to a higher spiritual level (Saint Isaac the Syrian).

The image that Saint Nektarios recalls from Saint John of the Ladder—that every insult and dishonor is in reality a gift from God, a “draught” that purifies a person from his sins because it leads him to humility—would be good for us also to keep frequently before us. When we are insulted, questioned, scorned, slandered, our response ought to have a spiritual character. Ideally, we should regard these assaults as “shots” of the Lord’s grace, which smooth out the heart so that it may become a place of rest for Him. Otherwise, our rebellious reaction will reveal our spiritual condition, which will likely be below the mark.

 

Greek source: https://pgdorbas.blogspot.com/2025/11/blog-post_6.html

What Happened to the Greek Orthodox Church in Chicago?

Saint Arethas, a Monophysite?

by an Athonite Hieromonk

 

Saint Arethas the Great Martyr

 

The publication [1] that presents a popularized view of Saint Arethas, the great martyr, and his companions as “Miaphysites,” (i.e., Severian, anti-Chalcedonian Christians who rejected the Council of Chalcedon) lacks theological weight and sufficient historical foundation. I will present the controversial excerpt from the publication, specifically the dialogue between the child and his father regarding the martyrdom of Saint Arethas:

“These saints lived after Chalcedon, in the sixth century. And my Coptic friend loves them. He even has their icons in his room.”

“That doesn’t make sense,” the father muttered. “Why would a Coptic family have icons of Chalcedonian saints?”

“Because these saints rejected Chalcedon,” the boy replied. “They were miaphysites.” . . .

“Dad, I looked up the history. Long after the council of Chalcedon—about two generations later—a famous miaphysite bishop the Coptics call St. Philoxenus ordained the bishops of Najran. These bishops and the martyrs who followed them were Christians who rejected Chalcedon. And yet they’re universally honored—in Orthodox churches in Russia, Greece, Serbia, Romania, Georgia, and Antioch—in the Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, and Ethiopian churches—even among Old Believers and the ‘Genuine Orthodox’ and ‘True Orthodox’ sects…”

The article concludes:

“The above dialogue between father and son centers around a paradox: Eastern Orthodox church calendars honoring saints who rejected Chalcedon. And behind that paradox lies a remarkable, historically traceable background: a story of bishops, martyrs, and kings bound together across the Red Sea by a shared miaphysite confession of the Christian faith.”

This text promotes the erroneous idea that the so-called “Miaphysite” (Monophysite) belief of today’s anti-Chalcedonian Christians is somehow aligned with Orthodox theology. The idea that Saint Arethas and his fellow martyrs were anti-Chalcedonian (Monophysite) saints can only be seen as a hagiographical assertion of the later (post-Arab conquest) anti-Chalcedonian Church of Egypt.

Saint Arethas’ martyrdom took place in 523 A.D., at a time when the Christian population of Himyar (present-day Yemen) was part of the Catholic [universal] Church, and as such, he is honored by the entirety of the Christian world.

The historical facts bear witness to the following:

Saint Arethas’ martyrdom took place in the city of Najran in the isolated country of Himyar, under the rule of the heathen king Dhu Nuwas. The cause for his martyrdom was the king’s fanatical Judaism in his persecution of the city’s Christian inhabitants. The entire Christian world was moved by the marvelous martyrdom of so many individuals under such circumstances. The appeal made by the besieged Christians of Najran to Constantinople and Persia led to the political intervention of Emperor Justin (518-527) with the king of Ethiopia, Elesbaan (Kalev Ella Asbeha, 520-540), which resulted in a military intervention in 525 to restore Christianity, which had been persecuted by the Jewish-minded king Dhu Nuwas, and who had brought about the martyrdom of Saint Arethas and his companions. [2]

Emperor Justin (518-527) was the Orthodox emperor in Constantinople who overturned the pro-Monophysite policies of his predecessors (Zeno, Basiliscus, Anastasius) and restored the Fourth Ecumenical Council to the Diptychs. His diplomatic actions in Ethiopia (including his support for the Christians of Himyar) could not have led to the recognition and confirmation of any supposed Monophysite position in Ethiopia or Himyar. Moreover, the ecclesiastical consciousness of the people in Constantinople would not have tolerated such imperial policy, especially since it had been wounded by the pro-Monophysite tendencies over the previous thirty years. In 518, the people demanded from Patriarch John of Cappadocia: “We have not communed for so many years; we want you to immediately declare the Council of Chalcedon from the pulpit.” This people would not have accepted the honoring of martyrs who had rejected the Council of Chalcedon and stood so opposed to Orthodoxy.

Lastly, the Orthodox hagiographers (Symeon Metaphrastes, Demetrius of Rostov, Agapius of Crete, Saint Nicodemus, and the later writers) would never have been convinced to include figures who were severed from the Catholic Church and involved with the heresy of Severian Monophysitism in their Synaxarion.

The anti-Chalcedonian claim that Saint Arethas and his fellow martyrs rejected the Council of Chalcedon because Monophysite monks had spread anti-Chalcedonianism in Himyar and installed their supposed co-religionist bishop Paul is highly uncertain and unsupported.

