Concerning the Validity of the Mysteries of Accused Heretics: The Example of St. Maximus the Confessor

Source: Σχόλιο στο κήρυγμα του Μοναχού Μακαρίου Κουτλουμουσιανού (Β΄), by Ioannis Rizos (January 15, 2018).

 

 

Continuing the brief investigation into whether the sermon of Fr. Makarios of Koutloumousiou concerning the invalidity of the Mysteries of the ecumenists after the acceptance of the pseudo-council of Kolymbari is patristically grounded, we will examine what teaching we treasure from the life of Saint Maximus the Confessor.

In 629, the Patriarch of Constantinople, Sergius, aligned himself with the heresy of the Monothelites.

For five years, Saint Maximus strove to persuade for the convocation of a council that would condemn this official adherence to heresy. Never in his preaching does he declare the position that the Mysteries of the fallen Church of Constantinople are invalid.

In 634, Saint Sophronius convenes a Council in Jerusalem, in which Monothelitism is condemned.

In 646, the saint succeeds in convincing the bishops of Africa, and the Council of Carthage takes place, in which Monothelitism is again condemned.

In 649, he achieves the same feat in Rome, and the Lateran Council anathematizes the patriarchates of Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria, which had adhered to the heresy.

Throughout this entire period, the saint, having three conciliar decisions in favor of his positions, never preaches that the Mysteries of those who had yielded to the heresy are invalid.

Because of these successes of the saint, which were in opposition to the positions of the emperor and of the official church, he was subjected to tortures and interrogations. In response to the interrogators’ questions as to why he did not commune with the church, the saint makes no mention whatsoever of invalid Mysteries—at a time when all the patriarchates had joined the heresy—but for him it is sufficient that the official church did not accept the correct teaching of the aforementioned Councils. [1]

In his sermon, Fr. Makarios, for example, says that the baptisms performed after Kolymbari in the Church of Greece are invalid. Consequently—according to him—those who receive the Mysteries of the Church of Greece after Kolymbari are not saved.

A corresponding question was posed to Saint Maximus by the interrogator Troilos: “Will you alone be saved, and all the others be lost?”

But the saint did not respond by teaching about invalid Mysteries of the Monothelites; instead, he said: “May God not permit me to condemn anyone or to say that only I am being saved.” [2]

Then they said to him: “Envoys of the Pope came from Rome and tomorrow they will commune with us, because as soon as you left there, they changed their mind and agreed with us.”

The saint then replied: “Those who came from Rome, even if they commune [with you], cannot act on their own in a way that binds the Church of Rome,” etc., etc.

It is very important to note that the saint, in his response, does not take a dismissive stance toward the impending “communion” of the Roman delegation with those Easterners who had communed with the heresy. He does not say, for example, that your sacramental “communion” is invalid or non-existent.

He maintains the same position later in the interrogation, where he says: “You command me to come and commune with the church in which such kinds of dogmas are preached… but I will never become a partaker with those who accept such innovations.”

Here we see the saint not using the opportunity given to him to perhaps say, “What shall I commune in, since you have no Mysteries?” but rather he clarifies that the “red line” which forbids him from communing with the official church is its acceptance of false teachings. The wisdom and humility of the saint teach this alone as a safe and more than sufficient reason for the cessation of ecclesiastical communion.

In 656, the saint is in exile in Bizye of Thrace. There he is visited by Bishop Theodosius of Caesarea, who tries to persuade him to commune with the heretical Patriarchate of Constantinople. Theodosius attempts to entice the saint by describing to him the honors he will enjoy if he yields. He says: “…we will come out at the Chalke Gate and greet you, we will give you our hand and bring you with all honor and glory into the Great Church. You will stand with us in the place where the emperors stand. We will serve the liturgy, we will commune of the spotless and life-giving Mysteries, the life-giving Body and Blood of Christ. We will proclaim you father…” etc., etc.

Here a great opportunity is given to the saint to declare the rejection of the Mysteries of those communing with heresy. Yet he does not do so. On the contrary, he remains silent on the matter of the Mysteries and responds to Theodosius regarding the heretical teachings written in a text called the “Typos” and the necessity for these to be annulled.

Shortly afterward, the saint is scourged, his tongue and hand are cut off, and without any care he is left to die in the land of the Laz, where he dies in 662.

It took 51 years from the beginning of his struggle, and 18 years after his death, for him to be vindicated by the 6th Ecumenical Council in 680.

This is the legacy of the saint on the matter that has concerned us, and it should be taken seriously into account by those of contrary opinion.

 

[1] P.G. 90, 116A–121C.

[2] Op. cit., ch. 4–7.

 

Greek source:

https://web.archive.org/web/20191210052216/https://paterikiparadosi.blogspot.com/2018/01/blog-post_30.html