To An Archimandrite With “Zeal
According to Knowledge”… Part 1
In the previous issue of The
Hagiorite, in our leading article, among other things, we also criticized
the clergy of Athens, particularly the learned archimandrites, who did not dare
to do or write anything concerning the uncanonical joint prayer of their
Archbishop, Seraphim, inside the Papist Church of Saint Dionysios in Athens! A
monastic periodical that follows the New Calendar and does not hesitate
continually to denounce the ongoing betrayal of the sacred treasures of
Orthodoxy by those appointed as her leaders by nature and position wrote the
following significant words concerning the aforementioned event:
“Three bishops,
Archbishop Seraphim of Athens, Ambrosios of Talantion, and Anastasios of
Androusa, prayed together with the heretical Papists in Athens, inside the
latter’s principal church. This was a flagrant violation of the divine laws,
which prescribe that ‘one must not pray together with heretics or schismatics’
(Canon 33 of the Council of Laodicea), and ‘If any clergyman... enters a
synagogue of Jews or heretics to pray, let him be deposed and excommunicated’
(Canon 65 of the Holy Apostles). Consequently, those aforementioned, according
to the Sacred Canons, are already deposed (Theodore the Studite, P.G. 99, 997),
but must be formally deposed by the competent ecclesiastical authority, which,
if it fails to do the will of the Lord, stands under judgment” (Good
Confession, November 1978).
Archimandrite Fr. Epiphanios
Theodoropoulos, wishing to excuse the aforementioned reprehensible action of
the Archbishop—and consequently to absolve both himself and his fellow
clergymen of their guilty silence—sent a letter on the matter to Orthodoxos
Typos, which, unfortunately, published it without the slightest hesitation
on its front page, with prominent headlines and enormous lettering, even though
the same newspaper had condemned the aforementioned action a few months
earlier, writing: “Orthodox and Latins Pray Together: Three Orthodox
Hierarchs... This is the first time that Orthodox Hierarchs have entered the
Papist church in Athens and prayed together with the Latins. This event...
causes genuine sorrow among the Orthodox... All these developments, as we are
informed, form part of the plan of certain well-known circles to conclude a
‘Concordat’!!” (September 20, 1978).
After this, what can one say
about the inconsistency of this religious newspaper? How does it dare, after
publishing contributions such as that of Fr. Epiphanios, to protest at the same
time against the Papal Nuncio who is coming to Athens? When will it cease
showing favoritism at the expense of the truth and its readers? But it is time
to examine more closely the content and character of the letter in question.
The Art of
Demagoguery in Action
At the outset, with considerable
pomposity, he presents a whole catalogue of accusations against the Old
Calendarists and the Zealots of Mount Athos, because their “zeal not according
to knowledge” has led them to the point of “overturning Orthodox Ecclesiology”
and becoming “schismatics” whose “salvation is in doubt”! Indeed, he did not
hesitate to call Ecumenism Scylla and Zealotism Charybdis, thus placing the
enemies of Orthodoxy on the same level as the honorable defenders of the Sacred
Traditions! What astonishing animosity and partiality!
After all this, one wonders what
connection all the above accusations could possibly have with the previous
article in The Hagiorite. And yet there is a connection, because The
Hagiorite is a Zealot publication, and the Very Reverend Father cannot
tolerate being criticized by a... “schismatic whose salvation is doubtful.” But
what if the person criticizing him is writing the truth? Never mind! “What is
truth?” What matters is that the Old Calendarists be humiliated, and if, for
this purpose, one writes a few lies or engages in demagoguery with considerable
skill, it is no great matter! The priority is to protect the reputation of the
New Calendarist shepherds so that the flock may be kept “within the walls”... Thus,
by beginning with statements that are true, or at least plausible, falsehood
can subsequently be presented to the reader more easily and more
persuasively...