Because:

a) Regarding the period before the martyrdom of Saint Arethas (523 A.D.), it is written: “According to tradition, around 480 A.D., during the reign of Al-Ameda (455-495), the ‘Nine Saints’ first went to Ethiopia, who are still considered the second apostles of the country. It is widely argued that they were Monophysites... However, these opinions are not well documented or supported by historical evidence” (Theological Encyclopedia, entry “Ethiopia,” vol. 1, p. 1019). The Orthodox Synaxarion commemorates “Saint Bishop Paul, who had died two years before the martyrdom of Saint Arethas,” [3] and that “in the sixth century in Himyar, there were three famous bishops: Paul, John, and Gregentius,” [4] for in Himyar “the lover of God and virtuous King Abram Abraham ruled” [5] and that he “sought the independence of his kingdom from Ethiopia and turned to Byzantium and the Chalcedonian doctrine.” [6] These Orthodox hagiographical accounts do not reconcile with the idea that Paul was a Monophysite, as it is claimed in the later Anti-Chalcedonian hagiographical tradition that he was installed in Najran by the Monophysite Philoxenus of Hierapolis in the 480s. It is also historically testified that the Arabic and Ethiopian versions of the martyrdom of Saint Arethas are later than the original Greek text: “The Martyrdom was written in Greek c. A.D. 560, and survives through its translations into Latin, Ethiopic, and Arabic.” [7]

b) After 451, the process of accepting the Fourth Ecumenical Council began (in Latin, reception). It was a long process that culminated over a hundred years later. At the time of Saint Arethas’ martyrdom, doctrinal disputes in Christian areas were intense. Egypt was going through a period of doctrinal and ecclesiastical flux. The vacillations due to the Unionist (e.g., Peter Mongus) and other negotiating tendencies show this fluidity. There was an alternation and parallel installation of Orthodox and Monophysite bishops in episcopal sees. The idea that Himyar was decisively influenced by Monophysite actions is a manifestly one-sided anti- Chalcedonian claim that emerged after the time of Saint Arethas. The people of Egypt at that time reacted against the Council of Chalcedon for known theological and political reasons but did not form a Monophysite Church until after the Fifth Ecumenical Council of 553 and its rejection by the Monophysites of Egypt.

c) In Ethiopia, the reign of King Elesbaan (520-540) (who is a saint according to the Orthodox Synaxarion) [8] coincided with the reigns of Justin and Justinian (527-565). A coordinated “inter-Christian” military intervention against the Jewish king Dhu Nuwas would have been a very natural reaction to the violent destruction of an entire Christian city. However, it would have been paradoxical for a clear and organized Monophysite community to have existed in the region of Himyar, supported by its counterpart in Ethiopia, but unnoticed by the imperial court in Constantinople, at a time when relations between the two kingdoms were excellent, the Archbishop of Alexandria was still an Orthodox (Chalcedonian) bishop, and top Monophysite bishops were being condemned in Constantinople.

d) We must admit that a martyrdom, such as that of Saint Arethas, which left a profound impression upon the entire Christian world, would have remained in the memory of Egyptian and Ethiopian Christians after they had formed separate churches and by that time they would have considered it as a “their own, anti-Chalcedonian” achievement.

Given all of this, it is clearly naive to believe that the honor given to Saint Arethas by the entire Christian world (Orthodox, Latin, and Monophysite) equates to a theological endorsement of the Severian Monophysitism, which is today erroneously referred to as “Miaphysitism.” The theological basis for the view that Miaphysitism is the Orthodox Cyrillian Christology is utterly impossible, as is demonstrated by theological studies in the volume: Ὁ Θεολογικός Διάλογος Ὀρθοδόξων καί Ἀντιχαλκηδονίων: παρελθόν, παρόν, μέλλον. Μία ἁγιορειτική συμβολή [The Theological Dialogue of Orthodox and Anti-Chalcedonians: Past, Present, Future. A Hesychastic Assessment] (Mount Athos: Holy Monastery of Saint Gregory, 2018). The modern term “Miaphysitism” refers to traditional Severian Monophysitism, which has been condemned by the entire Patristic and Synodal tradition of the Orthodox.

 

ENDNOTES

1. Fr. Joseph Gleason, "4,301 Orthodox Saints Who Said 'No' to an Ecumenical Council", posted September 19, 2025.

2. (In Greek) Neos Synaxaristes tes Orthodoxou Ekklesias, Oktovrios (October), Indiktos Publications, Athens 2004, pp. 285-289.

3. See above., pp. 286-287.

4.  Saint Justin Popovic, Lives of the Saints (ZITIJA SVETIH in Serbian), October, p. 529 (see footnote).

5.  As above, p. 548.

6. Neos Synaxaristes..., see above. p. 227 (ὑποσημ.).

7.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyrdom_of_Arethas

8. Saint Justin, as above. p. 549.

 

Source: https://www.orthodoxethos.com/post/saint-arethas-is-he-a-monophysite

Baptize “True Orthodox” when they join us! – 2020 Decision of the Moscow Patriarchate

Keep in mind, the Moscow Patriarchate has explicated stated it recognizes the sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church…

 

Moscow Patriarchate
Chancellery
17 July 2020
No. 01/3154

 

TO ALL DIOCESAN HIERARCHS

Circular letter for execution

Subject: On the practice of receiving laypeople from certain schisms

 

Your Eminences and Graces, dear Vladykas!

In connection with inquiries received from dioceses, I inform you that laypeople joining the Church from such schismatic communities as: the “Orthodox Church of Ukraine,” the “Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate,” the “Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church,” as well as varieties of the so-called “True Orthodox Church,” are to be received through the Sacrament of Baptism, if such laypeople were not baptized in the Orthodox Church prior to joining the aforementioned schismatic communities.

