The Holy Fathers teach us that
the only proper way of resistance must be the cessation of the commemoration of
their name and of ecclesiastical communion with them. Only in this way is there
a possibility that they may come to their senses and change course. Professor
Panagiotis Iliopoulos, in a recent lecture, mentioned relevant examples from
the history of the Church. When the Holy Fathers encountered a clergyman who
did not rightly divide the word of truth—that is, who was a heretic—they did
not pray together with him, nor did they concelebrate with him; and if he was
their shepherd, they ceased to commemorate his name in the sacred services
(cessation of commemoration).
Next, I shall mention from the
history of the Church several incidents of cessation of commemoration,
primarily of Patriarchs of Constantinople, by eminent Fathers of the Church,
who acted even prior to any Synodal decision—and in some cases, after heretical
pseudo-synods.
1) By decision of the Synod in
Antioch in 379, Saint Gregory the Theologian was sent to Constantinople to
strengthen the Orthodox there. When Saint Gregory arrived in the Imperial City,
he did not commemorate Patriarch Demophilus, as he was an Arian. When, two
years later, the Second Ecumenical Council convened (381), not only did it not
punish Saint Gregory, but it also elected him president of the Council.
2) When the heretic Nestorius
became Patriarch of Constantinople in 428, the Orthodox clergy ceased, one
after another, to commemorate him in the sacred services, while the people
would leave the churches where his name was commemorated, crying out, “We have
an emperor, but we have no bishop.”
At that time, the Patriarch of
Alexandria, Saint Cyril, in his letters to the clergy and people of
Constantinople, urged them to struggle and to cease the commemoration of
Nestorius. It must be noted that all this took place approximately three years
before the convening of the Third Ecumenical Council (431), which condemned
Nestorius and vindicated the stance of the Orthodox who had broken all
communion with him.
3) Seventh century,
Constantinople. At that time appeared the heresy of Monothelitism. All the
patriarchs had accepted this heresy. The banner of the true faith was upheld by
two monks: Saint Maximus the Confessor and Sophronius, the future Patriarch of
Jerusalem. Saint Maximus ceased the commemoration of the heretical Patriarchs
of Constantinople, and for this he was harshly persecuted. He was
anathematized, his right hand was cut off, his tongue was cut out, and he was
exiled to the Caucasus at the age of 80. All these things happened at least
twenty years before the convening of the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680), which
took place eighteen years after the death of Saint Maximus (662), and which
vindicated the struggle of Saint Maximus and condemned five patriarchs.
4) First phase of Iconoclasm
(758–787). At that time, the great Father and teacher of the Church, Saint John
of Damascus (680–754), struggled with zeal. His right hand was cut off, but it
was miraculously restored through fervent prayer before the icon of the Theotokos,
while the Iconoclastic synod of 754 anathematized him. Let us hear that
ridiculous anathema: “Anathema upon Mansur, the evil-named and Saracen-minded!
Anathema upon the icon-worshipper and falsifier! Anathema upon the blasphemer
of Christ and conspirator against the empire! Anathema upon the teacher of
impiety and misinterpreter of the divine Scriptures!”
The Seventh Ecumenical Council
(787), which convened 33 years after the death of Saint John (754), gloriously
vindicated him and pronounced dreadful anathemas against the iconoclasts and
all heretics, as we heard in the Synodikon on the Sunday of Orthodoxy.
5) Second phase of Iconoclasm
(813–843). Saint Theodore the Studite (759–826), that unyielding fighter,
ceased the commemoration of the Patriarchs of Constantinople three times. Two
of them were on account of an unlawful marriage. He was severely mistreated,
deposed, anathematized, and exiled by the iconoclasts. And all this took place
after two iconoclastic synods, those of 754 and 815, while part of Saint
Theodore’s struggles occurred before the Seventh Ecumenical Council (787). He
reposed in 826, that is, 17 years before the restoration of the holy icons and
the triumph of Orthodoxy (843).
6) The Patriarch of
Constantinople, Saint Germanos (1222–1240), in a letter to Cypriot clergy
(1229) who were commemorating Latin bishops due to unbearable pressure (Latin
occupation), strictly forbids any form of oikonomia on the matter of
commemoration, regardless of the cost. At that time, indeed, many were
persecuted and met a martyr’s end. In this letter, the Patriarch states, among
other things: “As many as are true children of the Catholic [i.e., Orthodox]
Church, flee with all your strength from Latin subjugation, and do not even
receive a casual blessing from their hands. For it is better to pray alone in
your homes than to gather in church with Latin-minded men.” (K. Sathas, Medieval
Library, Venice 1873 – Athens 1972, vol. II, p. 18)
7) Council of Lyons (1274). The
union of the Churches was decided. Clergy and people reacted strongly. The
Athonite Fathers sent to Emperor Michael VIII Palaiologos, the Azymite, a
monumental confessional letter, and subsequently ceased the commemoration of
the Latin-minded Patriarch John Bekkos. In 1280, the Emperor and the Patriarch
arrived on Mount Athos with an army, determined to enforce the commemoration by
force. Those fathers who remained steadfast were martyred and are celebrated by
the Church as Venerable Martyrs. The Iberians were cast into the sea, and their
memory is commemorated on May 13. The Zographou monks were burned in the tower
of the Monastery and are commemorated on September 22. The Vatopedi fathers
were executed by hanging and are honored on January 4. Those in Karyes were
killed—some by hanging, others by the sword—and are commemorated on December 5.