If The Hagiorite had
recommended that the Very Reverend Father join the Old Calendarists in order to
cease his communion with those of false belief, he might perhaps have had some
justification for writing against them, so as to justify his refusal. Since,
however, we wrote nothing of the sort to him, nor did we sing the praises of
Zealotism in our previous article, it is perfectly obvious that his attacks
against Zealotism serve no other purpose than to divert the reader’s attention,
through demagoguery, in order to obscure the truth and justify his culpability.
As to the question of who are the
schismatics, the Old Calendarists or the New Calendarists, we have dealt with
this at length in our study A Canonical Examination of the Calendar Schism (Athens,
1976), which, it should be noted, Orthodoxos Typos refused to publish,
even at a time when it was conducting a dialogue between Old Calendarists and
New Calendarists “for the sake of truth and Orthodoxy,” although it
subsequently acknowledged in writing that our study was “perhaps the most
valuable” of all the contributions submitted by the Old Calendarist side. Let
the aforementioned newspaper, therefore, first publish this study, followed by
Fr. Epiphanios’ commentary, and then we too shall respond appropriately in the
same forum, so that all interested parties may become acquainted with our
views. As for the Very Reverend Father’s observation concerning the four or
five Churches of the Old Calendarists, we have the following to say. Without
wishing to excuse the evil of the aforementioned divisions—about which we have
written extensively—we are obliged to emphasize that all these factions are
struggling to remain, and do remain, apart from the heresy and innovation of
the New Calendarists, and this is what matters. Nor should the Very Reverend
Father ever imagine that the outward unity of the New Calendarist bishops is a
fruit of the Holy Spirit. Quite the contrary! Let the policeman disappear for a
little while, and then he will see how the factions of his bishops become not
five, but fifty-five...
“Such Things Have
Happened Before”
Fr. Epiphanios then regards as
“positively comical” our assertion that the aforementioned joint prayer
constitutes an unprecedented event in the ecclesiastical history of Athens,
even though, as we have seen, Orthodoxos Typos itself characterized it
as such. Indeed, he himself unwittingly admits this, since he was unable to
cite a single “similar precedent,” but instead resorted to mentioning the
Anglicans and the attendance of ambassadors of other religions and heretical
confessions at the Metropolitan Cathedral of Athens, something entirely
irrelevant to our subject! But even if his assertion were true, would that give
Archbishop Seraphim any right to repeat such an action in our own days? Unless,
of course, His Beatitude feels inferior to his fellow hierarchs at the Phanar
and elsewhere, who have left nothing standing...
He then maintains that the event
does not constitute joint prayer, but merely a “social event” at which only
those “weak in faith” would take offense! Now, if the Sacred Canons prescribe
deposition for such actions, that is another matter, and applies to... those
who pray together with heretics, whereas here we are dealing with a mere social
event. As though the Church of Saint Dionysios were a refreshment stand and
Their Eminences had gone there to drink their lemonade...
Thus, with his new theories that
a) such things have happened before, and b) events of a social nature are
unworthy of any attention whatsoever, Fr. Epiphanios “absolved” Archbishop
Seraphim and revealed to us all why he himself had not reacted. After all, it
would be comical for a learned archimandrite to raise an outcry over such
trifling matters...
Judging by the aforementioned
approach of the Very Reverend Father, if tomorrow Archbishop Seraphim—following
the wholehearted acceptance accorded to his document concerning cooperation
with the heterodox Churches of the EEC [European Economic Community]—were to
require his flock to confess their sins indiscriminately even to the... Papist
priests of Athens, it would hardly be surprising if this too were considered
“of no essential significance,” since, as far back as 1651, the Orthodox
Archbishop of Paronaxia, Joseph Doxas, had already encouraged the clergy and
faithful of his diocese, through a relevant encyclical, to confess their sins
to the “holy Capuchin fathers,” on account of their great learning and
virtue... (P. Gregoriou, Relations Between Catholics and Orthodox, p.
11, Athens, 1958).