With love in the Lord,
Dionysius,
Chancellor of the Moscow Patriarchate
Metropolitan of Voskresensk

 

Russian source: https://rocor-observer.livejournal.com/323484.html

A Prayer for the Present Tribulation of Wars

(Unofficial English translation from the official Greek.)

 

O Master, full of mercy, Lord Jesus Christ our God, we know that we are not worthy to lift up our eyes unto Thee, nor to call upon Thy most holy Name; for we have sinned and dealt lawlessly, in that we have not kept Thy commandments. Yet, trusting in Thine immeasurable love for mankind, we fall down before Thee, who didst say, “Give to every one that asketh, and open unto him that knocketh.” Behold now, O Lord, we knock at the door of Thy mercy.

From the high Throne of Thy Majesty look down upon our lowliness, and incline Thine ear which hearkeneth unto prayer, and hear us sinners who beseech Thee, and have mercy upon us; for we are beset with tribulation, beholding nation rising up against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and man taking the sword, even as aforetime did the bloodstained Cain, and lifting it up against his brother, seeking to slay him—so that the word spoken by Thy prophet might be fulfilled, saying: “They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable.”

Wherefore we again beseech Thee, O Lord our God, who at Thy divine Nativity from the Ever-Virgin Mary didst command Thine Angels to hymn Thee and say, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men,” and after Thy third-day Resurrection from the dead didst bestow Thy peace upon Thy holy Disciples and Apostles: be Thou merciful unto Thy creature, and, as the only King of Peace, grant peace which passeth all understanding unto all the world, enlightening them who seem to rule over the nations.

Strengthen them that are warred against, give rest unto them that have unjustly perished, comfort them that mourn the death of their kinsfolk, still the wars, and vouchsafe that we may pass the remainder of our life in peace and repentance—so that all may render glory and thanksgiving unto Thee, together with Thine unoriginate Father and Thine all-holy, good, and life-giving Spirit, now and ever, and unto the endless ages. Amen.

 

(Approved by the Holy Synod of the Church of the G.O.C. of Greece, Session October 8/21, 2025, for liturgical and personal prayer by clergy and laity. Liturgically, it may be read aloud by the celebrant before the Dismissal of the Divine Liturgy, before “Blessed be the Name of the Lord…”)

Greek source:

https://ecclesiagoc.gr/index.php/%CE%B5%CE%BD%CE%B7%CE%BC%CE%B5%CF%81%CF%89%CF%83%CE%B7/%E1%BC%80%CE%BD%CE%B1%CE%BA%CE%BF%CE%B9%CE%BD%CF%8E%CF%83%CE%B5%CE%B9%CF%82/2400-euxi-iper-eirinis-2025

 

Saint Dimitry of Rostov: Instructions to Priests (Concerning Revealing Confessed Sins)

 

The humble Dimitry, by the mercy of God Metropolitan of Rostov and Yaroslavl, to the honorable priests in all the cities and villages of our flock — blessing and peace from our Lord Jesus Christ.

It has come to our hearing that among you there are priests unskilled and ill-natured, who recount and reveal the sins confessed to them by their spiritual children. In casual conversations with people, while drunk, they boast vainly of their spiritual children, telling whom they hear in confession; and if they become angry at their spiritual children for any reason, they reproachfully revile them, saying: “You are my spiritual son (or spiritual daughter); do you not know that your sins are known to me? Behold, I shall expose you now before all,” and they utter other such mad words.

We are exceedingly astonished at the madness and evil disposition of such base spiritual fathers; we grieve and sigh over their perdition, and at the same time over the needless distress of their spiritual children and the dishonor brought upon the latter. This brief exhortation we write also generally to all, in order that the secret of confession may be firmly kept, that unskilled and mad priests-confessors may not perish, and that spiritual children may not be deprived of their salvation and subjected to disgrace. Therefore, together with David, we say to such senseless priests: “Understand, you senseless among the people! And you fools, when will you be wise?” (Psalm 94:8 [93:8 LXX]), remembering what the mystery of confession, or Holy Repentance, is.

Oh, how great is the sin of revealing and violating that mystery, and how great is the distress caused by the violation of that mystery!

Confession is the Sacrament of Holy Repentance, in which a person, through the voluntary and humble confession of sins, receives from the mercy of God forgiveness, according to what is written in the Psalms: “I said: I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and Thou forgavest the iniquity of my heart” (Psalm 31:5). This sacrament is a Sacrament of God, for the power to forgive people their sins proceeds from God Himself, as it is written in the Gospel: “Who can forgive sins, but God alone?” (Luke 5:21), and to Him alone do we confess our sins, having a spiritual father as the hearer and witness of our confession, and along with this, as the judge and resolver appointed by God. Therefore, this divine mystery must be known to no one except the All-knowing God Himself and the spiritual father, as the witness and hearer of the deeds confessed by the mouth of the one repenting.

This is a Sacrament of God, sealed with the seal of God Himself—that is, of the Holy Spirit, Who brings this Sacrament to completion, as the Lord said to the holy apostles: “Receive ye the Holy Spirit. Whosoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them” (John 20:22–23). This Sacrament is performed by the Holy Spirit through the priest, as through an instrument, forgiving the confessed sins and justifying the sinner by the absolution pronounced through the mouth of the priest. By this, as with a seal, the forgiveness and justification are confirmed, and the mystery of confession is sealed—and no one must break this seal or make it known to men, according to the words of the Apostle: “Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth?” (Romans 8:33–34), that is, who has the right to reproach the sins of the servants of God whom God has justified for their confession and has chosen as heirs of His kingdom for their repentance? If God has justified, let man not condemn. If God has hidden, let man not expose. If God has concealed, let man not proclaim.

