When the Guardians Betray

Elder Savvas Lavriotis

Greek source: Orthodoxos Typos, issue no. 2237/November 30, 2018, pp. 1 and 5.

Shared by the G.O.C. Metropolis of Oropos and Phyle: https://www.imoph.org/pdfs/2019/05/15/20190515aFylakesProdidoun.pdf

 

 

“Why hast Thou led us astray, O Lord, from Thy way?
Thou hast hardened our hearts, that we should not fear Thee?”
(Isaiah 63:17)

“…the shepherds acted impiously toward Me, and the prophets prophesied by Baal and went after that which is profitless.”
(Jeremiah 2:8)

 

The word of the Lord is light and a lamp in our life. The Readings of the Services, the Troparia, and the Synaxaria are part of the daily life of the monk. The above prophetic passages are read at Vespers of the Feast of the Holy Great-Martyr Demetrios the Myrrh-streamer.

In our time we live, hear, and see unbelievable things. One such unbelievable, and yet true, event is also the following fact.

We read in Orthodoxos Typos (October 26, 2018, issue no. 2232), that the Metropolitans Paul of Drama and Barnabas of Neapolis, together with the Abbot of the Holy Monastery of Dionysiou of the Holy Mountain, Peter, went on the 14th of October to a Muslim (Mohammedan) cemetery, where they offered joint prayer with an Imam for a relative of a prominent businessman (a Turk).

It also publishes a photograph in which, with hands raised, they pray for the repose of the Turk. The photograph is taken from a video which has circulated and which anyone may see, and which speaks for itself.

What, then, is happening? Have Bishops and Athonite Abbots abandoned the Gospel and taken up the Qur’an, abandoned Christianity and joined Mohammedanism? Have they, in short, changed religion?

We do not wish to believe such a thing. Might all this reveal the mystery of lawlessness, something which for years has been at work through the pan-heresy of Ecumenism, and which will be the final temptation of the Church?

Already a month has passed, and we expected that the institutional Holy Mountain, the Holy Community, would have taken action regarding so serious a matter. If the old Athonite Fathers were living today, they would be weeping, as did the prophets of the Old Testament:

“…the shepherds acted impiously toward Me, and the prophets prophesied by Baal and went after that which is profitless” (Jeremiah 2:8).

So many Abbots, so many Hieromonks, Spiritual Fathers, and Monks in Monasteries, Kellia, and Sketes—do they no longer concern themselves with matters of the Faith?

The Masonic funds from Europe, with which the Monasteries “beautify” the Holy Mountain with luxury and extravagance, in order to make it more attractive and touristic, scandalizing the people who live in poverty and hunger—are these more beloved, God-pleasing, and traditional?

Do financial matters perhaps have greater value for our salvation?

But how can we remain silent in the face of such impiety! Even the stones will rise up against us.

As the least, simple, and insignificant Athonite Monks, therefore, for reasons purely of conscience and Orthodox Confession, just as we have already ecclesiologically separated our position with regard to the heretical decisions of the pseudo-synod of Kolymbari in Crete—during which the Papists, the Monophysites, and the multitude of Protestants were synodically recognized as Churches, something which is contrary to our Orthodox Faith and which we have analyzed in a patristic and theological manner in the published text Confession of Faith—so also, with the same sense of responsibility, we denounce the present event before the institutional authority of our Sacred Place.

The Athonite Abbot in question cannot be justified on the grounds of ignorance of the Orthodox Faith and the Sacred Canons: He went to a purely religious place, to a Mohammedan cemetery, and offered joint prayer with an Imam, praying for repose—not merely of a heretic, but even of one of another religion; this is unheard of. It is at the same time noteworthy, and very painful, that for the first time in history Athonites dare to participate in joint prayers and even proceed from inter-Christian Ecumenism to interreligious Ecumenism, since, recently, there have also been joint prayers by other Athonite Monks with heretical Papists inside churches, such as at the Phanar, in Smyrna, and elsewhere; and all these, among other things, boast that they are also descendants of great Neptic Elders…

For all these things, we would like to set forth—not our own personal judgments—but, as we always do, to present the Teaching of the Holy Fathers of the Church.