The Defilement
Arising from Commemoration
Unfortunately, however, this is
not the first time that the aforementioned archimandrite has attempted to
distort the truth so outrageously. Did he not display the same mentality and
conduct under the previous Archbishop, Ieronymos, with his extensive ecumenist
policy, attributing his uncanonical actions to his great kindness and
courtesy?! Following the same approach, did he not, beginning in 1969, seek
through three lengthy mimeographed letters (totaling 60 pages!!) to put a stop
to every contemplated act of resistance on Mount Athos and elsewhere, literally
distorting undeniable truths and facts? (We wrote extensively about these
matters in our Second Open Letter to him, comprising 41 pages, as early as 1970,
but we are still awaiting his reply...)
Thus, in his third letter to a
certain Athonite monk, he writes the following words, which are appalling to
every Orthodox conscience.
“But the
cessation of commemoration ‘before synodal judgment’ and condemnation does not
have the purpose of avoiding defilement from the heresy being preached! No, my
brother! If this were its purpose, then the Canons would not merely grant the
right to cease commemoration on account of heresy ‘before synodal judgment,’
but would establish an explicit and clear obligation to do so, under threat of
the severest penalties for failing to comply... There is therefore no danger of
our becoming... defiled, either by commemorating the Patriarch (so long as he
has not yet been condemned), or, much less, by admitting into communion those
who commemorate him. Assertions to the contrary are foolish manifestations of
‘zealotism’!!!”
First of all, it must be
emphasized that commemoration = communion. No one can dispute this. “For from
ancient times, the Orthodox Church of God has regarded the commemoration of the
bishop’s name in the sanctuary as full communion” (Letter of the Holy
Fathers). In other words, whoever commemorates someone who preaches heresy
PARTICIPATES in his heresy, and certainly not only the one who commemorates
him, but also the flock that follows him. Thus, Saint Mark of Ephesus writes:
“All the teachers of the Church, all the Councils, and all the Divine
Scriptures exhort us to flee those who hold different beliefs and to separate
ourselves from communion with them” (P.G. 160, 105 C). And the Confessor
Saint Theodore the Studite adds: “For Chrysostom declared, loudly and
emphatically, that not only heretics, but also those who are in communion with
such people, are enemies of God” (P.G. 99, 1049 A). And the Athonite
Fathers, writing to the Latin-minded Emperor Michael Palaiologos, state: “And
how can an Orthodox soul tolerate these things and not withdraw from communion
with those who commemorate them, regarding them as men who have made
merchandise of divine things?... Communion entails complete defilement merely
through the commemoration of him, even if the one who commemorates him is
Orthodox” (For a critical edition of the aforementioned letter, see V. Laurent
and J. Darrouzès, Dossier grec de l’Union de Lyon (1273–1277), pp.
376–403, Paris, 1976).
And again, the great Theodore
makes the following most important statements: “Even if someone were to give
away all the wealth in the world, while remaining in communion with heresy, he
would not become a friend of God, but an enemy” (P.G. 99, 1205 A)... “Guard
yourselves against the soul-destroying heresy, communion with which constitutes
alienation from Christ” (ibid., 1275 C)...“Some have suffered complete
shipwreck in the faith; others, although
they have not been overwhelmed in their thoughts, nevertheless perish along
with them through communion with the heresy”! (1164 A). And there is an even more important passage,
in which a very clear distinction is drawn between the champions of confession
of the Faith and those who have fallen through commemoration: “It has been
decreed that clergymen who have once been ensnared in heretical communion be
barred from celebrating the sacred services until the appointed time of
visitation by Providence from above... For how would the distinction become apparent
between those who betrayed the truth and those who did not: between those who
struggled courageously and those who were entirely unwilling to suffer anything
for the sake of what is right?...” (1636 D ff.).
We humble Zealots say these same
things to you conservatives “with your supposedly enlightened zeal,” Very
Reverend Father: you cannot possibly be speaking the truth when you write that
you “resist in a sound manner, openly and privately,” the accursed Ecumenism,
while at the same time remaining in communion with the leading figures and
allies of that heresy! Clerical staffs, spiritual children, and worldly glory
cannot be combined with confession of the Faith! Whoever claims that he can
combine all these things at the same time has indeed been deceived, according
to the words of Saint Theodore.