The mercy of God is like a sea, and our sins are like stones, heavily oppressing us. Just as a stone cast into the sea remains in the depths, known to no one, so also our sins, cast into the sea of God’s mercy through confession, can be known to no one.

The spiritual father in this Sacrament, standing in the place of Christ God Himself and the righteous Judge, must also manifest His disposition. Just as Christ God, knowing the sins of all, does not expose them nor make them known to anyone before His final and dread Judgment, so also the spiritual father, standing in the place of Christ, must not reveal the sins spoken in confession, nor should he expose them—not only voluntarily, but not even when compelled to do so by any force.

If any ruler or civil court were to command, or if anyone else were to compel a priest to reveal any sin of his spiritual son—if he were to threaten, torture, or put him in fear of death to persuade him to disclose someone’s sin—then the priest must rather choose to die and be crowned with a martyr’s crown than to break the seal of confession and make known the mystery of God by revealing the sins of his spiritual child. For it is better for a spiritual father, for not disclosing a confession, to suffer a temporary death at the hands of men who kill the body but cannot kill the soul, than for disclosing it to be punished by God with eternal death.

Moreover, the spiritual father must also be careful not only not to dare to reproach his spiritual child by word, but not even by any sign to expose him to human suspicion, so that people may not even surmise anything about his sin. Therefore, the confessor must not impose a public penance for a secret sin confessed in confession, because if he imposes a visible penance for a hidden sin, many will begin in every way to inquire what sin this penance was imposed for—and this will be contrary to the Mystery of God and the seal of confession.

Let the spiritual father also know this: that after the confession is completed, he must not remember the sins confessed to him, but is obliged to consign them to oblivion—not only must he not reveal them to anyone, but he must not even speak about them afterward with his spiritual son (or daughter), unless the spiritual son (or daughter) himself privately recalls the previously confessed sins to his spiritual father, either seeking beneficial counsel, or requesting a lessening of the penance which he is unable to bear, or for some other such reason.

But if any unskilled, ill-natured, and mad priest, drunk with wine or with malice, raging in pride or vainglorious arrogance, dares to expose his spiritual children and reveal their sins before others—such a one, being an enemy of God, a destroyer of the Sacrament of God, and a violator of the seal of the Holy Spirit, falls under the Dread Judgment of God and eternal punishment, and eternal torment awaits him with Judas, the betrayer of Christ. For he who reveals the mystery of God—that is, confession—and makes it known to men, betrays Christ Himself, Who dwells in the repentant man.

Such a spiritual father is no longer a spiritual father, but Judas, the betrayer of Christ, and even more than that—he is Satan himself, the accuser of our brethren, cast down from heaven, from whom comes great woe to mankind. For from such a spiritual father comes not salvation, but woe—and a twofold woe: woe for the spiritual father himself, who is deprived of the Kingdom of Heaven and goes to eternal perdition; and woe for those who confess to him, through the futility of their salvation and through disgrace.

The futility of salvation for those who confess arises from this: having heard reproach from the spiritual father, they will no longer confess their sins fully and sincerely; and by not confessing their sins openly, they remain with souls unhealed, become children of God’s wrath, and if any one of them happens to die in such a state, they will perish eternally.

The loss of good repute occurs in this way: those disgraced by the reproach of the spiritual father fall under human judgment. For many, believing the words of the reproaching spiritual father, will begin to regard the exposed as sinners, to condemn them, and to destroy their good name. The Apostle says: “It is better for me to die than that any man should make my glorying void” (1 Corinthians 9:15). Thus, an evil spiritual father not only brings destruction upon himself, but also upon his children whom he reproaches—and even further draws into perdition those before whom he reproaches them. Oh, what great woe!

The Mystery of Holy Repentance is, as has been said, a mystery sealed by God. Just as one who would dare, of his own will, to break the seal of an earthly king on a scroll containing a royal secret, and, having read it, reveal it to others, is subject to cruel torments and death—so also a priest who violates the mystery of confession, sealed with the seal of the King of Heaven, and gives the sins of the penitent into public knowledge, falls under torments and punishments—not only eternal in hell, but temporal also here on earth, for even civil law commands that such a priest should have his tongue “torn out from the root.”

O unskilled spiritual father, evil accuser of your spiritual children, destroyer of the mystery of God, scandalizer of the world, and cause of the perdition of many human souls! Why do you bring into the crowd the sins that were confessed and already forgiven? Why do you make open what was hidden and covered by God? Why do you smear again with mire those who have been washed? Why do you defile those who have been cleansed? Why do you recall by remembrance what has passed and been consigned to oblivion? For God has consigned confessed human sins to forgetfulness, as Ezekiel says in his prophecy: “If the sinner repent, his sins shall no more be remembered” (Ezekiel 33:15–16). But you, wretched priest, remember and recall the sins of your spiritual children when they ought not to be remembered, and by this you become an adversary of God. He remembers not the sins once forgiven unto the ages of ages, while you dare to recall them. What punishments are you worthy of for this?!