Let us first see what is said to us concerning the religion of Mohammed and the Mohammedans, with whom the Abbot in question and the Bishops so readily offered joint prayer.

Saint Gregory Palamas, the Athonite, one of the greatest Fathers and Theologians of the Church, when in 1354 he was traveling by sea toward Constantinople in order to mediate so that peace might be achieved in the civil conflict between the imperial court and [John VI] Kantakouzenos, was captured prisoner by the Turks, who had already occupied all of Asia Minor, on account of the apostasy from the Faith and the sins of the people and the rulers.

While being a prisoner, he was summoned three times to dialogue with the Emir of the Achaemenid Turks (certainly not like the dialogues conducted by today’s Ecumenists), as well as with the Chiones, that is, Islamized Christians; then, at the risk of his life, he confessed with boldness:

a) That there is one true God, the Holy Triune God — the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

b) That Jesus Christ is not a simple prophet, but the Son and Word of God, He who was foretold through all the Prophets.

c) That the Cross of Christ is the trophy and the banner of Christ (and he did not supposedly remove it so as not to offend the Mohammedan invaders brought into our homeland, as today’s Ecumenist Archbishops and others do).

And d) to the question of Tasimanes (a ruler), “Why do you not accept our prophet and do not believe in his book, which descended from heaven?” Saint Gregory Palamas replied with courage, bringing testimonies even from the Qur’an itself, saying:

“That Christ is testified to by Moses and by all the Prophets, and He alone is said throughout the ages to be the Son and Word of God, and He alone was born of a Virgin Mother. He alone ascended into the heavens and remains immortal, and in Him alone we hope that He will come to judge the living and the dead. All these things are also confessed by you Turks; for this reason, we believe in Christ and in His Gospel. But Muhammad we do not find to be testified to by the prophets, nor has he accomplished anything wondrous and noteworthy that leads to faith; therefore, we do not believe in him nor in the book (the Qur’an) which he delivered.” (See Philotheos Kokkinos, Life of Saint Gregory Palamas, E.P.E., vol. 70, pp. 345–373).

And succinctly he would say:

“Of all the barbarians, the most barbarous is this impious, God-hated, and utterly defiled race, who believe in a mere and mortal man — this Muhammad” (…). 

All these things are sufficiently capable of showing us how the Fathers of the Church spoke and confessed their Faith before those of other religions and heretics.

Let us also consider another Athonite Saint, the great Teacher of the Church and of enslaved Romiosyne, Saint Nikodemos, who, living under the slavery of the Turkish rule, not only did not practice diplomacy or politics with those of another religion, but on the contrary, through his Spirit-inspired writings, and by preparing many New Martyrs for Martyrdom, became the anointer of the New Martyrs and handed down to us their moving Martyrologies, as he recorded them in the New Martyrologion, writing:

“…many of these New Martyrs, having shown mercy toward the perdition of those of another faith, went for this very reason to martyrdom and proclaimed to them the truth, teaching them to abandon the darkness in which they are found and to hasten toward the light of the piety and faith of Christ, lest they be condemned in the unquenchable fire of hell” (Discourse on the New Martyrs).

We see with what boldness he writes concerning the uniqueness of the Christian Faith and of Orthodoxy, and how he reproves those of another religion, so that Christians might preserve their Faith.

But Saint Kosmas the Aetolian also, himself an Athonite, with great missionary zeal, traveled apostolically throughout all Romiosyne, over mountains and seas, and through many villages, some of which had changed their faith and others their language after unbearable pressures; he, by his evangelical and apostolic preaching, brought them back to the Patristic Faith, and in the end he himself was martyred by the Turko-Albanians.

And, as Saint Nikodemos the Athonite also writes most poetically in the hymnographic Service:

“The New Martyrs, having destroyed the ancient delusion, exalted the faith of the Orthodox and struggled steadfastly…” (Apolytikion of the New Martyrs).

“Proclaiming the glory of the Trinity, you fill the hearts of Christians with joy, and you leave the tribe of Hagar in shame, O renowned New Martyrs, the glory of the Orthodox…” (Apolytikion of the New Martyrs).

All these,

“the steadfast in soul, having been armored by the power of Christ, entered into the arena of contest, triumphing over the impiety of the Hagarenes, and proclaiming with boldness the faith of Christ” (Oikos of the New Martyrs).