All this took place six years after the pseudo-council of Lyons (1274) and four
years before the Council of Constantinople (1284), which repudiated the union
of Lyons and deposed Patriarch John Bekkos.
8) Hesychast Controversy, 14th
century. The papist monk Barlaam of Calabria comes to the East, disguises
himself as a zealous Orthodox, and spreads the rotten dogmas of papism, causing
confusion and mocking the Orthodox. He was condemned at the Synod of 1341 and
returned to the West.
However, his erroneous views were
adopted by Byzantine intellectuals (Akindynos, Gregoras, and others), as well
as by bishops—and even by the Patriarch John Kalekas himself. The pillar of
Orthodoxy, Saint Gregory Palamas, then ceased the commemoration of the
Patriarch; for this, he was anathematized and imprisoned in the palace prison
for approximately four years (1343–1347). The Orthodox Synods of 1341, 1347,
and 1351—which are regarded by many as Ecumenical—vindicated the struggles of
Saint Gregory, and even elected him Archbishop of Thessalonica (1347).
Let us hear the pitiful anathema
against the champion of Orthodoxy, Saint Gregory Palamas: “To Palamas and those
of like mind with him… who dared unlawfully and indiscriminately to cut off my
commemoration, we subject them to the bonds of the life-originating and Holy
Trinity, and we hand them over to the anathema…!” — John, by the mercy of God
Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome, and Ecumenical Patriarch. (Patrologia
Graeca 150, 863Ι–864Α).
9) Pseudo-Council of
Ferrara–Florence (1438–1439). At that council, the union of the Churches was
decided. The only one who did not sign, as is well known, was the Bishop of
Ephesus, Saint Mark of Ephesus (1392–1444), who also ceased the commemoration
of the Patriarch of Constantinople and never again concelebrated with any
bishop who had signed the union. Moreover, he left behind the instruction that
neither the Patriarch nor the bishops who had signed should be accepted, not
even after death—not at his funeral, nor at memorial services held in his
honor, out of any supposed respect for him. Concerning the commemoration of the
Patriarch and the Latin-minded bishops, Saint Mark said: “Flee in every way
from communion with him (the Patriarch), and neither concelebrate with him, nor
commemorate him, nor consider him a hierarch, but rather a wolf and a
hireling.” (Patrologia Graeca 160, 1097)
And all these things occurred
after the pseudo-council of Ferrara–Florence and before the Orthodox Council of
Constantinople in 1450, which vindicated the struggles of Saint Mark.
(M. Gedeon, Patriarchal Lists, p. 467)
10) However, beyond these
references to incidents from Church history, the right and duty to cease the
commemoration of a Patriarch who innovates concerning the faith is also
established by the holy canons: Canon 31 of the Holy Apostles and Canon 15 of
the First-Second Council in Constantinople under Patriarch Photios the Great
(861). This very significant canon stipulates that: Those clergy who cease
commemorating the Patriarch—especially prior to a synodal decision, when he is proclaiming
doctrines contrary to what has been delivered—not only are not making a schism
(and therefore are not schismatics), but are in fact worthy of honor from the
Orthodox. This is precisely what happened in the aforementioned incidents,
where eminent Fathers ceased commemoration before any synodal judgment. This
also occurred approximately 35 years ago (1972), by the majority of the
monasteries of the Holy Mountain and by three Metropolitans of the [Official] Church
of Greece: Augustine of Florina, Ambrose of Eleutheroupolis, and Paul of Paramythia,
without being punished by the Church of Greece.
Conclusion:
From all that we have mentioned,
we can say that the Holy Fathers never commemorated heterodox Patriarchs and
Hierarchs. Whenever such cases arose, they would cease their commemoration and
all communion with them. In this, we have the unanimous agreement of the Holy
Fathers (consensus patrum).
Reverend Fathers, beloved
brethren in Christ,
The essential prerequisites for
salvation are a pure life and right faith. Ecumenism is anything but right
faith.
It is:
– a “pan-heresy” (Fr. Justin Popović),
– “something worse than pan-heresy” (Professor Andreas Theodorou),
– a “mortal threat to Orthodoxy” (Fr. Spyridon Bilalis),
– a “(new) Babylonian captivity” (Fr. George Metallinos),
– a “heresy and pan-heresy” (Professor Fr. Theodoros Zisis),
– “the greatest delusion of our time, the greatest and strongest temptation”
(Hierotheos of Nafpaktos),
– a heresy (Archbishop Christodoulos).
Arianism, Monophysitism,
Monothelitism, and Iconoclasm were known heresies in other eras; Ecumenism
is the heresy of our time. The global centers of power—the contractors of
the much-vaunted globalization that direct the fate of the planet—aspire to
make Ecumenism the Pan-Religion of the future: a kind of federation of
religions, with the Pope as the spiritual leader of the globe. With satanic
cunning, everything is moving in that direction. The only way out of this
death-web—into which nearly all the Orthodox Churches have become entangled—is
one: The cessation of commemoration.
It is true that in recent years
many excellent texts have been written concerning this cancer within the
Church—Ecumenism. However, very few speak about the cessation of
communion with this great pan-heresy of our age. These fathers and brethren
resemble those surgeons who make excellent diagnoses, but give no medicine for
healing and do not amputate the gangrenous limb of the patient. And the
medicine in this case is the cessation of communion.
Greek source: https://orthodox-voice.blogspot.com/2025/10/blog-post_24.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.