Offering this to you, O priests, I exhort you with admonition and entreat you with supplication, that you cease from such mad wickedness and destructive boldness. I remind you of the instruction of Saint John of the Ladder from his “Word to the Shepherd”: “God, having heard the confession, never becomes an accuser, lest He strike down the one confessing by accusation and leave him suffering, unhealed” (The Ladder, 282). From these words of the Ladder-writer, every priest must learn not to reproach or reveal the sins which your spiritual children confess to the Lord before you, lest you strike them down, turn them away from repentance, and leave them incurably wounded.

But I, a humble bishop, by episcopal authority command you, O priests, not only not to reproach and not to reveal, but also not to boast that you are a spiritual father to anyone, or that such and such persons are your spiritual children—lest through such boasting, O priest, you give people some clue for conjectures and assumptions about anyone’s sin. It is enough for you that all who come to your church know you as their confessor. Why then do you still need to boast of your spirituality? What praise is there in washing someone from filth? What honor is there in cleansing another’s yard from dung? What glory is there in wiping away someone’s excrement? For when you hear the sins of your spiritual child, which he confesses before God in your presence; when you, discerning them by the priestly authority given to you by God, absolve him, wash him from the mire, cleanse the filth from the courtyard of his soul, and wipe away the uncleanness from his conscience—what vanity or pride is there for you in this?

The ministry of spiritual fatherhood is given to priests by God for the purpose of serving human salvation, and not for vanity, pride, vain exaltation, or excessive dominion over spiritual children. And if the power to bind and loose sins is given by God to the priest, then this power operates only at the very moment when the Sacrament of Confession and Repentance is being performed; but after the confession of sins, the spiritual father must not remember what was confessed, nor is it fitting for him to hold lordship over his spiritual children. If henceforth any of the priests, remaining in such incorrigibility, becomes known by name to our humble person, such a one shall be subject to our judgment and severe punishment as one disobedient to God and opposing our episcopal admonition.

If it also becomes known to our humility that certain negligent priests, having under their care not a small flock of human souls, do not care as they ought for their salvation, are slothful in visiting the sick to hear their confession and to communicate them, refuse to visit the poor and destitute, but go only to the rich—despising the poor and the needy—so that many, due to their negligence, die without confession and without Communion of the Divine Mysteries, then to such negligent priests I remind the word of Christ from the Gospel: “Woe unto you, for ye shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men; for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in” (Matthew 23:13). I further remind them of what is said in the prophecy of Ezekiel: “The blood of the perishing sinner will God require at the hand of the shepherd” (Ezekiel 3:18). And the Lord Christ also says in the Gospel: “It is not the will of your Father in Heaven that one of these little ones should perish” (Matthew 18:14). But if anyone perishes through the negligence of a priest, what answer shall that priest give for the soul that is lost?

Hear, O priests, what answer concerning your flock you will be required to give on the Day of Judgment; hear Saint John Chrysostom, who speaks thus: “If someone, through negligence, causes even one of his flock to perish, does he not thereby destroy his entire salvation? Would it not be better for him that ‘a millstone were hanged about his neck and he were cast into the sea’?” (Mark 9:42). For the whole world is not worth one human soul. What then shall be said of a priest who, through his negligence, has caused many souls to perish? Shall he not be plunged into the unquenchable fire of Gehenna?

Therefore, by the commandment of God, we command priests to care with all diligence for the salvation of human souls, both by day and by night; that they not despise the poor and destitute, but regard them equally with the rich. For at the dread judgment they will be required to give an equal account for all—the Master Christ Himself will demand an account from the priest for each one alike, both the poor and the rich.

If any priest has a very large flock of human souls and therefore cannot personally attend to all, then a subordinate priest should assist him in visiting the sick with the Divine Mysteries, for confession, and should help him in fulfilling other Christian duties.

These exhortations and commandments I have briefly set forth for you, O priests, so that you may receive them with obedience and remain worthy of your calling. Then you shall obtain the mercy of God, and the prayers and blessing of our humility shall remain with you. But if anyone proves disobedient and resistant, if anyone becomes indignant and remains uncorrected, such a one shall see for himself what judgment he shall incur—for the wrath of God does not slumber, and His destruction does not delay. As for us, the humble, we consider ourselves clean from the perdition of such a one, from which may Christ our God deliver all by His mercy. Amen.

 

Russian source: Сочинения святого Димитрия, митрополита Ростовского, 6th edition, Vol. 1, Moscow, Synodal Press, 1839, pp. 159-168.

A vision that the blessed Elder Kallistratos (+2012) saw regarding the New Calendarists

The blessed Athonite Elder Kallistratos once saw a vision in which the souls of New Calendarists were ascending to Paradise. Being a Zealot, he was astonished and wondered, "But is it possible for the New Calendarists to be saved?" Then he heard the voice of the Lord saying to him, "Do you sit on My throne and have you taken My judgment?"

From then on, he recommended that the faithful follow the Old Calendar but without making judgments regarding the salvation or condemnation of the New Calendarists…

Greek source: https://krufo-sxoleio.blogspot.com/2025/02/2012.html

Saint John the New Almsgiver of Amfiali on the New Calendarists

Source: Το ιστορικό και τα θαύματα της Παναγίας Ευαγγελιστρίας Ακρωτηριανής Σερίφου [The History and the Miracles of the Panagia Evangelistria of Akrotiriani in Serifos] Vol. 1, by Abbess Anthousa (Anneta, before becoming a nun), Athens, 2006.