Whoever, therefore, studies both the hymnographic Service and the sublime festal Encomiastic Homily of the Saint will taste something of that crucified sweetness of the love of Christ which set the souls of the New Martyrs aflame. He will perceive what the divine love of the Martyrs means, and what relation this can possibly have to the tasteless and flaccid ecumenical talk of “love” of our present-day “shepherds.”

After all these things, as well as many others which one could cite, it is now entirely clear and brighter than the sun that what is being carried out today is not at all accidental. We are now living through a complete, methodical, and deliberate apostasy from the Patristic Orthodox Faith, which is being engineered, indeed as principal agents, by the shepherds themselves—patriarchs, bishops, abbots, priests, and theologians; these too are among the signs of the times.

Patriarch Bartholomew himself, let us not forget, distributes Qur’ans, takes part in Ramadan meals, offers joint prayers with all religions, and clearly proclaims:

“We religious leaders must bring to the forefront the spiritual principles of Ecumenism, of brotherhood and of peace; but in order to achieve this, we must be united in the spirit of the one God — Roman Catholics and Orthodox, Protestants and Jews, Muslims and Hindus, Buddhists” (Episkepsis, no. 494, p. 23, Geneva 1994).

His name is commemorated seven times a day on the Holy Mountain, “as one rightly dividing the word of the truth—Orthodoxy”…

These are the false shepherds about whom, for 2,000 years, Scripture, the Apostles, and the Holy Fathers have warned us.

“But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who shall secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction” (2 Peter 2:1).

The great problem, however, is no longer them, for they have already followed the path of destruction and no longer worship Christ. The great problem is us—what are we doing in the face of all these things? This is the question and the necessity which should very seriously concern us. “He who has done and taught these things, he shall be called great.”

The diagnosis of an illness is of no benefit if we do not proceed also to its treatment; otherwise, we are merely playing games.

That which today, for most clergy, monks, and laypeople, remains incomprehensible is the matter of communion with heretics.

The term ecclesiastical communion, in the theological language of the Fathers, is weighty and possesses soteriological significance. Concerning the matter of communion, the Lord Himself speaks to us and commands us to flee far from the false shepherds—the wolf-shepherds:

“…the hireling, and not being a shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, sees the wolf coming and abandons the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them. The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care for the sheep” (John 10:12–13).

Moreover, when the Lord lived upon the earth, did He have any relationship, any spiritual communion, with the religious authority of Judaism—the Scribes, the Pharisees, and the Sadducees of His time?

And the Lord continues:

“…but you do not believe, for you are not of My sheep (not all sheep belong to Christ), as I said to you; My sheep hear My voice, and I know them” (John 10:26).

The sheep of Christ know His voice and have the command to follow only the true shepherds and not the false shepherds or wolf-shepherds.

And He continues:

“Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees… of their teaching” (Matthew 16:6–12).

Communion with heretics operates like leaven, which permeates the whole lump, whether for good or for evil.

And the Apostle says:

“O Timothy, guard the deposit, turning away (fleeing far away, a cessation of communion) from profane empty utterances and contradictions of the falsely so-called knowledge (Ecumenism), which some, professing, have concerning the faith suffered shipwreck (have been led to destruction)” (1 Timothy 6:20).

This teaching is expressed succinctly also by the great Father of the Church, Photios:

“The error of shepherds is the shipwreck of those in communion with them.” (P.G. 102, 698)

The Orthodox dogmatic teaching of the Church has been confirmed in many ways and by many means through the Ecumenical Councils. The Sacred Canons of the Church are of obligatory acceptance by the members of the Church, just as are the Commandments. There are no optional canons (that is, if one wishes he applies a canon, and if he wishes he does not apply it), just as there are no optional commandments.

Concerning joint prayers, the Sacred Canons prescribe, for example, the 45th Canon of the Holy Apostles:

“If any Clergyman or layman enters into a synagogue of Jews or of heretics to pray, let him be deposed and excommunicated.”

And commenting on this, Zonaras says:

“The Canon considers it a great sin… for what agreement has Christ with Belial? Or what portion has a believer with an unbeliever, according to the great Apostle?” (Pedalion, p. 84).

