For reference - Conclusions of the Conference with the theme: “The 15th Canon of the First-Second Council and the cessation of ecclesiastical communion.”

November 27, 2014 | Piraeus

 

 

The Sacred [New Calendar] Metropolis of Piraeus, with the blessing of our Most Reverend Metropolitan Seraphim, in cooperation with the Office on Heresies and Para-Religions, organized and held on Thursday, November 27, 2014, at 4:00 p.m., in the hall of the “Piraeus Association” in Piraeus, a Theological Conference with the theme: “The 15th Canon of the First-Second Council and the cessation of ecclesiastical communion,” in which a multitude of clergy and the faithful people of the Church of Piraeus participated.

The opening of the proceedings of the conference was declared by our Most Reverend Metropolitan, Mr. Seraphim.

Thereafter the subject was developed in detail by three distinguished speakers:

a) His Eminence the Metropolitan of Piraeus, Mr. Seraphim, who developed the topic: “Walling off in the light of the life and struggles of the Venerable Theodore the Studite.”

b) Archimandrite Fr. Basil Papadakis, Abbot of the Holy Monastery of Saint Anastasia the Roman in Rethymno, who developed the topic: “The cessation of ecclesiastical communion according to Orthodox Theology and the Tradition of the Church.”

c) Protopresbyter Fr. Ioannis Fotopoulos, Lawyer and Theologian, who developed the topic: “Non-communion and walling off according to the teaching and the life of the Holy Fathers.”

After the completion of the presentations and following an extensive discussion on them, the conference reached the following conclusions:

CONCLUSIONS

1. In Orthodoxy, the commemoration of the bishop of each local Church is important, as the guarantor and guardian of the Orthodox faith, but also as the one who expresses the unity of the ecclesiastical body, which unity is realized and preserved in the Divine Eucharist. When the faith is violated through heresies, the Church, through her holy and God-bearing Fathers, points out the deviant heretical teachings and then, following the long-standing Canonical and Synodal Tradition, proceeds to the condemnation of the heresy as well as of those heretics who persist unrepentantly in heretical teachings, through the convocation of Orthodox Synods at the local or even at the ecumenical level.

2. The rapid spread of the pan-heresy of Ecumenism throughout the entire course of the twentieth century up to our own days created the need among groups of clergy and laity to seek support in the Sacred Canons and in the holy Fathers of the Church, in order to base upon them their avoidance of every communication with the heresy, by cutting off every ecclesiastical communion with bishops who promote heresy. Thus, for yet another time in recent years, the 15th Canon of the First-Second Council, convened during the days of the great Photius in 861, has come again to the forefront of ecclesiastical discussion.

3. The Sacred Canon in question (and more precisely the second part, or paragraph, of this Canon) permits the cessation of commemoration (walling off) of a subordinate cleric from his superior even before his synodal judgment, only on the condition that the latter publicly preaches a heresy “condemned by the holy Councils or Fathers.” This condition is very important, because it obliges us to proceed “following the Holy Fathers” and to rely upon the diagnosis which they made, with the power and illumination of the Holy Spirit, concerning the said heresy, following and not preceding the Holy Fathers and pre-empting their judgment regarding the heresy. And this is so because it is not the competence of each member of the Church to point out and diagnose a heresy with certainty, since he does not possess the corresponding spiritual prerequisites. With the above phrase, “condemned by the holy Councils or Fathers,” the compilers of this Sacred Canon also seek to emphasize respect for the synodal institution of the Church, as well as the authority of the holy Fathers.

4. The Sacred Canon in question must be interpreted in the spirit and in the context of the two preceding canons, the 13th and 14th, with which it constitutes a thematic unity. Just as the two above-mentioned canons (the 13th and 14th), as well as the first part of the 15th, consider the synodal judgment and examination of the moral transgressions or other offenses of the bishop to be necessary before the cessation of his commemoration, so also—and even more so now, when it concerns the most serious offense of falling into some heretical teaching—the synodal judgment and examination of the heretical bishop is considered necessary, because this is required both by the connection with the two preceding Sacred Canons and by the entire Synodal Tradition of our Church. The only difference in relation to the two preceding Sacred Canons lies in the fact that, when the cause of walling off is the falling into a “condemned” heresy, then walling off is permitted even before the synodal judgment of the fallen heretical bishop. The separation from the body of the Church does not take place in an invisible and automatic manner by itself—immediately when the heretic falls into heresy—but by means of a specific condemning synodal decision. If the separation of the heretic occurred automatically and of itself, the synodal condemnation of him would be unnecessary.