One day, Anneta’s sister from Amfiali, Eugenia Triantafyllidi, came to Koropi and said to Anneta: “In my neighborhood, at Saint Demetrios, we have the clairvoyant elder John. You should come and receive a blessing.” The very next day, Anneta went to Amfiali and knocked on the door of the monastery of Saint Demetrios. Before they opened, she heard the elder commanding his nun: “Open, it’s the policewoman from Koropi, let her in.” Anneta was deeply moved.

They brought Anneta inside and led her to the back, beside the church of Saint Demetrios. As she entered, the elder—seated—said to her: “Come near me, handmaiden of God, Anneta, so I may read your sins on your forehead.” As soon as she approached him, deeply moved, she knelt before him and, weeping, kissed his hands with reverence. He lifted her head and looked at her forehead. He said to her: “I see on your forehead many cassocks written.” And immediately he told her: “Tell your priest at Saint Phanourios, the one on the Old Calendar, Hieromonk Eugenios, to stop driving away the New Calendarist sheep of God, because I used to do the same as my elder had advised me. Until one night, during the time of my rule of prayer, our Lord Jesus Christ appeared to me, showing me in a vision that on His right and left there were sheep—but with a difference: the sheep on His left were burnt, completely blackened. I was frightened and said: ‘Lord, on the left are [to be] the goats; how can there be burnt sheep?’ Then the Lord said to me, with indignation: ‘These burnt sheep are My New Calendarist children whom I send to you to enlighten, and you drive them away. I will demand them of you on the Day of Judgment, for it is not your prerogative to restore My New Calendarist sheep back to genuine Orthodoxy. That is directed by Me alone. You must accept them all, and those whom I allow shall return to the right path of My Glory. For the sins of the people, I permitted this division of the Church. You—accept them near you, for I am the One sending them. Protect them, for I will demand them of you on the Day of Judgment!’ And immediately the Lord disappeared, leaving me terrified by His severity.

“The very next day, I immediately opened my church for both New Calendarists and Old Calendarists. Now I have three thousand spiritual children who have me as their spiritual father. So tell your priest to stop driving away our New Calendarist brethren, and the rest is God's work.”

As soon as Anneta returned to Koropi, she told her priest the command. The Hieromonk said: “I will obey his command, for I have heard of his holiness.” And he began to love everyone and to serve them, without checking whether they belonged to the Old or the New Calendar. Within a year, fifteen families returned on their own to the Old Calendar because of the love he showed them, without coercion. When Saint John passed away, his New Calendarist spiritual children were as numerous as the sea.

Greek text: https://krufo-sxoleio.blogspot.com/2012/05/blog-post_4952.html

Obedience or simply submission?

November 5, 2025

[Contemplation by a member of Official Orthodoxy]

 

 

“Better to be with the Church even if it errs, than to be right and outside the Church”!

We heard it from priestly lips. Again and again. A discourse about blind and unreasoning obedience. It sounds very easy and very convenient: without examination of conscience and without any spiritual effort, I simply obey the Church in whatever it says and decides synodally… or even by diocese and province. This, of course, is the camouflage word. The word behind which lies hidden the entire egotistical and self-satisfied intention of one who does whatever he wants, however he wants, without being accountable to anyone.

Perfect: the path to salvation is now wide open. Who was it that said, “Narrow is the gate and difficult the way which leads to life” (Matt. 7:14)? He must have been mistaken, because His modern representatives teach us that everything is easy, as long as one obeys. That is, to obey in getting vaccinated, in shutting down churches and locking doors, in altering ecclesiastical canons at will or violating them. To obey in the corruption of the mindset and the de-sacralization of every concept and mystery or tradition of the Church. To obey the demands of the times and the whims, wishes, and passions of the rulers—since the Church co-signs and approves them “synodally.”

Something is not right. This matter of obedience to the Church has greatly troubled me as well, just as it has many others.

I believe the answer lies in the understanding and proper interpretation of the term Church. By this term is described the totality of Christians throughout the world, which provides priesthood and apostolic ministry, shares a common dogma, and proclaims its faith in its Creator, the Lord Jesus Christ, in an Orthodox manner. The Church is the Body of our Lord. We are all members of it—whether weak, healthy, in the process of healing, or near death—we are members when we are baptized and consciously choose to be members in freedom. “For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another” (Galatians 5:13–15). What makes us members of the Church is the awareness and understanding that we are members of Christ; therefore, in this life each of us struggles according to his strength, so that he may become of one body with Christ and ultimately a healthy member. That is to say, a saint.

Now, those who govern the Church—if we suppose that they are a specialized member of this Body with a specific mission—must know that they are NOT the head of this Body. And neither, of course, do they replace Christ (as if He were somewhere far away).

They too are members—some weak, some healthy, others dead, already lifeless. “I know your works, that you have a name that you are alive, but you are dead” (Revelation 3). The only distinction they have from any other member is the priesthood, which is a particular mission within His Body. But even greater than the priesthood is the continual union and communication with the Holy Spirit, because whoever is cut off from the Holy Spirit is cut off from the Vine and becomes a cancerous member that is cut off: “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (Matthew 3:10).

So then, from where does this constant and permanent refrain originate—this command for unquestioning obedience? Are we to obey even the dry and severed members? Unfortunately for us (not for the true Church), the synod is composed of members of a clique that agrees beforehand to submit to the decision of one man as if he were infallible like the Pope.