A devout Athonite abbot, whose
very name signified piety, dared a few years ago to cease commemorating the
Patriarch in his Holy Monastery. Immediately, the leading members of his
brotherhood reduced him from abbot to arsanaris (keeper of the
monastery's landing), because they were enthusiastic supporters and followers
of the theory set forth in your letters! His name is widely known on Mount
Athos, despite the man's humility and quiet disposition. And it should be noted
that he wished to put into practice only a part of the sacred teaching of our
Tradition, yet he lost his abbatial throne...
The Responsibility
of Those Who “Appear to Be Orthodox”
Can all of you, the advocates of
economy and of supposedly enlightened zeal, also tell us how you have helped
Orthodoxy, which has been under attack since 1923—that is, since the year when
Ecumenism, gradually advancing through the calendar innovation, reached the
point of having the Pope’s name included in the diptychs of Constantinople, of
recognizing him as an “apostle” (!), and of recognizing his “church” as a
treasury of Divine Grace, possessing apostolic succession, Mysteries, etc.?
(See Episkepsis, Nos. 139, 159, 214; Orthodoxos Typos, December
1, 1969, p. 3; Makedonia, July 9, 1978). Not only have you failed to help
Orthodoxy, but you have also sought, by various means, to dissuade those heroic
children of hers who said NO to the modern-day Bekkoses of the Phanar from
continuing along their path of confession of the Faith, undoubtedly because
their stance exposed your own conduct, just as the Latin-minded men of
Byzantium were once ashamed of, and at the same time detested, the Zealous
Orthodox. Or does the Very Reverend Father perhaps discern some difference
between the situation then and that of today? We see a difference only in the
attitude of contemporary Orthodox Christians, and particularly of Mount Athos,
which, instead of having collectively severed all communion with the Church of
Constantinople, which has fallen into heresy, not only continues to remain in
communion with it without concern, but also persecutes the Zealot Athonite Fathers
in various ways, treating them as supposedly schismatic, outside the Church,
etc. Indeed, how alike you are, Very Reverend Father!
Thus, not only have you failed to
help Orthodoxy in her struggle, but even in her anguished effort to escape the
deadly embrace of the Papist corpse, you have replied to her each time, with
what one might call sadism: Patience, O Mother, until the appointed time, until
the common Chalice, and then you shall see what heroic children you have.
Very Reverend Father,
Never imagine that Orthodoxy,
without you and your two or three “conservative” bishops and “militant”
publications such as Orthodoxos Typos, is unable to continue her
bloodstained yet glorious course. There will always be “the poor of Christ,”
the faithful people together with their few but God-fearing clergy, those who
love the truth without sophistries and slanders, to struggle, by the grace of
God, against the various forms of error and false doctrine. But woe to those
who supposedly possess zeal according to knowledge, and particularly to Your
Very Reverence, who not only refuse to enter the arena of confession of the
Faith, but also prevent those who wish to enter it, with the result that heresy
advances more freely and the ranks of the Lord are weakened. Saint Basil the
Great must surely have had certain people like you in mind when he wrote these
most truthful words: “For us, in addition to the open warfare of the heretics,
the attack launched by those who appear to be Orthodox has brought the Churches
to a state of extreme weakness” (Epistle 92).
- Th. M. [Fr. Theodoretos Mavros]
Greek source: The Hagiorite, Issue 7, June-August
1979, pp. 1-4.
* * *
To An Archimandrite With “Zeal
According to Knowledge”… Part 2
Kapsala, April 5/18, 1980
My dear Mr. Editor [of Orthodoxos
Typos], Christ is Risen!