5. The Fathers who composed the 15th Sacred Canon did not make walling off from heretical bishops obligatory. This Canon does not legislate an obligation, but simply grants a right. While it praises those who wall themselves off from the heretical bishop “before his synodal judgment,” it does not impose any penalty upon those who, without accepting his teachings, nevertheless continue to commemorate him, while at the same time censuring his false teachings and seeking the intervention and secure synodal diagnosis and condemnation of him by the competent synodal authority. If the Sacred Canon had a mandatory character, there would necessarily have been a corresponding formulation concerning all those who continue to maintain ecclesiastical communion with the heretical bishop before his synodal condemnation, and in that formulation the prescribed penalty would have been included, especially since the matter involved is so serious as heresy. Moreover, if the Church considered it the duty of a cleric to separate immediately from a bishop who had fallen into heresy, it would have established specific canons on this fundamental issue, and indeed very strict ones. It would not have been satisfied to speak about this matter as if in passing, that is, it would not have sufficed simply to insert an exception into Sacred Canons which were enacted in order to discourage and punish schisms.

6. In the confrontation of heresies, the contribution of the holy Fathers is decisive and pivotal, as is evident from the Acts of the Councils, the Lives of the Saints, the ecclesiastical literature, and the Sacred Canons. The holy Fathers do not improvise; rather, being illumined by God and moved by God, they refute heresy through their theological discourse and guide the people of God in their stance toward it and toward the heretics, as is shown by the life and struggles of the Venerable Theodore the Studite.

7. Sure guides of the ecclesiastical body in its stance toward the contemporary pan-heresy of Ecumenism are the recently illustrious venerable Fathers, such as Venerable Justin Popović, Saint Elder Paisios the Athonite, Saint Elder Philotheos Zervakos, the Venerable Elder and great Russian Athonite ascetic, founder of the Holy Monastery of the Honorable Forerunner in Essex, England, Sophrony Sakharov, and others. These indeed pointed out Ecumenism, but did not wall themselves off from their local bishops, while at the same time indicating the necessity of the synodal condemnation of this heresy, as well as of those who promote it. The preference for our own improvisations against false teaching, in contrast to the God-illumined stance of the contemporary holy Fathers, and the claim that divine illumination and the synodal condemnation of the heresy are unnecessary in the matter of walling off, remove us from the spirit of the holy Fathers. Moreover, the manifold insults directed against the saints of our time by certain brethren who have walled themselves off not only wall them off from the bishops who promote heresy, but also separate them from the Orthodox Church.

8. The fact that within the contemporary pan-heresy of Ecumenism there exist elements of older heresies, which have been synodically condemned by the Church, does not remove the necessity of its contemporary synodal condemnation, in accordance with the spirit and proposal of Venerable Justin Popović. For this purpose, the clergy and the faithful people of God must direct their struggle and activate themselves in a more dynamic anti-heretical struggle, until our Hierarchy, pressed by clergy and people, addresses this pan-heresy, condemns it synodically, names its adherents, and calls them to repentance. If they persist in their errors, it should cut them off from the Church.

9. The theology of the holy and God-bearing Fathers and their God-illumined pastoral ministry has as its ontological foundation the Church as the Body of the living Lord Jesus Christ. It aims at the safeguarding of the unity of the ecclesiastical body, the integrity of the faith, and the experience of the Church, but also at the essential presentation and application of the true provisions of the divine Law and the Sacred Canons, through which the incorporation of the human person into Christ and his deification by grace are established and realized.

 

Greek source: http://aktines.blogspot.com/2014/11/15_28.html