The decision of that one directs and determines even the episcopal ordinations, so we have now reached the point where all the hierarchs comprising the synod are elected by the first according to his desires (and naturally, his expectations from them). Whoever does not obey along the way or does something of his own—even if it is apostolic and ecclesiastical—is persecuted by all means and in every way (see the case of Tychikos, former Bishop of Paphos). Therefore, we are being told to obey a synod with prearranged decisions and directions, since everything depends on one man and not on a synod in the Holy Spirit.

Here is the Holy Spirit before us once again: “The One present everywhere and filling all things.”

The Apostles and the Synods of our Fathers were Spirit-bearing figures, and as such they established the dogmas and the course of the Church throughout the ages, while also resisting heresies and deviations with steadfastness. The present-day successors of the Apostles—who most certainly are not of the same mind and faith as they—how are they justified in demanding absolute obedience and conformity?

Isn’t it very convenient for them that everyone obeys without any resistance?

I believe things are now clear. Our hierarchs—and often, even at the parish level, our priests—find obedience convenient, as it allows them to conceal their mistakes, their weaknesses, and their falls. Behind so-called obedience they hide their inability to govern, but above all, their lack of love, fatherliness, forgiveness, absence of resentment, and compassion—not only toward their priests, but toward any person found in need, who has nothing to offer in return in the form of money, property, or service to the interests of the metropolis.

All the rest, then, through the command of obedience, are weakened and pushed to the margins of love, care, and mercy—which the official Church is supposed to represent. Instead of our administrative Church being an honorable and sanctified member, it has degenerated into a cancerous and decayed one, which not only does not seek healing, but demands that all silently accept the rot and stench as something given. Not only does it refuse to undergo surgery, but it does not even allow the diagnosis of the illness by anyone, as though it holds absolute authority and the sole truth. As if Christ were not the Truth and the Life, but rather those who govern the Church are infallible—givers of life and sinless.

Infallible. It is precisely within this environment and condition that they demand absolute obedience to the “Church.” And of course, it is as if they are saying, obey me—that is what they truly mean deep down; they simply do not say it outright due to a pretense of humility. The fact that the Church is faltering, surrendered to the passions and to greed, to the lust for power and the self-justification of its rulers, unfortunately seems to concern no one.

The people now turn away and avoid attending church and associating with the clergy and those so-called “of the Church.” They have become disillusioned and, to a great extent, have withdrawn—not so much from the true God, but from His supposed people and representatives. For all they hear about is obedience, without understanding, and without seeing behind the actions and deeds of those in charge anything of Christ Himself. Large churches are empty, events and banquets are attended by the same few people who rotate among themselves and enjoy the wealth and grandeur reserved for the few and the “elect” who obey. Come then, obey, and you shall enjoy in this life all the power and magnificence of those who hold authority within the Church—and within the State as well, since Church and State now walk hand in hand on the difficult and painful issues of our lives (see: homosexuality, coronavirus, European funds and subsidies, etc.).

I am sorrowful for the above, which is a painful and bitter experience and realization. This is not the Christ we loved. This is not the Christ we fell in love with. Christ does not speak of obedience (great is the mystery of obedience within monasticism—but obedience in the world is something entirely different, as Archimandrite Nikodimos, Abbot of the Holy Monastery of Philotheou on Mount Athos, said in a talk he gave in Athens), but He awaits the last just as the first (the Parable of the Talents and the Paschal Homily of Saint John Chrysostom).

He goes out to gather the lost sheep—the disobedient one (Luke 15:3–6). He takes upon His shoulders the sin of us all, without distinguishing anyone, embracing the sinner and the penitent with absolute love and forgiveness. No one is excluded or different; no one is exempt. Acquaintance or long-standing obedience to the bishop or priest does not count as a reward of loyalty or as a guarantee of a sound spiritual life.

I wish and I pray that those who govern us may ascend their Cross, embrace it with love, and thereby come to understand—being themselves crucified—that this is the only way and path to understanding their fellow man, his pain, his anxiety, his unjust journey. Only upon the cross can any person who holds authority ultimately be united with Christ and find themselves with Him.

Not in gilded parlors, nor clothed in purple and fine linen (Luke 16:19: “There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and fared sumptuously every day”), acting without effort and yet aimlessly, using as his shield the declared obedience of his subordinates, with no one holding him accountable or judging his actions.

I believe that the time of the great hierarchs of our Church’s past will return, through the pain and afflictions that will come. Sooner or later, when God allows it, those who govern will be called to take a stand of confession of faith, at the cost of personal persecution and torment. Without hiding behind the command of obedience, without being able to deceive everyone through alignment with worldly power and its forces, and certainly without monetary self-sufficiency being able to redeem them.

The hour is coming, and now is, when we will all be called to reveal the deepest things of our heart and of our faith. Amen!

 

Greek source: https://apotixisi.blogspot.com/2025/11/blog-post_5.html

The Epidemic of Condemnation

Protopriest Alexander Ilyashenko

 

 

One of the most widespread sins today is condemnation. To speak in medical terms, this is not merely an epidemic but a pandemic—that is, a universal affliction. All of us appropriate for ourselves what belongs to the Lord God alone. The Lord is the all-righteous Judge, the all-knowing Judge; the Lord knows all, is aware of all. The Lord takes into account every smallest circumstance. And all mitigating factors He considers, in order to have mercy on us.

