A Walled-Off Priest on the Issue of the Mysteries of Unjudged Heretics

Noteworthy questions about walling off and the mysteries of the Ecumenists

Protopresbyter Dimitrios Athanasiou | November 23, 2025

The following questions were posed by a brother in Christ who is walled-off.

In a talk by Fr. Athanasios Mitilinaios (Fr. A.M.), published at the web address

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yafg3jXj3tU

the blessed elder says the following:

“…the Holy Spirit performs the rites, places the seal on the mysteries (Baptism, Priesthood, Holy Communion, Confession), and consequently, the priest, when he is ‘wicked,’ does not have a valid mystery, but for the sake of the faithful, the mystery is operative”???

So, if I understand correctly, today the “wicked” Ecumenist bishops and priests do not have valid mysteries and priesthood, and the people rightly follow them! And we who have walled ourselves off have caused a schism? And the same applies to the believer when he too is “wicked”—condemnation—he does not have baptism even if he was baptized!

Then are the things concerning the defilement of the mysteries not correct?

Response to the above questions.

In order to answer your questions, we must first examine when a mystery is VALID.

When is a Mystery valid?

Apostolic Tradition and the Fathers of the Church have taught us that, for a Mystery to be valid and “canonical,” the following conditions must be met:

a. The officiant must be “canonically” ordained (priest or bishop), and must not be under any penalty that prohibits them from performing sanctifying acts—that is, they must not be deprived of part or all of their priestly authority.

b. The sensible signs must be present, the material of the Mystery, which differs for each Mystery (e.g., flour for Holy Unction, prosphoron for the Divine Liturgy, etc.).

c. The specific Hierology must be observed—that is, the “specific” words for each Mystery, as handed down to us by the Fathers throughout Church history and Divine Worship. In this third condition, only under normal circumstances (and not, for example, in time of war), the “canonicity” regarding the use of sacred vestments by the officiant must also be observed, always in accordance with his degree of priesthood.

***

There is a contradiction in the words of Fr. A.M. On the one hand, we have the AUTOMATIC LOSS OF GRACE DUE TO HERESY; on the other hand, Grace (??) operates for the sake of the faithful. This, of course, is not substantiated anywhere.

Every heretic who distorts the DEFINED DOGMAS of the Church is condemned, in the sense that he condemns himself—he has lost Divine Grace for himself, but not the authority to perform mysteries on behalf of the people, until that authority is taken from him by the Synod which granted it to him, through the hands of the bishops who ordained him.

The position of the Fathers is clear. They tell us to separate from heretics when we come to understand their heretical teaching. They do not tell us that we have the authority to strip them ourselves of the right to celebrate the sacred rites—although they do urge us to anathematize them, whether we are laypeople or clergy. Deposition is carried out by a Synod. And of course, the Saints who established the Holy Canons do not consider our separation from those heretics who have already been condemned synodally (such as today’s Papists, Anti-Chalcedonians, Copts, etc.) as “walling off,” because it is self-evident that we have no communion with them, since they already belong to another false “church.” Walling off takes place from our own celebrants—those false bishops and false teachers—who, through heresy, cease to be ours! When they are deposed, we no longer speak of walling off. We don’t say, for example, “wall yourselves off from the Papists!” These are not ours; they already constitute another “church”!

As to whether he himself possesses Divine Grace, whether he is condemned for adding hypocrisy to heresy, the Fathers indeed teach that yes, he is personally condemned, since he is a false bishop and a false shepherd. At the same time, however, they accept that he has canonical priesthood, the mysteries he performs remain valid as long as he has not been deposed, and this is on account of the ordination he received from God through the bishops who ordained him, and for the benefit of the judgment of the faithful—since the Mysteries are performed by God Himself.

At the appearance of every heretical teaching, we observe that, in the first stage, certain faithful (whether clergy or laity—it makes no difference) react and point out the heresy. They distance themselves, they give warning about the fire that has been kindled and is burning, and about the serpent that roams freely in the Church and spreads its poison by biting the faithful. These individuals simultaneously urge the other faithful (not merely as a form of protest, as some claim) to also distance themselves, so that they too are not infected by the contagious heretical ideas, so that they do not consciously become participants and accomplices in the heresy through their tolerance; and subsequently, the right-believing, Orthodox Synod condemns the heretical positions and removes the Grace that had been given. At that point, the mysteries are invalid, since they are performed by one who has now been condemned as a heretic and no longer possesses the liturgical Grace.

And furthermore, those who are aware of their atheism–heresy and yet receive Communion from them, it is—in each case—questionable whether they receive Divine Grace and illumination, or whether, precisely because the Mysteries are valid, they become for them judgment and condemnation, since they are aware. It is, in other words, a matter of intention—whether it is good and confessing, or of evil intent.

CONCLUSION. Fr. A.M. does not address the entire issue also from the perspective of the DEFILEMENT OF THE FAITH, one form of SPIRITUAL DEFILEMENT being the COMMEMORATION OF HERETICAL FALSE BISHOPS. He accepts the automatic loss of the Grace of Priesthood, whereas this only occurs THROUGH A SYNOD OF ORTHODOX BISHOPS.

The 15th Canon of the First-Second Council speaks of FALSE BISHOPS AND FALSE TEACHERS, but not of pseudo-hierarchs [i.e., fraudulent or deposed  pretenders to episcopal thrones - tr.]. That is, it removes from heretical bishops the right to SHEPHERD and to TEACH ONLY.

This results in the mysteries being indeed VALID AND CANONICAL (until condemnation), yet DUE TO THE DEFILEMENT OF THE FAITH they become JUDGMENT AND CONDEMNATION.

The reason for the counsel and teaching of the Saints regarding separation from heretics who have not been condemned is their different faith, which DEFILES—not supposedly because the mysteries they perform are invalid. For ultimately, no one is harmed by invalid mysteries; invalid mysteries, in and of themselves, as invalid, do not defile—but communion with those who perform them does defile, with heretics, enemies of God!

The criterion for an ecclesiastical situation to be characterized as a SCHISM is the EXISTENCE OF A SYNOD OF ORTHODOX BISHOPS. Does such a synod exist today??

WALLING OFF IS NOT SCHISM, because WE SEPARATE FROM HERETICAL AND NOT FROM ORTHODOX BISHOPS AND SYNODS.

 

Greek source: https://apotixisi.blogspot.com/2025/11/blog-post_23.html