For about fifty years now, anyone examining the course of the so-called Theological Dialogues will ascertain that actions and choices were followed which had been prearranged within predetermined frameworks in which they were required to operate, and these frameworks were none other than the decisions of the Second Vatican Council (1962–65). All these things are expressed chiefly through joint prayers and bring about the greatest alteration in the Orthodox mindset of the people.

After all these things, the following questions arise:

a) What will be the stance of the Brotherhood itself of the Holy Monastery of Dionysiou? For in the person of the Abbot the entire Brotherhood is in communion, which means that whatever the Abbot does is in agreement also with the whole Brotherhood; for this reason, in all the documents of the Monastery they are signed “together with the brethren with me in Christ”. They commemorate his name daily in the Divine Liturgies, receive his blessing, commune from his hands, and concelebrate with him.

All these are not mere formalities; they are matters of essence, because they presuppose identity of Faith—that is, the Brotherhood holds the same Faith as the Abbot, and likewise the Abbot as the Brotherhood.

Patristic theology defines that “he who is in communion with one excommunicated is himself also excommunicated” (Theodore Balsamon); that is, those who commune with heretics become defiled, through their communion with heretics, by the very heresy itself.

The 2nd Canon of the Council of Antioch states: “He who communes with those who are excommunicated, let him also be excommunicated”, because

“from of old the Orthodox Church of God has accepted that the commemoration of the name of the bishop at the holy altar constitutes full communion with him” (Athonite Fathers, Letter to Michael VIII Palaiologos).

Likewise, a serious problem also arises for lay brethren who will be received as guests, since they too will face the problem of defilement.

b) The other Abbots and the rest of the fellow Athonite Monks in Christ who will visit the Monastery—by maintaining ecclesiastical communion with them, they too will indirectly be accepting his joint prayer.

And in general, what stance will the Athonites take? Will they continue to tolerate this ecumenical course of the Monastery, which many other Monasteries also follow?

c) Based on the above, the question posed to the Holy Community is what it intends to do.

What is fitting according to the sacred institutions of our Sacred Place is to convene an extraordinary Assembly for the swift resolution of the matter, which is already being widely discussed both within and outside the Holy Mountain.

We remind that formerly the same Holy Community wrote:

“The Holy Mountain has always preserved the self-awareness that it remains, by the Grace of Christ, a faithful guardian of the holy Orthodox Faith, which the God-proclaiming Apostles delivered to the Church and which our God-bearing Fathers, through the holy Ecumenical Councils, preserved unaltered throughout the ages” (Memorandum of the Holy Mountain, Orthodoxos Typos, no. 1801, October 9, 2009).

The Holy Mountain, apart from Venerable Saints and Ascetics, has also brought forth a multitude of Hieromartyrs and New Martyrs. The defense of the Orthodox Faith unto death always accompanied their ascetical and neptic struggles, since “a life is of no benefit when doctrines are corrupted” (Saint John Chrysostom).

We pray that our Sacred Place, the Garden of the Panagia, which is so greatly honored by the whole world, may preserve the Orthodox Faith as the apple of its eye, if we wish to have the blessing, the grace, and the protection of the Lady Theotokos—Who, we recall, in the time of the persecution by the unionist and Latin-minded Patriarch Bekkos against the Athonites, who had ceased commemorating him, spoke those fearful words:

“The enemies of me and of my Son are coming.”

Therefore, as Athonites, the feasts and celebrations in honor of Saint Kosmas the First and the Hieromartyrs under Bekkos are of no benefit to us if we do not also imitate them in the Confession of Orthodoxy. The time, therefore, is a time for Confession.

One of the contemporary virtuous Elders, Elder Savvas Kapsaliotis, a man who harmoniously united Asceticism with Confession, used to say characteristically and succinctly:

“I have spent six decades in the Schema; I wish to be in agreement with the Holy Hieromartyr Kosmas the First, because there are two paths. One leads to the excommunicated and disgraced ones of the Lavra, and the other to the martyr’s crown of Saint Kosmas the First.”

We pray for good illumination and repentance for all of us.

A good Confession, so that we may also have a good defense. Amen.

Athonite Fathers

 

 

Additional Greek source:

https://www.agioritespateres.com/otan-oi-fylakes-prodidoun/