Anyone who read the article “To
an Archimandrite with ‘Zeal According to Knowledge’...” in last August’s issue
of The Hagiorite, and Fr. Epiphanios Theodoropoulos’ “reply” to it in
your newspaper (April 4, 1980), must surely have been puzzled by the tactics of
the Very Reverend Father, who, instead of answering the pressing questions and
accusations raised there (and he had seven whole months at his disposal to do
so!), occupies himself with Saint Nektarios’ discourse on love toward heretics
and the “shoo!” cries of a certain Old Calendarist priest of his acquaintance! Out
of respect for your readers, and with the utmost brevity, I shall add the
following to what I wrote in the aforementioned issue of The Hagiorite,
prompted by Fr. Epiphanios’ reply.
A) It is true that New
Calendarist faithful frequently attend services in the churches and monasteries
of the Old Calendarists, sometimes also partaking of the Mysteries. This fact,
however, does not defile the Orthodoxy of the Old Calendarist priest, nor does
it defile the rest of the congregation. On the contrary, it constitutes a
commendable pastoral method and an application of proper economy toward the
ordinary New Calendarist faithful, who, unfortunately, often do not even know
what Ecumenism means, owing to the almost complete silence of the pulpit (and
the confessional) on matters of this nature. Nevertheless, perceiving for
themselves, and also learning from the press and television, the heretical
beliefs and uncanonical actions of their religious leaders, these faithful turn
to the Old Calendarists as to a haven of peace and safety, in order to protect
their souls from the defilement of indirect communion with heretics, as we
explained at length in our previous reply to Fr. Epiphanios. Indeed, it was in
this way that the Old Calendarist movement was formed: namely, through the
gradual movement of New Calendarist faithful toward the strict observance of
Orthodoxy maintained by the Old Calendarists. It must be emphasized here,
however, that the aforementioned priests never admit a New Calendarist
clergyman to communion in prayer, much less to sacramental communion.
Although Fr. Epiphanios is well
aware of all the above, nevertheless, without the slightest hesitation, he
equates the aforementioned attendance of New Calendarist faithful at church
services with the joint prayers of their innovating shepherds with the heretical
clergy of the West, and thus declares: “We are all boiling in the same
cauldron.” This is why, for years now, we have believed that the Very Reverend
Father does not rightly divide the word of truth, but rather beheads it.
B) He also writes: “For decades,
the Old Calendarists... have been preaching the blasphemous and heretical
belief that the correction of the Calendar in and of itself deprived the Church
of Grace and rendered her Mysteries invalid...” Yet behold, he himself, like
most New Calendarist clergymen, is a participant in the very same heresy and
blasphemy, since in his reply he denies the existence of priesthood and
Mysteries among the Old Calendarists, placing the words Holy Communion, bishop,
and Church in quotation marks whenever these terms refer to them! What is even
more appalling is that his ecclesiastical superiors, namely, the heads of the Greek
Patriarchates, Archbishop Seraphim of Athens, and other New Calendarist
hierarchs, regard the Mysteries of the heretical Papists as valid and
canonical!!! What struggles has Fr. Epiphanios undertaken against this
blasphemy? Only when it comes to attacking the Old Calendarists does his
boldness manifest itself and his pen begin to race...
Deeply grieved by this latest
fall of his, I sincerely pray that he will soon realize what a... splendid
service he has rendered to the Ecumenists and Latin-minded men of our time from
1969 until today, and that he will humbly ask forgiveness from God and from His
people, whom he has wronged.
With love in the Lord,
Monk Theodoretos.
Note: We sent the above reply to Orthodoxos
Typos for publication, but this proved impossible... due to lack of space,
as they informed us! You see, the newspaper devotes its first and fourth pages
to Fr. Christophoros so that he may insult Monasticism, but when it comes to
the great question of with whom Orthodox faithful should be in ecclesiastical
communion today, the good newspaper... “groans”... under the strain of
insufficient space. We are grieved, but we forgive.
Greek source: The Hagiorite, Issue 11, March–April
1980, pp. 1-2.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.