We, however, who know nothing and see only the negative, often pronounce judgment on our neighbor—moreover, this judgment is final and not subject to appeal. And the person doesn’t even know why others have become cold toward him, why they have become unfriendly, why they have stopped paying attention to him. No one particularly tries to explain. There is nothing to explain in human terms, because condemnation is a sin. And to justify sin to another person is somewhat strange.

Once I was hearing confessions, and it so happened that three women came to me in a row, and each of them, having confessed and not giving me a chance to open my mouth, said: “You probably think…” I replied: “You know, my dear, please never think that I think what you think I think. I couldn’t even have thought it; it never crossed my mind.” And I also added: “You’re probably very discerning, you read my thoughts, but I assure you, you see only the negative, and you don’t see the positive.” There is not enough discernment for the positive. We have negative discernment. We see only the bad, somehow calculating through secret means that a person has something terrible in their mind—and we base our interaction with them on this as though it were a fact.

So then, one must watch one’s thoughts strictly; one must absolutely forbid oneself to condemn anyone or to assume the right to judge the actions of a person whose actions are the result of a vast complex and confluence of circumstances. Something was important to him, and perhaps, when he acted, he thought he was doing the right thing—or perhaps he didn’t even realize he was making a mistake. But we forgive him nothing. No mitigating circumstances. On the contrary, drop by drop it accumulates, and it all gathers into a vast lake filled with the poisoned water of condemnation.

Or, as one priest used to say, we see the specks in our neighbor’s eye and, without seeing the beam in our own, we try to remove those specks from our neighbor’s eye. And this gives rise to a huge, rotting heap of refuse—sinful refuse that clogs our soul. And it often happens that some particular sin, even if it is truly heavy, is much easier to get rid of—along with its consequences—than a pile of petty sinfulness. Because in the latter case, it’s the soul itself that is improperly disposed.

It is difficult to catch oneself in the act of truly having condemned someone, because you’ve grown used to condemning. One must make special efforts not to condemn, not to let that sinful contagion penetrate into the soul.

One recalls an incident that took place at Optina Hermitage before the revolution. After the death of Father Ambrose, one of the brothers came to the head of the skete and said: “Listen, what kind of disgrace is going on here? A woman visits such-and-such a brother at night. This is terrible—so many years in the monastery... What have we come to.”

The head of the skete summoned that monk and said, “What is this? What’s going on?” And he even began to weep and said, “How could you think such a thing? If Father Ambrose were alive, he would never have allowed this… So many years in the monastery, so many years in the skete, and no one ever dared to insult me with such distrust. But still, if it was seen—then it was seen.” Very well, the three of them went together around midnight, hid, and watched to see what would happen. And indeed, at midnight a woman appeared and, through a closed door, entered his cell. Then it became clear who had appeared to him [i.e., the Most Holy Theotokos]. And if they had believed the accusation—what horror, what shame, what disgrace that would have been. But they did not believe; they decided to verify.

Even contrary to what seems obvious, one must not believe in condemnation—that injustice which brazenly, insistently, and at the same time convincingly pushes its way into our minds.

I want to touch on a subject that goes hand in hand with this and, unfortunately, is rarely discussed among us. The Lord said to render righteous judgment, only righteous. To render righteous judgment is by no means easy. It requires a special grace from God.

Even in pagan Rome, the ancients formulated the principle of the presumption of innocence. I often ask people: what is the presumption of innocence? And in ninety percent of cases, I receive no answer. Yet this is a principle which states that if a person’s guilt has not been convincingly proven by a free, fair, independent, and public trial, then one must regard that person as innocent until their guilt has been established.

Often, in the course of a legal proceeding, it turns out that a person is innocent, even though all the evidence seems to be against him. And a public trial presupposes that the accused has the right to defend himself—and to do so publicly. The Romans formulated the principle of the auditor: “Hear the other side.” And the defender may argue with the prosecutor, persuade, present counterarguments against the prosecutor who accuses the defendant. When it truly becomes evident to all that the person is either guilty or, on the contrary, innocent, then the court’s decision is accepted as just and final.

So then, we must not forget these principles. One must not proceed from the principle of the presumption of guilt. Yet when we condemn, we act precisely from that principle. A person cannot justify himself, cannot defend himself—he doesn’t even understand what he is being condemned for.

The most terrifying scourge of modern man is the certainty that he has the right to condemn everyone and everything. In condemning, we lose trust in one another, we lose the warmth of relationships, sincerity, the hope that a person will not let us down. People become strangers and hostile to us, although this is merely the result of our own sinfulness.

May God grant us to realize this and begin to treat one another with goodwill. One can always ask: tell me, please, am I understanding correctly that such and such is the case? He will tell you: no, you are mistaken, that has nothing to do with me. Or one can ask differently: tell me, please, how do you see this? Ask the question in such a way that the person himself gives you the answer.

When I became a priest and began to hear confessions, I realized that another one of the most widespread sins today is the sin of fornication. A person comes and confesses certain sins. I can see it is his first time. Since fornication is a common sin, I might want to ask: tell me, please, are you married? Married. And from there I could ask in different ways. I could formulate it like this: “Do you cheat on your wife?” But that’s an offensive formulation! After all, it can be asked differently: “Are you faithful to your wife?” Such a formulation, on the contrary, is respectful. By asking this way, you uphold that very presumption of innocence.

 

Russian source: http://internetsobor.org/index.php/stati/iz-raznykh-istochnikov/epidemiya-osuzhdeniya